• An Age Of Decay
  An Age Of Decay

  Authored by Chris Buskirk via AmGreatness.com,

  This essay is adapted from “America and the Art of the Possible: Restoring National Vitality in an Age of Decay,” by Chris Buskirk (Encounter, 192 pages, $28.99)

  The fact that American living standards have broadly stagnated, and for some segments of the population have declined, should be cause for real concern to the ruling class…

  

  America ran out of frontier when we hit the Pacific Ocean. And that changed things. Alaska and Hawaii were too far away to figure in most people’s aspirations, so for decades, it was the West Coast states and especially California that represented dreams and possibilities in the national imagination. The American dream reached its apotheosis in California. After World War II, the state became our collective tomorrow. But today, it looks more like a future that the rest of the country should avoid—a place where a few coastal enclaves have grown fabulously wealthy while everyone else falls further and further behind.

  After World War II, California led the way on every front. The population was growing quickly as people moved to the state in search of opportunity and young families had children. The economy was vibrant and diverse. Southern California benefited from the presence of defense contractors. San Diego was a Navy town, and demobilized GIs returning from the Pacific Front decided to stay and put down roots. Between 1950 and 1960, the population of the Los Angeles metropolitan area swelled from 4,046,000 to 6,530,000. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory was inaugurated in the 1930s by researchers at the California Institute of Technology. One of the founders, Jack Parsons, became a prominent member of an occult sect in the late 1940s based in Pasadena that practiced “Thelemic Magick” in ceremonies called the “Babalon Working.” L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology (1950), was an associate of Parsons and rented rooms in his home. The counterculture, or rather, countercultures, had deep roots in the state.

  Youth culture was born in California, arising out of a combination of rapid growth, the Baby Boom, the general absence of extended families, plentiful sunshine, the car culture, and the space afforded by newly built suburbs where teenagers could be relatively free from adult supervision. Tom Wolfe memorably described this era in his 1963 essay “The Kandy-Colored Tangerine Flake Streamline, Baby.” The student protest movement began in California too. In 1960, hundreds of protesters, many from the University of California at Berkeley, sought to disrupt a hearing of the House Un-American Activities Committee at the San Francisco City Hall. The police turned fire hoses on the crowd and arrested over thirty students. The Baby Boomers may have inherited the protest movement, but they didn’t create it. Its founders were part of the Silent Generation. Clark Kerr, the president of the UC system who earned a reputation for giving student protesters what they wanted, was from the Greatest Generation. Something in California, and in America, had already changed.

  California was a sea of ferment during the 1960s—a turbulent brew of contrasting trends, as Tom O’Neill described it: 

  The state was the epicenter of the summer of love, but it had also seen the ascent of Reagan and Nixon. It had seen the Watts riots, the birth of the antiwar movement, and the Altamont concert disaster, the Free Speech movement and the Hells Angels. Here, defense contractors, Cold Warriors, and nascent tech companies lived just down the road from hippie communes, love-ins, and surf shops.

  Hollywood was the entertainment capital of the world, producing a vision of peace and prosperity that it sold to interior America—and to the world as the beau ideal of the American experiment. It was a prosperous life centered around the nuclear family living in a single-family home in the burgeoning suburbs. Doris Day became America’s sweetheart through a series of romantic comedies, but the turbulence in her own life foreshadowed America’s turn from vitality to decay. She was married three times, and her first husband either embezzled or mismanaged her substantial fortune. Her son, Terry Melcher, was closely associated with Charles Manson and the Family, along with Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys—avatars of the California lifestyle that epitomized the American dream. 

  The Manson Family spent the summer of 1968 living and partying with Wilson in his Malibu mansion. The Cielo Drive home in the Hollywood Hills where Sharon Tate and four others were murdered in August 1969 had been Melcher’s home and the site of parties that Manson attended. The connections between Doris Day’s son, the Beach Boys, and the Manson Family have a darkly prophetic valence in retrospect. They were young, good-looking, and carefree. But behind the clean-cut image of wholesome American youth was a desperate decadence fueled by titanic drug abuse, sexual outrages that were absurd even by the standards of Hollywood in the 60s, and self-destructiveness clothed in the language of pseudo-spirituality.

  The California culture of the 1960s now looks like a fin-de-siècle blow-off top. The promise, fulfillment, and destruction of the American dream appears distilled in the Golden State, like an epic tragedy played out against a sunny landscape where the frontier ended. Around 1970, America entered into an age of decay, and California was in the vanguard.

  

   

  H. Abernathy/ClassicStock/Getty Images

  Up, Up, and Away

  The expectation of constant progress is deeply ingrained in our understanding of the world, and of America in particular. Some metrics do generally keep rising: gross domestic product mostly goes up, and so does the stock market. According to those barometers, things must be headed mostly in the right direction. Sure there are temporary setbacks—the economy has recessions, the stock market has corrections—but the long-term trajectory is upward. Are those metrics telling us that the country is growing more prosperous? Are they signals, or noise?

  There is much that GDP and the stock market don’t tell us about, such as public and private debt levels, wage trends, and wealth concentration. In fact, during a half-century in which reported GDP grew consistently and the stock market reached the stratosphere, real wages have crept up very slowly, and living standards have flatlined or even declined for the middle and working classes. Many Americans have a feeling that things aren’t going in the right direction or that the country has lost its societal health and vigor, but aren’t sure how to describe or measure the problem. We need broader metrics of national prosperity and vitality, including measures of noneconomic values like family stability or social trust.

  There are many different criteria for national vitality. First, is the country guarded against foreign aggression and at peace with itself? Are people secure in their homes, free from government harassment, and safe from violent crime? Is prosperity broadly shared? Can the average person get a good job, buy a house, and support a family without doing anything extraordinary? Are families growing? Are people generally healthy, and is life span increasing or at least not decreasing? Is social trust high? Do people have a sense of unity in a common destiny and purpose? Is there a high capacity for collective action? Are people happy?

  We can sort quantifiable metrics of vitality into three main categories: social, economic, and political. There is a spiritual element too, which for my purposes falls under the social category. The social factors that can readily be measured include things like age at first marriage (an indicator of optimism about the future), median adult stature (is it rising or declining?), life expectancy, and prevalence of disease. Economic measures include real wage trends, wealth concentration, and social mobility. Political metrics relate to polarization and acts of political violence. 

  Many of these tend to move together over long periods of time. It’s easy to look at an individual metric and miss the forest for the trees, not seeing how it’s one manifestation of a larger problem in a dynamic system. Solutions proposed to deal with one concern may cause unexpected new problems in another part of the system. It’s a society-wide game of whack-a-mole. What’s needed is a more comprehensive understanding of structural trends and what lies behind them. From the founding period in America until about 1830, those factors were generally improving. Life expectancy and median height were increasing, both indicating a society that was mostly at peace and had plentiful food. Real wages roughly tripled during this period as labor supply growth was slow. There was some political violence. But for decades after independence, the country was largely at peace and citizens were secure in their homes. There was an overarching sense of shared purpose in building a new nation. 

  Those indicators of vitality are no longer trending upward. Let’s start with life expectancy. There is a general impression that up until the last century, people died very young. There’s an element of truth to this: we are now less susceptible to death from infectious disease, especially in early childhood, than were our ancestors before the 20th century. Childhood mortality rates were appalling in the past, but burying a young child is now a rare tragedy. This is a very real form of progress, resulting from more reliable food supplies as a result of improvements in agriculture, better sanitation in cities, and medical advances, particularly the antibiotics and certain vaccines introduced in the first half of the 20th century. A period of rapid progress was then followed by a long period of slow, expensive improvement at the margins.

  When you factor out childhood mortality, life spans have not grown by much in the past century or two. A study in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine says that in mid-Victorian England, life expectancy at age five was 75 for men and 73 for women. In 2016, according to the Social Security Administration, the American male life expectancy at age five was 71.53 (which means living to age 76.53). Once you’ve made it to five years, your life expectancy is not much different from your great-grandfather’s. Moreover, Pliny tells us that Cicero’s wife, Terentia, lived to 103. Eleanor of Aquitaine, queen of both France and England at different times in the 12th century, died a week shy of her 82nd birthday. A study of 298 famous men born before 100 B.C. who were not murdered, killed in battle, or died by suicide found that their average age at death was 71.

  More striking is that people who live completely outside of modern civilization without Western medicine today have life expectancies roughly comparable to our own. Daniel Lieberman, a biological anthropologist at Harvard, notes that “foragers who survive the precarious first few years of infancy are most likely to live to be 68 to 78 years old.”  In some ways, they are healthier in old age than the average American, with lower incidences of inflammatory diseases like diabetes and atherosclerosis. It should be no surprise that an active life spent outside in the sun, eating wild game and foraged plants, produces good health.

  Recent research shows that not only are we not living longer, we are less healthy and less mobile during the last decades of our lives than our great-grandfathers were. This points to a decline in overall health. We have new drugs to treat Type I diabetes, but there is more Type I diabetes than in the past. We have new treatments for cancer, but there is more cancer. Something has gone very wrong. What’s more, between 2014 and 2017, median American life expectancy declined every year. In 2017 it was 78.6 years, then it decreased again between 2018 and 2020 to 76.87. The figure for 2020 includes COVID deaths, of course, but the trend was already heading downward for several years, mostly from deaths of despair: diseases associated with chronic alcoholism, drug overdoses, and suicide. The reasons for the increase in deaths of despair are complex, but a major contributing factor is economic: people without good prospects over an extended period of time are more prone to self-destructive behavior. This decline is in contrast to the experience of peer countries.

  In addition to life expectancy, other upward trends have stalled or reversed in the past few decades. Family formation has slowed. The total fertility rate has dropped to well below replacement level. Real wages have stagnated. Debt levels have soared. Social mobility has stalled and income inequality has grown. Material conditions for most people have improved little except in narrow parts of life such as entertainment.

  

  Spencer Platt/Getty Images

  Trends, Aggregate, and Individuals 

  The last several decades have been a story of losing ground for much of middle America, away from a handful of wealthy cities on the coasts. The optimistic story that’s been told is that both income and wealth have been rising. That’s true in the aggregate, but when those numbers are broken down the picture is one of a rising gap between a small group of winners and a larger group of losers. Real wages have remained essentially flat over the past 50 years, and the growth in national wealth has been heavily concentrated at the top. The chart below represents the share of national income that went to the top 10 percent of earners in the United States. In 1970 it was 33.3 percent; in 2019 the figure was 45.4 percent.

  

  Disparities in wealth have become more closely tied to educational attainment. Between 1989 and 2019, household wealth grew the most for those with the highest level of education. For households with a graduate degree, the increase was 31 percent; with a college degree, it was 17 percent; with a high school degree, about 4 percent. Meanwhile, household wealth declined by a precipitous 60 percent for high school dropouts, including those with a GED. In 1989, households with a college degree had 2.74 times the wealth of those with only a high school diploma; in 2012 it was 3.08 times as much. In 1989, households with a graduate degree had 4.85 times the wealth of the high school group; in 2019, it was 6.12 times as much. The gap between the graduate degree group and the college group increased by 12 percent. The high school group’s wealth grew about 4 percent from 1989 to 2019, the college group’s wealth grew about 17 percent, and the wealth of the graduate degree group increased 31 percent. The gaps between the groups are growing in real dollars. It’s true that people have some control over the level of education they attain, but college has become costlier, and it’s fundamentally unnecessary for many jobs, so the growing wealth disparity by education is a worrying trend.

  Wealth is relative: if your wealth grew by 4 percent while that of another group increased by 17 percent, then you are poorer. What’s more crucial, however, is purchasing power. If the costs of middle-class staples like healthcare, housing, and college tuition are climbing sharply while wages stagnate, then living standards will decline.

  More problematic than growing wealth disparity in itself is diminishing economic mobility. A big part of the American story from the beginning has been that children tend to end up better off than their parents were. By most measures, that hasn’t been true for decades.

  The chart below compares the birth cohorts of 1940 and 1980 in terms of earning more than parents did. The horizontal axis indicates the relative income level of the parents. Among the older generation, over 90 percent earned more than their parents, except for those whose parents were at the very high end of the income scale. Among the younger generation, the percentages were much lower, and also more variable. For those whose parents had a median income, only about 40 percent would do better. In this analysis, low growth and high inequality both suppress mobility.

  

  Over time, declining economic mobility becomes an intergenerational problem, as younger people fall behind the preceding generation in wealth accumulation. The graph below illustrates the proportion of the national wealth held by successive generations at the same stage of life, with the horizontal axis indicating the median age for the group. Baby Boomers (birth years 1946–1964) owned a much larger percentage of the national wealth than the two succeeding generations at every point.

  

  At a median age of 45, for example, the Boomers owned approximately 40 percent of the national wealth. At the same median age, Generation X (1965–1980) owned about 15 percent. The Boomer generation was 15–18 percent larger than Gen X and it had 2.67 times as much of the national wealth. The Millennial generation (1981–1996) is bigger than Gen X though a little smaller than the Boomers, and it has owned about half of what Gen X did at the same median age.

  Those are some measurable indicators of the nation’s vitality, and they tell us that something is going wrong. A key reason for stagnant wages, declining mobility, and growing disparities of wealth is that economic growth overall has been sluggish since around 1970. And the main reason for slower growth is that the long-term growth in productivity that created so much wealth for America and the world over the prior two centuries slowed down.

  Wealth and the New Frontier

  There are other ways to increase the overall national wealth. One is by acquiring new resources, which has been done in various ways: through territorial conquest, or the incorporation of unsettled frontier lands, or the discovery of valuable resources already in a nation’s territory, such as petroleum reserves in recent history. Getting an advantageous trade agreement can also be a way of increasing resources. 

  Through much of American history, the frontier was a great source of new wealth. The vast supply of mostly free land, along with the other resources it held, was not just an economic boon; it also shaped American culture and politics in ways that were distinct from the long-settled countries of Europe where the frontier had been closed for centuries and all the land was owned space. 

  But there can be a downside to becoming overly dependent on any one resource. Aside from gaining new resources, real economic growth comes from either population growth or productivity growth. Population growth can add to the national wealth, but it can also put strain on supplies of essential resources. What elevates living standards broadly is productivity growth, making more out of available resources. A farmer who tills his fields with a steel plough pulled by a horse can cultivate more land than a farmer doing it by hand. It allows him to produce more food that can be consumed by a bigger family, or the surplus can be sold or traded for other goods. A farmer driving a plough with an engine and reaping with a mechanical combine can produce even more. 

  But productivity growth is driven by innovation. In the example above, there is a progression from farming by hand with a simple tool, to the use of metal tools and animal power, to the use of complicated machinery, each of which greatly increases the amount of food produced per farmer. This illustrates the basic truth that technology is a means of reducing scarcity and generating surpluses of essential goods, so labor and resources can be put toward other purposes, and the whole population will be better off.

  Total factor productivity (TFP) refers to economic output relative to the size of all primary inputs, namely labor and capital. Over time, a nation’s economic output tends to grow faster than its labor force and capital stock. This might owe to better labor skills or capital management, but it is primarily the result of new technology. In economics, productivity growth is used as a proxy for the application of innovation. If productivity is rising, it is understood to mean that applied science is working to reduce scarcity. The countries that lead in technological innovation naturally reap the benefits first and most broadly, and therefore have the highest living standards. Developing countries eventually get the technology too, and then enjoy the benefits in what is called catch-up growth. For example, China first began its national electrification program in the 1950s, when electricity was nearly ubiquitous in the United States. The project took a few decades to complete, and China saw rapid growth as wide access to electric power increased productivity.

  The United States still leads the way in innovation—though now with more competition than at any time since World War II. But the development of productivity-enhancing new technologies has been slower over the past few decades than in any comparable span of time since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the early 18th century. The obvious advances in a few specific areas, particularly digital technology, are exceptions that prove the rule. The social technologies of recent years facilitate consumption rather than production.As a result, growth in total factor productivity has been slow for a long time. According to a report from Rabobank, “TFP growth deteriorated from an average annual growth of 1.1% over the period 1969–2010 to 0.4% in 2010 to 2018.” 

  In The Great Stagnation, Tyler Cowen suggested that the conventional productivity measures may be misleading. For example, he noted that productivity growth through 2000–2004 averaged 3.8 percent, a very high figure and an outlier relative to most of the last half-century. Surely some of that growth was real owing to the growth of the internet at the time, but it also coincided with robust growth in the financial sector, which ended very badly in 2008. 

  “What we measured as value creation actually may have been value destruction, namely too many homes and too much financial innovation of the wrong kind.” Then, productivity shot up by over 5 percent in 2009–2010, but Cohen found that it was mostly the result of firms firing the least productive people. That may have been good business, but it’s not the same as productivity rising because innovation is reducing scarcity and thus leading to better living standards. Over the long term, when productivity growth slows or stalls, overall economic growth is sluggish. Median real wage growth is slow. For most people, living standards don’t just stagnate but decline.

  

  Spencer Platt/Getty Images

  You Owe Me Money

  As productivity growth has slowed, the economy has become more financialized, which means that resources are increasingly channeled into means of extracting wealth from the productive economy instead of producing goods and services. Peter Thiel said that a simple way to understand financialization is that it represents the increasing influence of companies whose main business or source of value is producing little pieces of paper that essentially say, you owe me money. Wall Street and the companies that make up the financial sector have never been larger or more powerful. Since the early 1970s, financial firms’ share of all corporate earnings has roughly doubled to nearly 25 percent. As a share of real GDP, it grew from 13–15 percent in the early 1970s to nearly 22 percent in 2020. 

  The profits of financial firms have grown faster than their share of the economy over the past half-century. The examples are everywhere. Many companies that were built to produce real-world, nondigital goods and services have become stealth finance companies, too. General Electric, the manufacturing giant founded by Thomas Edison, transformed itself into a black box of finance businesses, dragging itself down as a result. The total market value of major airlines like American, United, and Delta is less than the value of their loyalty programs, in which people get miles by flying and by spending with airline-branded credit cards. In 2020, American Airlines’ loyalty program was valued at $18–$30 billion while the market capitalization of the entire company was $14 billion. This suggests that the actual airline business—flying people from one place to another—is valuable only insofar as it gets people to participate in a loyalty program.

  The main result of financialization is best explained by the “Cantillon effect,” which means that money creation, over a long period of time, redistributes wealth upward to the already rich. This effect was first described in the 18th century by Richard Cantillon after he observed the results of introducing a paper money system. He noted that the first people to receive the new money saw their incomes rise, while the last to receive it saw a decline in their purchasing power because of consumer price inflation. The first to receive newly created money are banks and other financial institutions. They are called “Cantillon insiders,” a term coined by Nick Szabo, and they get the most benefit. But all owners of assets—including stocks, real estate, even a home—are enriched to some extent by the Cantillon effect. Those who own a lot of assets benefit the most, and financial assets tend to increase in value faster than other types, but all gain value. This is a version of the Matthew Principle, taken from Jesus’ Parable of the Sower: to those who have, more will be given. The more assets you own, the faster your wealth will increase.

  Meanwhile, the people without assets fall behind as asset prices rise faster than incomes. Inflation hawks have long worried that America’s decades-long policy of running large government deficits combined with easy money from the Fed will lead to runaway inflation that beggars average Americans. This was seen clearly in 2022 after the massive increase in dollars created by the Fed in 2020 and 2021. 

  Even so, they’ve mostly been looking for inflation in the wrong place. It’s true that the prices of many raw materials, such as lumber and corn, have soared recently, followed by much more broad-based inflation in everything from food to rent, but inflation in the form of asset price bubbles has been with us for much longer. Those bubbles pop and prices drop, but the next bubble raises them even higher. Asset price inflation benefits asset owners, but not the people with few or no assets, like young people just starting out and finding themselves unable to afford to buy a home.

  The Cantillon effect has been one of the main vectors of increased wealth concentration over the last 40 years. One way that the large banks use their insider status is by getting short-term loans from the Federal Reserve and lending the money back to the government by buying longer-term treasuries at a slightly higher interest rate and locking in a profit. 

  Their position in the economy essentially guarantees them profits, and their size and political influence protect them from losses. We’ve seen the pattern of private profits and public losses clearly in the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s, and in the financial crisis of 2008. Banks and speculators made a lot of money in the years leading up to the crisis, and when the losses on their bad loans came due, they got bailouts.

  Moral Hazard

  The Cantillon economy creates moral hazard in that large companies, especially financial institutions, can privatize profits and socialize losses. Insiders, and shareholders more broadly, can reap massive gains when the bets they make with the company’s capital pay off. When the bets go bad, the company gets bailed out. Alan Krueger, the chief economist at theTreasury Department in the Obama Administration, explained years later why banks and not homeowners were rescued from the fallout of the mortgage crisis: “It would have been extremely unfair, and created problems down the road to bail out homeowners who were irresponsible and took on homes they couldn’t afford.” Krueger glossed over the fact that the banks had used predatory and deceptive practices to initiate risky loans, and when they lost hundreds of billions of dollars—or trillions by some estimates—they were bailed out while homeowners were kicked out. That callous indifference alienates and radicalizes the forgotten men and women who have been losing ground.

  Most people know about the big bailouts in 2008, but the system that joins private profit with socialized losses regularly creates incentives for sloppiness and corruption. The greed sometimes takes ridiculous forms. But once that culture takes over, it poisons everything it touches. Starting in 2002, for example, Wells Fargo began a scam in which it paid employees to open more than 3.5 million unauthorized checking accounts, savings accounts, and credit cards for retail customers. By exaggerating growth in the number of active retail accounts, the bank could give investors a false picture of the health of its retail business. It also charged those customers monthly service fees, which contributed to the bottom line and bolstered the numbers in quarterly earnings reports to Wall Street. Bigger profits led to higher stock prices, enriching senior executives whose compensation packages included large options grants. 

  John Stumpf, the company’s CEO from 2007 to 2016, was forced to resign and disgorge around $40 million in repayments to Wells Fargo and fines to the federal government. Bloomberg estimates that he retained more than $100 million. Wells Fargo paid a $3 billion fine, which amounted to less than two months’ profit, as the bank’s annual profits averaged around $19.7 billion from 2017 to 2019. And this was for a scam that lasted nearly 15 years.

  What is perhaps most absurd and despicable about this scheme is that Wells Fargo was conducting it during and even after the credit bubble, when the bank received billions of dollars in bailouts from the government. The alliance between the largest corporations and the state leads to corrupt and abusive practices. This is one of the second-order effects of the Cantillon economy.

  Another effect is that managers respond to short-term financial incentives in a way that undermines the long-term vitality of their own company. An excessive focus on quarterly earnings is sometimes referred to as short-termism. Senior managers, especially at the C-suite level of public companies, are largely compensated with stock options, so they have a strong incentive to see the stock rise. In principle, a rising stock price should reflect a healthy, growing, profitable company. But managers figured out how to game the system: with the Fed keeping long-term rates low, corporations can borrow money at a much lower rate than the expected return in the stock market. Many companies have taken on long-term debt to finance stock repurchases, which helps inflate the stock price. This practice is one reason that corporate debt has soared since 1980.

  The Cantillon effect distorts resource allocation, incentivizing rent-seeking in the financial industry and rewarding nonfinancial companies for becoming stealth financial firms. Profits are quicker and easier in finance than in other industries. As a result, many smart, ambitious people go to Wall Street instead of trying to invent useful products or seeking a new source of abundant power—endeavors that don’t have as much assurance of a payoff. How different might America be if the incentives were structured to reward the people who put their brain power and energy into those sorts of projects rather than into quantitative trading algorithms and financial derivatives of home mortgages.

  While the financial industry does well, the manufacturing sector lags. Because of COVID-19, Americans discovered that the United States has very limited capacity to make the personal protective equipment that was in such urgent demand in 2020. We do not manufacture any of the most widely prescribed antibiotics, or drugs for heart disease or diabetes, nor any of the chemical precursors required to make them. A close look at other vital industries reveals the same penury. The rare earth minerals necessary for batteries and electronic screens mostly come from China because we have intentionally shuttered domestic sources or failed to develop them. We’re dependent on Taiwan for the computer chips that go into everything from phones to cars to appliances, and broken supply chains in 2021 led to widespread shortages. The list of necessities we import because we have exported our manufacturing base goes on.

  Financialization of the economy amplifies the resource curse that has come with dollar supremacy. Richard Cantillon described a similar effect when he observed what happened to Spain and Portugal when they acquired large amounts of silver and gold from the New World. The new wealth raised prices, but it went largely into purchasing imported goods, which ruined the manufactures of the state and led to general impoverishment. In America today, a fiat currency that serves as the world’s reserve is the resource curse that erodes the manufacturing base while the financial sector flourishes. Since the dollar’s value was formally dissociated from gold in 1976, it now rests on American economic prosperity, political stability, and military supremacy. If these advantages diminish relative to competitors, so will the value of the dollar.

  Dollar supremacy has also encouraged a debt-based economy. Federal debt as a share of GDP has risen from around 38 percent in 1970 to nearly 140 percent in 2020. Corporate debt has had peaks and troughs over those decades, but each new peak is higher than the last. In the 1970s, total nonfinancial corporate debt in the United States ranged between 30 and 35 percent of GDP. It peaked at about 43 percent in 1990, then at 45 percent with the dot-com bubble in 2001, then at slightly higher with the housing bubble in 2008, and now it’s approximately 47 percent. As asset prices have climbed faster than wages, consumer debt has soared from 43.2 percent of GDP in 1970 to over 75 percent in 2020. 

  Student loan debt has soared even faster in recent years: in 2003, it totaled $240 billion—basically a rounding error—but by 2020, the sum had ballooned to six times as large, at $1.68 trillion, which amounts to around 8 percent of GDP. Increases in aggregate debt throughout society are a predictable result of the Cantillon effect in a financialized economy.

  The Rise of the Two-Income Family

  The Cantillon effect generates big gains for those closest to the money spigot, and especially those at the top of the financial industry, while the people furthest away fall behind. Average families find it more difficult to buy a home and maintain a middle-class life. In 90 percent of U.S. counties today, the median-priced single-family home is unaffordable on the median wage. One of the ways that families try to make ends meet is with the promiscuous use of credit. It’s one of the reasons that personal and household debt levels have risen across the board. People borrow money to cover the gap between expectations and reality, hoping that economic growth will soon pull them out of debt. But for many, it’s a trap they can never escape.

  

  Another way that families have tried to keep up is by adding a second income. In 2018, over 60 percent of families were two-income households, up from about 30 percent in 1970. This change is not a result of a simple desire to do wage work outside the home or of “increased opportunities,” as we are often told. The reason is that it now takes two incomes to support the needs of a middle-class family, whereas 50 years ago, it required only one. As more people entered the labor market, the value of labor declined, setting up a vicious cycle in which a second income came to be more necessary. China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 put more downward pressure on the value of labor.

  

  When people laud the fact that we have so many more two-income families—generally meaning more women working outside the home—as evidence that there are so many great opportunities, what they’re really doing is retconning something usually done out of economic necessity. Needing twice as much labor to get the same result is the opposite of what happens when productivity growth is robust. It also means that the raising of children is increasingly outsourced. That’s not an improvement.

  Another response to stagnant wages is to delay family formation and have fewer children. In 1960, the median age of a first marriage was about 20.5 years. In 2010, it was approximately 27, and in 2020 it was an all-time high of over 29.18  At the same time, the total fertility rate of American women was dropping: from 3.65 in 1960 down to 2.1, a little below replacement level, in the early 1970s. Currently, it hovers around 1.8. Some people may look on this approvingly, worried as they are about overpopulation and the impact of humans on the environment. But when people choose to have few or no children, it is usually not a political choice. That doesn’t mean it is simply a “revealed preference,” a lower desire for a family and children, rather than a reflection of personal challenges or how people view their prospects for the future. Surely it’s no coincidence that the shrinking of families has happened at the same time that real wages have stagnated or grown very slowly, while the costs of housing, health care, and higher education have soared.

  The fact that American living standards have broadly stagnated, and for some segments of the population have declined, should be cause for real concern to the ruling class. Americans expect economic mobility and a chance for prosperity. Without it, many will believe that the government has failed to deliver on its promises. The Chinese Communist Party is regarded as legitimate by the Chinese people because it has presided over a large, broad, multigenerational rise in living standards. If stagnation or decline in the United States is not addressed effectively, it will threaten the legitimacy of the governing institutions. 

  But instead of meeting the challenge head-on, America’s political and business leaders have pursued policies and strategies that exacerbate the problem. Woke policies in academia, government, and big business have created a stultifying environment that is openly hostile to heterodox views. Witness the response to views on COVID that contradicted official opinion. And all this happens against a backdrop of destructive fiscal and monetary policies.

  Low growth and low mobility tend to increase political instability when the legitimacy of the political order is predicated upon opportunity and egalitarianism. One source of national unity has been the understanding that every individual has an equal right to pursue happiness, that a dignified life is well within reach of the average person, and that the possibility of rising higher is open to all. When too many people feel they cannot rise, and when even the basics of a middle-class life are difficult to secure, disappointment can breed a sense of injustice that leads to social and political conflict. At first, that conflict acts as a drag on what American society can accomplish. Left unchecked, it will consume energy and resources that could otherwise be put into more productive activities. Thwarted personal aspirations are often channeled into politics and zero-sum factional conflict. The rise of identity politics represents a redirection of the frustrations born of broken dreams. But identity politics further divides us into hostile camps.

  We’ve already seen increased social unrest lately, and more is likely to follow. High levels of social and political conflict are dangerous for a country that hopes to maintain a popular form of government. Not so long ago, we could find unity in civic rituals and were encouraged to be proud of our country. Now our history is denigrated in schools and by other sensemaking institutions, leading to cultural dysphoria, social atomization, and alienation. In exchange, you can choose your pronouns, which doesn’t seem like such a great trade. Just as important as regaining broad-based material prosperity and rising standards of living—perhaps more important—is unifying the nation around a common understanding of who we Americans are and why we’re here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 23:30

• 2022 Box Office Still 33% Shy Of Pre-Pandemic Levels
  2022 Box Office Still 33% Shy Of Pre-Pandemic Levels

  Despite a 65 percent jump in box office earnings last year, the movie industry still has a long way to go in its recovery from the Covid-19 shock.

  At an estimated total of $7.5 billion, Statista’s Felix Richter notes that the North American box office had the third worst year since 2000, still trailing 2019 box office earnings by 33 percent.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Things are looking even worse when adjusting for ticket price inflation, which makes the 2022 results the third worst year in a long, long time. With roughly 814 million tickets sold in the United States and Canada, movie theaters attracted at least 400 million fewer visitors than in any year between 1995 and 2019, according to industry tracker The Numbers.

  Movie theaters and the film industry were hit incredibly hard by the coronavirus pandemic, as screens went dark in most parts of the world in March 2020, when strict social distancing measures were implemented to contain the virus. Box office earnings vanished practically overnight, and film studios were forced to push back movie releases to later in the year, hoping that things would be back to normal by then. Unfortunately, things never went back to normal, as Covid came and went in waves and it took a long time for people to be comfortable enough to return to movie theaters, even after vaccinations had become widely available.

  Desperate to generate new revenue streams, studios even did the previously unthinkable in 2021 and started releasing films on streaming services simultaneous to the theatrical release. While embracing streaming as an alternative means of distribution during these special times seemed like a shrewd move, it is proving difficult to put the genie back in the bottle. Consumers have a way of quickly getting used to new realities, and while many people have sorely missed the moviegoing experience, others have long called for the end of theatrical release windows.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 23:00

• In 2022, The World As We Know It Ended. Decades Of Conflict Lie Ahead…
  In 2022, The World As We Know It Ended. Decades Of Conflict Lie Ahead…

  Via The Burning Platform blog,

  The ‘end of history’ has concluded and the world has returned to conflicts between ‘great powers’. Let’s hope it doesn’t turn nuclear…

  

  By Ivan Timofeev, Valdai Club Programme Director & one of Russia’s leading foreign policy experts.

  In 1989, the ‘short 20th century’ concluded with the ‘end of history’ – the victory of the Western capitalist world over the Soviet socialist project. At that time, there was not a single country, or community, left in the world which offered a realistic alternative to the US-led view of the organization of the economy, society, and the political system.

  The Soviet bloc dissolved itself. A large part of it quickly integrated into NATO and the European Union. Other major world players had begun to integrate organically into the Western-centered world system long before the end of the Cold War. China retained a high level of sovereignty in terms of its domestic order, but quickly moved into a capitalist economy, actively trading with the US, EU, and the rest of the world.

  Beijing, meanwhile, shied away from promoting the socialist project abroad. India had avoided claiming global projects of its own, although it has, to this day, also maintained a high level of identity in its political system and has so far shied away from joining blocs and alliances. Other major players also remained within the rules of the ‘liberal world order’ game, avoiding attempts to challenge it.

  Individual rebels, such as Iran and North Korea, did not pose much of a threat, although they raised concerns with their stubborn resistance, persistent promotion of nuclear programs, successful adaptation to sanctions, and for the most part, any potential military attack was ruled out because of its high cost. For a brief period, it seemed that the global challenge might come from radical Islamism. But it could not shake the existing order either.

  The initially spectacular military campaigns by the US and its allies in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up doing little to democratize the Islamic world. But this did not bring about a global game-changer either. Moreover, the fight against radical Islamism has even strengthened the identity of the Western world as the guardian of the secular and rational, as opposed to the religious and fundamentalist.

  Russia had, at first glance, found its niche in the new world order. The country had become a peripheral economy specialized in the supply of raw materials. Its market was eagerly exploited by global Western companies. Its large bourgeoisie became part of the global elite, becoming ‘global Russians’. Its industry either degraded or incorporated itself into global chains. Human capital was gradually shrinking. On the whole, Russia was perceived by Western partners as a withering, yet fairly predictable, power. Its occasional outbursts of indignation over the bombing of Yugoslavia, the war in Iraq, or the revolutions in the post-Soviet space were somehow smoothed over and were not considered a big problem.

  It was possible to criticize Moscow for its ‘legacy of authoritarianism’ or its human rights record, to lecture it periodically – mixed with praise for its cultural affinity with the West, but at the same time making it clear that there would be no deeper integration. Timid attempts by Russian businesspeople to buy into the likes of Opel or Airbus or to acquire assets in other areas – in other words, to establish slightly more equal and interdependent economic relations – were unsuccessful. Moscow was also very explicitly told that its concerns about Western military involvement in the post-Soviet space had no legitimate basis and would be ignored.

  Overall, in the late 2000s and even in the 2010s, it was possible to speak of a fairly high degree of sustainability of the order that had been established since the end of the Cold War. However, in 2022, it finally became clear that the ‘end of history’ was over. The world has now resumed its usual course of global upheaval, the struggle for survival, fierce competition, and rivalry.

  In order to adequately assess this new phase, it is important to understand the meaning of the idea of the ‘end of history’. Its identification with Francis Fukuyama’s well-known concept provides only a superficial understanding; it has much deeper normative and political-philosophical roots. These can be found primarily in two modernist political theories – liberalism and socialism. Both are based on a belief in the limitless power and normative value of the mind. It is the mind that enables man to take control of the forces of nature as well as – the elemental forces, and darker sides of human nature and society.

  

  Francis Fukuyama © Panayotis Tzamaros / NurPhoto via Getty Images

  In the US, liberalism and realism have coexisted for decades. The former fulfils an ideological and doctrinal role. The latter is sort of behind a screen, compensating for ideological templates with pragmatism and common sense. Hence the often criticized American ‘double standard policy’.

  In the USSR, under the concrete slabs of socialist belief, there was also its own version of realism. It was not reflexive to the extent that it could be in America, but it was implicitly developed among academic science, diplomacy, and intelligence. The existence of this stratum (its icon later became Evgeny Primakov) allowed Russia to rather quickly acquire a pragmatic base for its foreign policy after several years of idealism in the late 1980s and early 1990s. By the 2000s, Russian foreign policy was finally on a realistic track. Unlike the US, Moscow had no ideological outlook and did not want to have one, having satiated itself with such obsessions during the Soviet period. In the US and the West as a whole, the ideological component survived, further asserting its importance against the backdrop of the victory in the Cold War.

  The dualism of ideology and pragmatism, however, has its own trap. It is that ideology can be not only a screen for pragmatic realists, but also an object of faith for a multitude of diplomats, academics, journalists, military, businessmen, and other representatives of the foreign policy elite. Ideology is capable of being the very self-sustaining value that can make social action value-rational rather than goal-rational. Approaching foreign policy in terms of democratization, or the degree of involvement in the global market economy, is an example of the influence of ideology on the perception of foreign policy and the formulation of foreign policy objectives. The attempt to democratize Afghanistan may be viewed with skepticism, but in the US, there were a considerable number of sincere supporters of the idea.

  Both the dogmatism of US foreign policy and its realism proved critical to the shortness of ‘the end of history’. This mixture gave rise to unsustainable policies such as the aforementioned Afghanistan adventure on the one hand, and departures from the ‘canon’, expressed in double standards and the pushy promotion of interests under pious slogans, on the other. The first led to a waste of resources and an erosion of faith in the omnipotence of the hegemon (the Afghan resistance managed to get rid not only of the ‘ineffective USSR’, but also of the ‘effective US’ with all its allies in tow).

  The second was the erosion of trust and growing skepticism on the part of other major players. Russia was the first, then China began to come to a similar understanding. In Russia, this started to emerge amid NATO’s eastward expansion in the post-Soviet space. In China, this happened later when then-US President Donald Trump launched an attack in the form of a trade and sanctions war without blinking an eye. However, Moscow and Beijing responded differently. Russia banged its fist on the table in 2014 and then turned over the table. China has started to prepare hard for a worst-case scenario, without yet openly challenging the US. But even short of such a challenge, it is perceived in Washington as a more dangerous long-term adversary than Russia.

  

  Chinese President Xi Jinpin and Russian President Vladimir Putin talk to each other during their meeting in Beijing. © Alexei Druzhinin / Sputnik / Kremlin pool via AP

  In 2022, the remnants of the ‘end of history’ era finally became a thing of the past. However, there has not been a return to the Cold War either. Russian policy is mainly concerned about security interests. It is not derived from ideology, although it does include components of the identity of ‘the Russian world’, as well as historical motives for opposing Nazism. Russia does not offer a global ideological alternative comparable to liberalism – nor has China yet taken such initiatives.

  The end of the ‘end of history’ is notable for several other details.

  • Firstly, a major power has risked giving up the benefits of the ‘global world’ overnight. Historians will argue about whether Moscow anticipated such harsh sanctions and the departure of hundreds of foreign companies so quickly. However, it is clear that Russia is vigorously adapting to the new realities and is in no hurry to return to US-centric globalization.

  • Secondly, Western countries have embarked on a very tough ‘purge’ of Russian assets abroad. Overnight, their jurisdictions ceased to be ‘safe havens’ where the ‘rule of law’ is followed. Now it is politics that calls the shots and Russia is the only harbor to which its citizens can return to relative peace. Stereotypes about the ‘stability and security’ of the West are breaking down. Of course, they are unlikely to begin a similar purge of other assets there. But looking at the Russians, outside investors are wondering whether they should hedge their risks.

  • Thirdly, it turned out that in the West, they might face not only asset stripping, but outright discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Thousands of Russians ‘fleeing’ the ‘bloody regime’ have suddenly faced rejection and contempt. Others trying to prove that they are even bigger ‘Russophobes’ than their host partners are running ahead of the anti-Russian propaganda train. However, this does not guarantee that the stubborn dogmatists will embrace them.

  The conflict between Russia and the West is likely to drag on for decades, regardless of how the conflict in Ukraine ends. In Europe, Russia will play the role of North Korea, while possessing much greater capabilities. Whether Ukraine has the strength, the will, and resources to become a European South Korea is a big question. Conflict between Russia and the West will lead to a strengthening of China’s role as an alternative financial center and source of modernization. A stronger China will only accelerate its rivalry with the US and its allies. The ‘end of history’ has ended with a return to its usual course.

  One of these is the collapse of the world order as a result of large-scale conflicts between centers of power. It remains to be seen if the next cycle will not be the last for mankind, given the risks of an open military clash between the great powers with a subsequent escalation into full-scale nuclear conflict.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 22:30

• Tesla Owners Flood Chinese Showrooms To Protest Sharp Price Cuts
  Tesla Owners Flood Chinese Showrooms To Protest Sharp Price Cuts

  Tesla owners in China are apparently not pleased with the company’s new policy of cutting prices on what now seems like a weekly basis. 

  The swift pace of price cuts caused several of Tesla’s showrooms and distribution centers to swell with new Tesla owners, furious that they had missed out on the company’s price cuts by a matter of days. 

  Customers were demanding rebates and credits, claiming that they had overpaid for the same cars that weren’t marked down at the time they were purchased, a new report from Reuters says. Prices of Tesla vehicles in China are now between 13% and 24% lower than they were in September. 

  About 200 recent buyers of the Tesla Model Y and Model 3 made their way to a Tesla delivery center in Shanghai to protest, the report says. Recall, Tesla cut prices for the second time in just three months at the end of last week. 

  Some of the customers claimed that they didn’t think the prices would be cut so quickly. Many of the buyers were rushed into buying their vehicles before the end of 2022 to beat the deadline on a government subsidy for EVs.

  

  Reuters reviewed video on social media that showed “crowds at Tesla stores and delivery centres in other Chinese cities from Chengdu to Shenzhen”, suggesting that the protests were carried out widely across the country. 

  One owner told Reuters: “It may be a normal business practice but this is not how a responsible enterprise should behave.” He told reporters that police had facilitated a meeting between the customers and Tesla staff. The customers handed over a list of demands, the report says, which included an apology, compensation and other credits. Tesla has said it would respond by early next week. 

  “About a dozen police officers” were on site at the protests in Shanghai. “Return the money, refund our cars,” a crowd in one protest video, posted to social media, chants out loud. 

  Tesla has cut prices to help spur demand as the company heads into the new year. In Q4 2022, Tesla reported a record number of vehicle deliveries, but still missed Wall Street’s estimates. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 22:00

• Will Universities Ever Admit They Were Wrong About COVID Policy?
  Will Universities Ever Admit They Were Wrong About COVID Policy?

  Authored by Matthew Andersson via AmericanThinker.com,

  Former White House adviser Dr. Scott Atlas, the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow in health policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, wrote an excellent essay recently in the Wall Street Journal. 

  In it, he raises a vital question for all students, parents, faculty, and the broader public, as to how our nation’s university system became, along with major media, the most aggressive proponent and distributor of medical ideology and biosecurity policy.  University behavior continues to be directed by the CDC and WHO, and it appears that university administration will continue its commitment to a consensus posture toward the COVID phenomenon, until another institution that it considers authoritative tells it otherwise.  That is not likely to happen.

  Academia will never account for its misguided COVID policies, and it will never back out of its commitment to consensus explanations or opportunities.  Indeed, these people will help accelerate the entire COVID complex.  COVID is a new social engineering program, and universities will make biosecurity, including molecular engineering and tracking technology, into a permanent research activity that is worth billions per year in funding and commercialization.  The link connecting business, government, and higher education has never been stronger, while China-style social credit scoring, based in part on medical and ideological compliance, is considered by the current White House administration a necessary part of the political agenda.

  For universities to admit that they were wrong would not only undermine their authority and risk their research funding, but also, most of all, put their senior administration in legal jeopardy.  University directors, trustees, regents, and other governance bodies are keen to avoid liability, and university legal and communications departments are working overtime to shield their institutions from blowback, including vicarious liability.

  

  Image: Oregon State University.

  Plaintiff litigation, including class action, appears to be gaining momentum, as the evidence necessary to make durable causes of action against university administration is coalescing from widespread sources (serious health complications due to vaccines, for example).  Legal theories are being formed to seek damages that could easily reach in the billions of dollars.  Some universities could face bankruptcy.

  COVID-related damages may be the next large-scale, long-term litigation project that rivals tobacco and asbestos.  

  The lawyers in the modern university system know that and have effectively put out a gag order to avoid university self-incrimination.  

  But the best legal strategy they possess is to push the same COVID explanations, while actually escalating their commitment to them. 

   They continue to expand the spectrum of biosecurity research that has penetrated nearly every department in the modern university system.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 21:30

• NYC Subway Crime Spikes 30% Despite Beefed Up Transit Patrols
  NYC Subway Crime Spikes 30% Despite Beefed Up Transit Patrols

  Send in the Ninja Turtles.

  Subway crime in the New York City has jumped 30% in 2022 vs. one year ago, outpacing the 22% jump in major crimes across the city over the same period, Bloomberg reports, citing police data released this week.

  

  The crime wave comes as an embarrassment to NYC Mayor Eric Adams (D) who deployed thousands of additional police patrols in the transit system in order to to reduce crime and put riders at ease.

  “Once we stabilized that, we’re going to right-size,” said Adams during a Thursday briefing, discussing the need to reduce the police force once crime is lower. “You’re going to see a normalizing of the number of people who are there.”

  The New York City Police Department is spending an additional $20 million per month on overtime costs on top of regular levels, which pushed its overtime spending to $272 million through November. That’s more than 70% of the annual overtime budget for the fiscal year that ends June 30, according to New York City Comptroller Brad Lander’s office. -Bloomberg

  The rise in spending on the police comes as Adams grapples with critics who say the city isn’t doing enough to tackle crime within the transit system. Ridership, meanwhile, has to 60% of 2019 levels.

  Some City Council members, meanwhile, say the additional funding should be sent on other services such as schools and libraries.

  Even though @NYCMayor says we need to defund libraries and senior centers to stay afloat, he wants to ADD officers to the largest police force in the US.

  It’s a vicious cycle: cut social services, violence increases, respond with more police, cut social services to afford them. pic.twitter.com/FAi2Yop9D4

  — Council Member Tiffany Cabán (D22) (@CabanD22) January 5, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsOn Thursday, NYPD Chief of Transit Michael Kemper said the additional subway patrols resulted in a 4.6% reduction in major crime in the transit system between Oct. 31 – Dec. 31, vs. the same period in 2021.

  “This plan is paying dividends,” said Kemper, who was probably told the plan needed to pay dividends, or else. “We went from a very concerning increase in crime for the first 10 months of the year to a sharp turnaround during the last nine weeks of the year.”

  In October, Adams and NY Governor Kathy Hochul pledged 1,200 overtime NYPD shifts in order to back the nearly 2,600 subway cops.

  According to the Police Benevolent Association, which represents over 24,000 NYPD officers, said that the beefed up pace was unsustainable, and that the city was “underpaying and overworking cops.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 21:00

• Is The New World Order On The Precipice?
  Is The New World Order On The Precipice?

  Authored by ‘Madame DaFarge’ via The Burning Platform blog,

  The New World Order nobility may be receiving more roadblocks for their plans than they had anticipated.

  The entire scam is based on the ignorance and complacence of the great mass of people in the western based economies.

  Control of the West is essential for world domination.

  We are the source of wealth and innovation which makes it imperative.

  The new platform has begun to get rickety with energy problems, war and civil strife bubbling to the surface.

  

  China is believed to be a huge source of economic and political power but actually without the West being a customer, China is a backwater without technology, markets, energy and foodstuffs. The government is unstable as shown in the past few weeks with the new attempted lockdowns. Their food shortages of the past two years are not mentioned by the simpletons of the media but contribute to general instability. The Chinese are a huge unknown to our “intellectual elite” whether they realize it or not. Control of the sluggish population of Chinese is an easy task compared to Europe and North American farmers but all are now stirring.

  This does not even consider India and Russia. By adding these cards to the deck the game plan of the WEF attempted coup appears poorly designed with a small chance of successful domination. That leaves two options regarding their plans, either they are rather sophomoric or there is a plan simmering as yet unknown. I vote for sophomoric. All international schemes have revolved around the US for 100 years because of our ability to fund any type of debauchery. The current unknown is how do they expect the US consumer to drive the economies that they expect to dominate if we are poor, hungry and cold. Europe has been used as test bed for the new system as they are used to being dominated by a system of their betters.

  The clock is ticking as we speak for a major crash that will test the controls set up by the Reich in Europe. The citizens are getting chilly and unappreciative in the support for the new order. The power bills have skyrocketed while farmers’ land is being confiscated. France has been using a colonial type franc to fund its ex-territories in Africa while sucking them dry causing huge migration. Italy and France have begun a war of words about illegal immigrants. Hungary has said it will veto additional sanctions on Russia. The Reich has used the Euro to tap money from the Mediterranean countries so they are running on empty. Britain is in their own mess financially as well. Where will the funding for this extension of socialism originate?

  Theoretically the last option would be expanding the Belt and Road system financed by China. Unfortunately China is experiencing tougher times than expected at home and it is a road to nowhere. Bluffing about Taiwan is amusing, not dangerous. Even their border with India has become volatile.

  The Reich is left again bumping into the Russian Bear that is blocking its’ expansionist dreams. WEF intellectualism is revealed again to be suspect at best. Russia is only interested in its’ own empire and historically defends against the Reich. Certainly the sanctions invoked by the EU for the war are a thorn for Russia but an obvious disaster for Europe.

  The traditional answer to world financial trauma is to have the USA make the payoffs through gold or more recently inflation. Today there is little room for maneuver in our finances. In 1907 we spent 7% of our GDP on government. Today it is about 46%. There is nothing left for the banks to steal. That leaves one option for world stability. That is of course our military.

  Europe has none since the US has paid for its’ unruly teenager for 90 years. In WW2, 1 of 11 men were in the army. Today it is about 1 in 200 and there is a 25% deficit in recruiting. Our young men are not being fooled into supporting a corporate empire building system again.

  US hegemony is past but there is no one to take our place as the relatively benign thief in charge.

  This is a new horizon in history which places a great deal of pressure on the “intellectual” class to react to unknown situations.

  Their record in the last century for functional innovative thought is 0 wins vs 100 losses.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 20:30

• Media Blackout Over Terror Incident At Vegas Power Plant
  Media Blackout Over Terror Incident At Vegas Power Plant

  The US power grid is under attack as extremists shoot, sabotage, and vandalize electrical equipment at power stations. One of the highest-profile attacks was when two men used guns to paralyze a substation in Washington state on Christmas Day, leaving thousands without electricity. The incident made national news, but strangely enough, another attack last week on the Las Vegas power grid went unnoticed by the national press.

  Mohammad Mesmarian, 34, rammed his car through the gate of a solar power generation plant outside Las Vegas on Wednesday and set his car on fire, intending to damage a massive transformer, 8 News Now reported.

  

  “Employees at the plant said they found a car smoldering in a generator pit,” 8 News Now said, adding the Mega Solar Array facility provides power to 13 properties on the Las Vegas Strip, all belonging to MGM Resorts. 

  Investigators believe Mesmarian “siphoned gasoline from his car to put on wires at the transformer,” 8 News Now said, citing documents from investigators. 

  “Mesmarian clarified he burned the Toyota Camry,” police said. “Mesmarian said he burned the vehicle at a Tesla solar plant and did it ‘for the future.'”

  Here’s security camera footage of Mesmarian lighting his car on fire next to a giant transformer. 

  

  8 News Now said Mesmarian caused “major damage,” estimating it could take two years to receive parts and fix the transformer. Luckily, the damaged unit wasn’t online at the time of the incident.. 

  

  “Following an incident at the Mega Solar Array facility, on-site personnel immediately notified authorities and shut down the plant’s operations as a precaution in accordance with industry-standard safety protocols,” an Invenergy spokesperson said.

  Mesmarian was arrested at a campground Thursday. He’s being charged with committing an act of terrorism, first-degree arson, third-degree arson, destroying or injuring real or personal property of another, and escape by a felony prisoner.

  Why is the national press absent in reporting this terror incident on the power grid? 

  

  Perhaps the person involved doesn’t fit the extremist profile routinely touted by progressive and state media. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 20:00

• Fear Of COVID Is The Opiate Of The People
  Fear Of COVID Is The Opiate Of The People

  Authored by Mark Oshinskie via The Brownstone Institute,

  After all of the criticism I’ve directed toward Coronamaniacs and the Vaxxmongers over the past three years – in-person and online – I know that many of them have wished that I’d get very sick and die “from Covid.” If I had, they would have gleefully jeered me, as many did when lockdown critic Herman Cain died. Bear in mind that Mr. Cain was 74 and had Stage IV cancer.

  

  But I haven’t died “from Covid.” Like the super-vast majority of people, I was never at any risk of doing so. 

  While I’d prefer to never get sick, I always knew it was possible that I might “get Covid,” just as I had gotten some other, prior, unnamed coronavirus-driven colds or flus. It’s how life is, has been and will always be. Many people seem to be sick lately. It doesn’t help immune function to be in the low light/low Vitamin D state of winter. And during the past three years of disrupted social life, our immune systems haven’t been properly tested.

  Many have said that, by Spring, 2022, everyone had been exposed to Covid-causing coronaviruses. Maybe it’s true, though it sounds like hyperbole; I’m not sure how this could be known. Regardless, except for one February, 2020 day of malaise, and then a week-long dry cough with no apparent cause—perhaps a quick, nearly asymptomatic, pre-Lockdown brush with Covid, or perhaps nothing at all—I’ve felt fine for the past three years. 

  Last week, on the day after Christmas, that changed.

  My muscles started to ache. These aches spread and lasted for three days, accompanied by a tight chest and a banging headache. On Day 2, I also got a high fever. I let the fever crest until I took some Tylenol to moderate my temperature. Serial doses over the next two days quelled the headaches. My wife got sick the day after I did and exhibited the same symptoms.

  By our respective Day 4s, we each felt much better. 

  Aside from the fever, we didn’t have the publicized, original Covid symptoms: shortness of breath, dry cough and fatigue. Plus, for what it’s worth, we each tested negative on home antigen tests that my wife had gotten in the mail. Thus, we mutually guessed that we probably had some form of flu. I didn’t care whether or not I had “had Covid.” That diagnosis never scared me. I only cared that we felt sick for three days. 

  A day later, by coincidence—or perhaps because my computer was, in our surveillance society, eavesdropping on my wife and my conversations about how we were feeling, physically—this clickbait headline appeared on my screen: “The New Symptoms of Covid.” 

  I took the bait. The article set forth a revised list of symptoms closely resembling those that my wife and I had just endured. 

  Hmm. Maybe we did “have Covid.” The new kind. Because heaven forbid that anyone might think that they just got some unspecified sort of cold or flu, as they might have thought three-plus years ago. 

  To the extent I might believe the article, it said that the virus had mutated into yet another variant, this one with the parodic name, “XBB-1.5.” I’ve known for decades that viruses mutate. This adaptability was another reason that I declined to begin to take an endless series of shots said to protect against viruses that would continually go out of fashion, only to be replaced by others. 

  Throughout, my understanding has been that viruses typically weaken—not strengthen—following such mutations. Thus, I might expect that a coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which was unscary to begin with, would cause the same symptoms—only weaker—as it evolved into some different variant under the “Covid” umbrella.

  But as a virus weakens, I didn’t assume—as the clickbait article suggested—that the types of symptoms would change. I’ve wondered why an illness caused by an ever-evolving virus, that is supposedly genetically distinct from its viral predecessors and said to cause different symptoms than other viruses or variants have caused, is still widely presented to the public as “Covid.” 

  Like other marketing campaigns—only more so—countless money and boundless effort went into building the “Covid” brand. In order to incite fear, Government/Media/Pharma had to set “Covid” apart from centuries of respiratory illnesses experienced by those infected by other coronaviruses. Given the name recognition that Government/Media have developed for “Covid” since March, 2020, they’re motivated to stick with this well-known brand name to describe a viral disease that wasn’t much different from centuries of pre-March, 2020 Coronavirus infections; which, in turn, won’t be much different from infections that follow it, ad infinitum.

  Christian Scientists say that to name a disease is to empower it. But while the Chistian Scientists think it’s bad to empower an illness, Government/Media/Pharma have taken the opposite approach: for three years, they’ve relentlessly strived to empower, and thus, exploit “Covid.”

  Politically and economically, it’s been extremely useful to perpetuate the Covid franchise. Keeping some people scared of Covid helps to sustain the perpetual State of Emergency—oxymoron intended—and all of the Covid-linked government oppression and subsidy schemes that depend upon the myth of crisis. If, instead of referring to “Covid,” Government/Media used all of the various variant names, the public might eventually figure out what they should have known in March, 2020: we’ve always lived among evolving respiratory viruses that briefly sicken many people but don’t seriously threaten anyone who’s healthy. 

  Though to those with the attention span to accommodate all of the shifting variant names, these names might have a certain spooky sci-fi cachet of their own: so many viruses keep emerging that some people feel they’re under siege. 

  But overall, from a fear-marketing standpoint, it’s best to stick with the simpler, original brand name:

  “Covid.” 

  “Covid.” 

  “Covid.”

  Did I mention “Covid?”

  Government/Media/Pharma have seared “Covid” into the American consciousness and terrorized people by grossly exaggerating Covid’s lethality. They aggressively suppressed criticisms of the attendant scam. By repeatedly saying “Covid” and “Pandemic,” they weaponized these words in order to pacify and control the masses, to effect the biggest wealth transfer in history to the already rich—including but not limited to, Pharma—to further impoverish the working class that they now disdain, and to strategically change election laws. 

  Aside from sustaining the perception of a public health Crisis, and to justify imposing a wide array of deprivation restrictions on basic liberties, sustaining Covid brand loyalty also provides at least three other important, continuing benefits. 

  Firstly, by keeping at least some segment of the population afraid of the Covid bogeyman, politicians can use it as an excuse to print ever more “Covid Emergency” relief and research money, ostensibly, but not actually, to control what Biden strategically labeled “this God-awful disease;” even though everyone I know who has had it experienced it as a cold or flu. This massive, annually supplemented slush fund will be used for a vast array of chicanery, including widespread political patronage, with tentacles reaching through politically-aligned state and municipal governments, political donors, the Medical Industrial Complex and the Defense/Biosecurity apparatus. Covid is worth far more alive than it is dead.

  Secondly, sustaining Covidism protects politicians and public health bureaucrats. By continuing to invoke “Covid” to spook a gullible public, the scaremongers can use this word to defuse public anger regarding the overreaction of the past three years and all of the lasting damage which people are belatedly seeing. People who are constantly reminded of the Covid Scare of the past three years or who remain naively scared of the Covid Monster will continue to think that all measures to crush it were worth the suffering that the Government/Media/Pharma opportunistically caused with their orchestrated overreaction. Thus, most people won’t demand accountability for the scam of the past three years. They’ll allow the Government/Media/Pharma to continue to hide behind the foundational lie that “We did all of that to save you from death!” 

  Fear of Covid is the opiate of the people. 

  Lest we forget how essential it was—not—to wreck American society and economy over a virus that threatened almost no one under 75, politicians will order and fund the construction of public monuments where people can go and wring their hands over, and speak in hushed tones about, the deaths of unhealthy septugenarians, octogenarians and nonagenarians “from Covid.” 

  Thirdly, preserving the Covid Scare also enables Government/Media/Pharma to unilaterally, arbitrarily declare victory over Covid whenever it wants. If Covid ever becomes a political liability, it can be decreed to have been conquered. The self-proclaimed Covid-slaying politicians can portray themselves, and the public health bureaucrats, as saviors of humanity. The Media can hail, and gullible people will venerate, those who may claim to have liberated our nation from the long-lasting grip of, as Trump so inaptly called it, “The Plague.” 

  Fundamentally, whether my wife or I had some weird, sore-throat-free cold, some nausea-less flu or just the latest style of “Covid,” neither of us enjoyed our three-day viral experience. Like any old school respiratory virus, this one made us feel lousy, albeit with a different constellation of symptoms. We handled it the same way as other viral illnesses: we drank extra water, took some home remedies, and tried to get some extra sleep. A few years ago, no one made a big deal about, or needed to categorize, being sick like this. People rode it out. No one cared what you had. Or didn’t have.

  During the three days that my wife and I felt the effects of some sort of virus, I never regretfully thought that I would’ve been fine if I had only worn a mask. Nor, while reclining on the sofa sipping hot tea, did I think to blame anyone for passing a virus to me; I understood that an occasional respiratory infection is an unavoidable cost of social life.

  And I definitely didn’t think that any coronavirus justified shutting down a society or mass-injecting some experimental substance.

  These measures have failed miserably and caused tremendous, lasting and expanding harm.

  *  *  *

  Republished from the author’s Substack

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 19:30

• Mysterious Antennas Found In Utah's Hills; Some Speculate 'Decentralized' Blockchain Network
  Mysterious Antennas Found In Utah’s Hills; Some Speculate ‘Decentralized’ Blockchain Network

  Salt Lake City officials are finding mysterious antennas across the foothills of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. The first ones were discovered nearly a year ago, but more have been popping up in recent months. These devices appear to be relaying data across a wide area. 

  As first reported by KSLTV 5 in Utah, the mysterious devices consist of a battery box, a solar panel, and an antenna.

  “These towers have been bolted into different peaks and summits and ridges around the foothills,” Tyler Fonarow, the city’s recreational trails manager, explained, “and it started with one or two, and now it might be as much as a dozen.”

  Salt Lake City public lands officials hiked up the snowy Twin Peaks trail today to remove a mysterious device (solar panel, antenna & locked battery box). They’re finding more in the foothills, with no explanation as to who’s putting them there — or why. Story on @KSL5TV at 6 pic.twitter.com/llfFXMOyLq

  — Michael Locklear (@MichaelLocklear) January 5, 2023

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

  Fonarow said whoever is installing these small fiberglass antennas doesn’t have a permit for authorization on public land. His department has been seizing the devices. They found one last week and plan to remove another later this month. 

  More antennas have been found on property managed by the Forest Service and the University of Utah. 

  A university spokesperson just released a statement about the mysterious antennas: 

  “Since Salt Lake City leaders alerted the University of Utah to the unauthorized solar panel towers in the foothills northeast of the Avenues neighborhood, University of Utah representatives have been actively coordinating with City Public Lands officials to determine whether any member of our campus community is connected to the towers. As far as we know, the tower located on university property is not owned or operated by the university. We appreciate Salt Lake City’s collaboration and dedicated efforts to identify the owners.”

  Fonarow speculated the devices could be part of a decentralized wireless connectivity platform:

  “It might be related to cryptocurrency and relaying networks and being able to make money off that,” he said, “so that’s another reason we want to stop it now before it becomes a dumping ground for dozens and dozens of more antennas.”

  Last week, a Salt Lake City Public Lands Facebook posted pictures of “unauthorized solar panel towers” found in the Foothills. 

  

  Some people who replied to the Facebook post speculated the devices could be part of the Helium network. 

  “Probably helium network like several have posted. Or some kind of mesh network repeaters? I don’t understand why they are being torn down and huge effort to take them off public lands, when if it is a mesh network repeater, can be used by the public, and is very important in emergency/communication failure situations,” one person said. 

  “Those are very clearly off-grid Helium miners,” another person said. 

  Someone asked: “Ham radio repeater?” 

  If the speculation is correct, these mysterious antennas could be hotspots connecting to a wireless blockchain-based network for Helium. This entirely new incentive model allows people to set up hotspots that act as Helium miners and serve data to devices. People can earn money by simply buying a hotspot and plugging it in. 

  Here’s what the Helium coverage looks like around Salt Lake City. 

  

  There are nearly a million hotspots nationwide.

  

  “Mining HNT is done by installing a simple device on your home or office window,” Helium wrote on their website, adding these “hotspots provide miles of wireless network coverage for millions of devices around you using Helium LongFi, and you are rewarded in HNT for doing this. And because of an innovative proof-of-work model (we call it “Proof-of-Coverage”), your Hotspot only uses 5W of energy.”

  There’s no confirmation Helium hotspots are the devices being found by officials, but speculation indeed points to that. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 19:00

• Ron DeSantis Activates National Guard Amid Surge of Illegal Aliens Entering Florida Keys
  Ron DeSantis Activates National Guard Amid Surge of Illegal Aliens Entering Florida Keys

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Friday signed an executive order to activate the National Guard in the state amid a major surge of illegal aliens arriving in the Florida Keys from places such as Cuba and other Caribbean countries.

  “As the negative impacts of [President Joe] Biden’s lawless immigration policies continue unabated, the burden of the Biden administration’s failure falls on local law enforcement who lack the resources to deal with the crisis,” the Republican governor said in a statement.

  “That is why I am activating the National Guard and directing state resources to help alleviate the strain on local resources. When Biden continues to ignore his legal responsibilities, we will step in to support our communities.”

  The executive order (pdf) also directs state law enforcement agencies and other state agencies to “provide resources in support of local governments” responding to the influx of illegal immigrants in the Florida Keys, as well as “additional support toward efforts to prevent further migrant landings on Florida’s shores.”

  

  A boat that was left along the shoreline after it was used recently to transport Cuban migrants from the communist island nation to America in Key West, Fla., on Jan. 6, 2023. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

  Florida’s state government is also set to deploy aircraft from the Florida National Guard, as well as support marine patrol from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, to “support water interdictions and ensure the safety of migrants attempting to reach Florida through the Florida Straits.”

  DeSantis’s office called the influx of illegal immigrants “alarming.”

  

  It noted that about 300 illegal aliens on Jan. 1 unlawfully entered Dry Tortugas National Park, which is about 70 miles west of Key West. On the same day, another 45 illegal aliens entered Key West—an island that’s part of the Florida Keys archipelago.

  8,000 Illegal Aliens Encountered in Waters Off Florida

  “This massive influx of illegal immigrants caused the park to close to ensure the safety of visitors and staff and to provide the space necessary to attend to the illegal immigrants,” stated the governor’s office.

  “Since August 2022, federal, state and local law enforcement have encountered more than 8,000 migrants in waters off the coast of Florida.”

  

  Illegal aliens from Cuba line up to board a bus to be driven to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection station as they are processed in Marathon, Fla., on Jan. 5, 2023. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

  “Florida has a long history of helping refugees, including Cubans and others fleeing communist regimes, find support after they arrive in the United States, however, this has always involved support from the Federal Government and a large, coordinated effort amongst state, federal and local governments,” DeSantis’s office said.

  But it is “particularly burdensome” for Monroe County Sheriff’s Office, which has 194 deputies, to manage hundreds of illegal immigrants while also trying to ensure public safety, his office noted. It called the Biden administration’s overall response to the influx of illegal aliens into the United States “inept,” adding that the federal government has failed to “provide the resources necessary to respond to the current mass migration event.”

  “Instead, the burden falls on local law enforcement, which puts Floridians at risk.”

  Meanwhile, the arrivals have been continuing.

  Walter N. Slosar, the chief patrol agent of the Miami Sector headquarters, wrote on Twitter late Jan. 6: “During the past 24 hours, Border Patrol agents & [law enforcement] partners responded to 5 migrant landings & encountered 90 Cuban migrants in the Florida Keys. The migrants arrived on rustic vessels & residents notified local authorities.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 18:30

• Saudi Arabia's PIF That Owns LIV Golf "Emerging" As "Possible Bidder" For WWE In Entertainment Expansion
  Saudi Arabia’s PIF That Owns LIV Golf “Emerging” As “Possible Bidder” For WWE In Entertainment Expansion

  World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (or WWE) shares jumped on Friday after the entertainment company announced founder Vince McMahon, who retired last year amid allegations of sexual misconduct, would return to the board as a possible sale is being explored. Then after markets closed on Friday evening, a report surfaced that the Saudi-backed sovereign fund behind the pro golf league LIV Golf could be a possible bidder for WWE if it decides to sell.

  Michael McCarthy and A.J. Perez of “Front Office Sports” wrote, “Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund is emerging as a possible bidder for WWE if the promotion puts itself up for sale. “

  

  PIF, who owns LIV Golf — appears to have expanding interests in sports and entertainment. LightShed Partners analyst Brandon Ross told Front Office Sports:

  “In the same way they did LIV, there’s an unlimited faucet of dollars there.

  “The Saudis are already a decent part of the profitability of the company just on those two [Saudi-based WWE] events alone. They’re trying to be relevant in the entertainment world.” 

  Last month, WSJ reported McMahon “told people that he intends to make a comeback at WWE,” and on Friday, it appears he has done just that, with the return to the board and finding a buyer for the company. 

  Back to WWE and Saudi Arabia, Front Office Sports said the two have a “deep history” of holding events in the Middle Eastern country. WWE recently signed a deal to hold two events annually in the Kingdom through this decade. 

  WWE shares closed up 17% to $84.27 on Friday after the news of McMahon returning to the board. 

  

  We pointed out that WWE’s equity float as a percentage of short interest is about 20% — as the news of McMahon, possible sale, and rumor of interested PIF bidder sparked a squeeze. 

  

  If Front Office Sports is correct, it appears the Saudis are preparing to expand their reach over several forms of entertainment, from golf to wrestling — and the big question: What’s next?.. XFL?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 18:00

• "We Don't Do This": Adam Schiff & The Underbelly Of American Censorship
  “We Don’t Do This”: Adam Schiff & The Underbelly Of American Censorship

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in the Hill on the recent disclosure of efforts by Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) to pressure Twitter to censor critics, including a columnist. This effort occurred shortly after Schiff’s office objected to one of my columns accusing him of pressuring social media companies to censor those with opposing views. While publicly denying that he supports censorship, Schiff was secretly pressuring Twitter to censor an array of critics.

  Here is the column:

  “We don’t do this.”

  

  That response from Twitter to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is a singular indictment, coming at the height of Twitter’s censorship operations. Apparently, there were some things that even Twitter’s censors refused to do.

  One of those things was silencing critics of Schiff and his House committee.

  In the latest tranche of “Twitter Files,” journalist Matt Taibbi revealed that Twitter balked at Schiff’s demand that Twitter suspend an array of posters or label their content as “misinformation” and “reduce the visibility” of them. Among those who Schiff secretly tried to censor was New York Post columnist Paul Sperry.

  Sperry drew Schiff’s ire by writing about a conversation allegedly overheard by one of his sources. Sperry’s article, which appeared in RealClearInvestigations, cited two sources as overhearing two White House staffers discussing how to remove newly-elected President Trump from office. The article raised the possibility of bias on the part of an alleged key player in launching the first Trump impeachment, CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella. The sources reportedly said that Ciaramella was in a conversation with Sean Misko, a holdover from the Obama administration who later joined Schiff’s staff. The conversation — in Sperry’s words — showed that “just days after [Trump] was sworn in they were already trying to get rid of him.”

  Rather than simply refute the allegation, Schiff wanted Sperry and other critics silenced. His office reportedly laid out steps to cleanse Twitter of their criticism, including an instruction to “remove any and all content about Mr. Misko and other Committee staff from its service — to include quotes, retweets, and reactions to that content.”

  The date of Schiff’s non-public letter in November 2020 is notable: Earlier that year, I wrote a column for The Hill criticizing Schiff for pushing for censorship of misinformation in a letter that he sent to social media companies. His office promptly objected to the very suggestion that Schiff supported censorship.

  We now know Schiff was actively seeking to censor specific critics on social media. These likely were viewed as more than “requests” since Schiff was sending public letters threatening possible legislative action against these same companies. He wanted his critics silenced on social media. After all, criticizing his investigations or staff must, by definition, be misinformation — right?

  His office seems to have indicated they knew Twitter was using shadow-banning or other techniques to suppress certain disfavored writers. In the letter, his staff asked Twitter to “label and reduce the visibility of any content.”

  Twitter, however, drew the line with Schiff; one of its employees simply wrote, “no, this isn’t feasible/we don’t do this.”

  The “this” referred to in this case was raw political censorship. And even a company that maintained one of the largest censorship programs in history could not bring itself to do what Schiff was demanding — but the demand itself is telling.

  Not only does it show how dishonest some politicians have been in denying censorship while secretly demanding it, it also shows the insatiable appetite created by censorship. The article in question, written by Sperry, is a good example. Sperry has denied ever supporting QAnon conspiracy theories, as Schiff’s office charged. Yet even if Sperry’s account about Schiff’s staffer was wildly untrue, that should make it easier to rebut publicly.

  The move by Schiff to ban Sperry and others on Twitter — and to remove content — is highly ironic. Schiff has been criticized repeatedly for promoting “misinformation” and for relying on unidentified “sources” for his claims of Trump’s criminality. For example, Schiff pushed the false claim that the infamous Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation; he also was criticized for pushing false narratives of Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 election.

  Nevertheless, I would equally oppose any effort to ban Schiff from social media, although that is hardly likely given the demonstrated political bias of past censorship efforts.

  As for Sperry, he was later permanently suspended by Twitter, which I also criticized.

  Schiff is unlikely to be deterred by the release of these communications. He recently sent a letter to Facebook, warning it not to relax its censorship efforts. His letter, written with Reps. André Carson (D-Ind.), Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), reminded Facebook that some lawmakers are watching the company “as part of our ongoing oversight efforts” — and suggested they may be forced to exercise that oversight into any move by Facebook to “alter or rollback certain misinformation policies.”

  Schiff’s actions embody the slippery slope of censorship. By labeling his critics as QAnon supporters or purveyors of “misinformation,” he sought to have allies in social media “disappear” critics like Sperry — yet he found that even those allies could not stomach his demands. Given Twitter’s censorship of even satirical sites, it was akin to being turned down by a Kanye West podcast as being too extreme.

  With the disclosure of apparent FBI involvement in Twitter’s censorship program, the release of the Schiff files is another rare insight into how government officials attempted to enlist social media companies for censorship by surrogate or proxy. That is precisely why many in the media, political and business establishments have mobilized against Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter who has released these compromising files.

  In a recent tweet, Schiff chastised Musk and demanded more answers from the Twitter CEO. While insisting that “I don’t support censorship,” Schiff asked Musk if he would “commit to providing the public with actual answers and data, not just tweets?” Well, Musk just did precisely that.

  The “actual answer” is that Schiff has long sought to silence his critics, and Musk has exposed the underbelly of censorship — which is where we found Adam Schiff.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 17:30

• Billionaire Jack Ma Cedes Control Of Fintech Giant Ant Group
  Billionaire Jack Ma Cedes Control Of Fintech Giant Ant Group

  A little over two years after China launched its billionaire “re-education” campaign by unexpectedly suspending the IPO of one of China’s most influential fintech companies, Ant Financial, in November 2020, a move aimed at humbling (if not crushing) China’s then-richest man Jack Ma, the campaign has come full circle on Saturday when Ant announced Jack Ma was giving up controlling rights of the fintech giant as the billionaire further retreats from his online empire following China’s unprecedented tech crackdown.

  Ant Group said in an announcement on Saturday that Ma would no longer be the “control person” who holds 34 percent of the company’s shares. Instead, he would be one of 10 major shareholders. The move would “further enhance the stability of our corporate structure and sustainability of our long-term development,” according to the statement.

  The announcement, which described the move as part of a “corporate governance optimization” plan, gave no details about when the changes would be finalized, and noted that they would not affect the company’s day-to-day operations. Under Ant Group’s current governance structure, Ma does not have a management role.

  The company is offering 10 individuals, including the founder, management and staff, voting rights independently, effectively removing Ma’s control of Ant, according to an announcement on Saturday. The adjustment, however, will not change economic interests of any shareholders and Ma will still hold voting rights and economic interests in the company following the change. In a filing in July, affiliate Alibaba Group Holding reiterated that Ma “intends to reduce and thereafter limit his direct and indirect economic interest in Ant Group over time” to a percentage that doesn’t exceed 8.8%. Ma will have about 6.2% of the voting rights after the adjustment, Bloomberg calculated.

  Ma’s retreat from the company he founded comes after the Chinese Communist Party waged an unprecedented crackdown on Big Tech and some of China’s richest oligarchs. Beijing had made Ma’s Ant Group and its sister company, e-commerce giant Alibaba, early targets in the campaign to curb the power of internet giants. After Beijing forced Ant Group to call off what would have been a blockbuster initial public offering in 2020 and later fined Alibaba a hefty $2.8 billion for abusing its dominance, Jack Ma effectively disappeared from public view and was last seen living in Japan. Last year, Ant Group said it would undertake a major government-ordered overhaul of its business to address regulators’ concerns about unfair competition and the amount of data it collects on users.  

  Meanwhile, on Friday the Jay Fai restaurant in Bangkok, Thailand posted a picture of Ma on Instagram, where he appears to have just visited the restaurant. “Incredibly humble, we are honored to welcome you and your family to Jay Fai’s,” the caption on the post reads. According to Reuters, Ma was at the restaurant with Soopakij Chearavanont, the chair of the Charoen Pokphand Group

   

   

   

   

  View this post on Instagram

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  A post shared by JAY FAI (เจ๊ไฝ)⭐️ (@jayfaibangkok)

  //www.instagram.com/embed.js

  According to Bloomberg, the change of control could mean that Ant will have to wait longer for a much anticipated resumption of its initial public offering. Companies can’t list domestically on the country’s so-called A-share market if they have had a controller change in the past three years — or in the past two years, if listing on Shanghai’s STAR market. For Hong Kong’s stock exchange, this waiting period is one year.

  Ant’s consumer lending affiliate recently received regulatory approval for a capital injection of 10.5 billion yuan ($1.5 billion), signaling progress in its restructuring and removing a hurdle as it seeks to obtain a financial holding license. The company could issue about 400 billion yuan to 500 billion yuan of loans after the changes, based on Bloomberg calculations.

  While Ma was once hailed in China as a model of success, but he faced increasing trouble with the Chinese government, especially after he criticized the nation’s banking regulators in late 2019. As the NYT notes, under Xi Jinping, Beijing had sought to exert greater state control over the economy in recent years, including by reining in the influence of tycoons who amassed enormous wealth but were seen to overstep their bounds.

  The Chinese government’s multi-year crackdown has reined in breakneck growth for the entire internet sector, and left global investors feeling the shockwaves. It’s changed the playbook for the nation’s tech champions who once prioritized growth at all costs, introducing a new paradigm for the country’s private sector.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 17:00

• 'A Wonderful Christmas Present': Zelensky Hails Single Biggest US Arms Package At One Time
  ‘A Wonderful Christmas Present’: Zelensky Hails Single Biggest US Arms Package At One Time

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US is going to send Ukraine Bradley Fighting Vehicles for the first time in a new weapons package worth nearly $3 billion, US officials told The Associated Press late this week.

  The $2.85 billion aid package was formally announced on Friday, and marks the single largest arms package for Ukraine the US has pledged at one time. The package will include 50 Bradleys, which are designed to transport infantry troops with armored protection that are equipped with a 25 mm gun.

  

  The White House confirmed the US will be providing Ukraine with Bradleys in a statement on a phone call between President Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The statement said that Berlin will be supplying Kyiv with a similar piece of equipment, the German-made Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

  The announcement came the day after France said it would be giving Ukraine AMX-10 RC armored combat vehicles, which are similar to the Bradleys but have a bigger gun and are considered “light tanks.” A French official said it was the “first time that Western-made armored vehicles are being delivered in support of the Ukrainian army.”

  While providing Ukraine with Western-made armored vehicles is a significant escalation in aid, it falls short of the heavier tanks Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been seeking, such as US-made Abrams and German-made Leopards.

  Zelensky was denied Abrams when he visited Washington DC, and a US official told The Washington Post the Biden administration is still ruling it out.

  Zelensky described the new package as a “Christmas Present” in a Friday tweet…

  

  The US officials speaking to AP said the $2.85 billion weapons package will also include HUMVEES, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, and a large number of missiles and other ammunition. The weapons will be paid for by funds already authorized by Congress to spend on the war, which at this point totals about $112 billion.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 16:30

• Ontario Governing Body For Psychologists Demands Re-Education For Jordan Peterson
  Ontario Governing Body For Psychologists Demands Re-Education For Jordan Peterson

  Outspoken psychologist and former tenured professor Jordan Peterson has come under relentless attack ever since he criticized the ‘Act To Amend The Canadian Human Rights Act And The Criminal Code’ back in 2016.  The act is a framework which makes scrutiny of gender identity ideology or transsexualism into potential discrimination under Canadian law.  Peterson posted a series of videos which outline why critique of gender identity groups is rooted in science and should be protected as free speech.    

  After several years of harassment from leftist activists and politically motivated bureaucrats, Peterson is once again being threatened.  This time, with the loss of his license to practice psychology unless he submits to a series of ‘re-education’ programs mandated by the College of Pyschologists of Ontario.

  The CPO is a quasi-governmental body (a mostly unaccountable bureaucracy) acting in accordance with the Psychology Act, 1991 the Health Professions Procedural Code, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 and the regulations and by-laws of the college.  The CPO’s sudden aggressive effort to silence Jordan Peterson appears to have been triggered by his reinstatement on Twitter in November.

  

  He was originally banned from the site for referring to actress Elliot Page by her original name (Ellen Page) and using the word “her” as a descriptive, which is a scientific fact, but also a violation of the leftist site’s TOS before Elon Musk’s takeover.  

  The psychologist is also known for his criticisms of Canada’s draconian covid lockdowns and mandates.

  With Peterson once again having access to a wider audience on social media, the CPO has ordered him to complete a mandatory “Specified Continuing Education or Remedial Program” to “review, reflect on and ameliorate [his] professionalism in public statements,” according to a lengthy list of requirements from the college that Peterson shared on Twitter.  He must meet with a psychologist for coaching classes, which he must pay for, until a final report is issued by the coach that shows their concerns have been “properly ameliorated.”    

  The CPO argues that Peterson’s social media interactions constitute a violation of the organization’s standards for professional interactions with the public.  In other words, the CPO essentially believes it has the right to control the speech of member psychologists and force them to adhere to a predetermined narrative they find acceptable when engaging with the public.  

  It should be noted that there are no publicized instances of psychologists being threatened with a loss of their license for espousing leftist viewpoints on social media.  The measures appear to be strictly designed to punish more conservative leaning professionals.  

  Peterson says he will not comply with the CPO programs because his comments have nothing to do with his role as a psychologist.  “Every single accusation is not only independent of my clinical practice, but explicitly political — and not only that: unidirectionally explicitly political,” Peterson writes.

  Canada’s spiral into authoritarianism is widely publicized and the nation’s waning respect for free speech accelerated during the pandemic lockdowns.  While the US is not far behind, Americans at least have free speech rights codified in a constitution that is designed to regulate what the government can and cannot do.  In Canada, such a thing does not exist.  Canadian rights are treated more like privileges that the government is allowed to legally erase at a moment’s notice.

  CPO actions not only indicate hostility towards free speech, but also hint at an underlying fear – Members of the professional class are often the most indoctrinated of all people, and for one of them to break from the paradigm and speak against the establishment is considered the utmost betrayal.  

  Peterson is being targeted with a special brand of bureaucratic attention because the establishment uses the professional class to convince and control the general public.  The claim that the “experts have spoken” is the ultimate tool for manipulating a majority of the population, and when some of those experts contradict the narrative, the powers-that-be take particular notice.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 16:00

• The CDC Puts Itself In Charge Of Language Too
  The CDC Puts Itself In Charge Of Language Too

  Authored by Robert Malone via The Brownstone Institute,

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has come out with a guide for how we are all to speak and write. This can be found on the website titled, “Preferred Terms for Select Population Groups & Communities.” It is clear that this list is being read and distributed broadly – from medical institutions, hospitals, scientific communications, doctor’s offices, schools and universities, as well as other US Government agencies and institutes.

  

  The CDC is the arm of the US Government tasked with disease control and prevention. It is not tasked with correcting wrong-speak.

  Now, how exactly this guide fits in with the CDC mission is beyond me. Here is what the CDC lists as their mission on their website:

  

  Do you read anything in the above that suggests that political correctness or correcting wrong-speak is part of the CDC mission? When did the CDC decide that they should take on the progressive left’s cause to reshape American language (oh, I used that “forbidden” word -”America”, which according to Stanford University- that is now verbotten). 

  I dunno – Maybe there should be some sort of jail penalty for those of us who just can’t get it right. Or maybe, the government should just revoke social media “privileges” or stop people from being allowed to make payments via internet banking services, such as PayPal has done on occasion.

  According to the website, the CDC has put together this very extensive “list” to protect people from “stigmatizing language.”

  The problem is that the CDC evidently believes that there should be no social stigmas. That if one commits a crime, is in prison, is an addict, or is involved in behaviors that most find offensive or are illegal, it is not ok to use a term to directly describe that activity because societal judgment might hurt someone’s feelings.

  So, the CDC is apparently afraid that we might hurt people’s feelings by using unapproved terms, and that this would lead to a threat to public health. This comes down to a new, popular opinion among mental health care professionals that “Harmful language ultimately increases stigma on the individual, which reduces one’s belief in the ability to change as well as their motivation to ask for help.” I went to Pubmed and tried to find data to support this hypothesis.

  A quick review of Pubmed shows that it has over 1,300 publications with the keywords “stigmatizing language.” What I found was a lot of first-person stories and case studies about how healthcare professionals have either witnessed or been harmed by hurtful words. But what I didn’t find was clear evidence that calling someone an addict, prisoner, smoker, handicapped, underserved, rural and a vast myriad group of words that are now labelled as being inappropriate by the CDC actually do harm. Now, there must be studies out there? But I couldn’t actually find any, so I couldn’t evaluate the quality of the research. My basic search does imply that whatever evidence is out there isn’t very strong or it would be cited by a multitude of studies.

  The article “Words Matter: Addiction and Stigmatizing Language: When it comes to addiction, stigmatizing language shouldn’t be the norm.” is a fairly typical example of the articles and studies I found. This article is in a large, mainstream magazine (Psychology Today) and is all about the feelings and beliefs of health care professionals about the harms of stigmatizing language. Yet, not a single study is cited in the article. 

  So, let’s take a closer look at this list of words from the CDC website and compare them to real-life examples at the CDC. The question being: does the CDC use the forbidden words on their own list? The answer is an unequivocal ”yes,” they do and they use them a lot. Another case of “good for thee but not for me.” An internet search shows that their website and spokespeople have no issues using these words themselves. Seems to me what is good for the goose should be good for the gander.

  Some examples. 

  According to the CDC, we are no longer to use the word “smoker,” as it might offend those who smoke. 

  

  Yet, here are images from the CDC website – using the word “smoker.” In fact, they even have a registered trademark for the phase:

  

  So, please folks – don’t do like the CDC. The proper term is “people who smoke.” We wouldn’t want to offend smokers…

  The CDC’s attempt to be non-judgmental for people who are addicted is also interesting. As they now categorize addiction as a disease, this means any reference to people who are addicted being called “addicted” is wrong-speak. For instance, instead of “relapse,” we should say “people who return to use.” Because relapse implies that the behavior is stigmatizing and we shouldn’t stigmatize disease.

  But the CDC conflates the fact that addiction and addicts hurts society, families and individuals. Being an addict is not healthy and is harmful.

  The CDC has even developed a special abbreviation for injectable drug addicts (I mean people who inject drugs):

  

  As a society, as individuals, we have every right to judge those who hurt families, children, communities and themselves. Addicts hurt themselves and others. Let’s not sugarcoat it. Yes, there are addicts who are mentally ill, but it is often a self-inflicted wound. 

  Many treatment programs and practitioners do insist that the addict confront themselves and the damages done by their addiction. This is not a malicious or bad thing. Not “sugarcoating” addiction is often part of the treatment and healing process. 

  “Person who relapsed” versus “person who returned to use.” Why? Because we wouldn’t want to put any judgement on addiction? Where does their idiocy end?

  

  Then of course, there are all those tried and true public health phrases that aren’t supposed to be used anymore.

  

  Except the CDC uses these terms also. From the CDC website:

  

  Another group of words what are now wrong-speak is how people who are incarcerated are to be discussed:

  From the CDC Website:

  

  The CDC believes that people who are incarcerated will be offended, and they might have their mental health status endangered by using terms such as inmate, prisoner, convict, ex-convict, criminal, parolee or detainee. 

  Because we wouldn’t want someone detained or convicted of a murder to have their feelings hurt, would we?

  So, calling Bryan Kohberger a “detainee” for the murder of four innocent college students would be considered a wrong-speak crime. Good to know.

  There are many words that are truly offensive. We all know of them. None of those words made it to the CDC list. 

  Please, go to the CDC website and read for yourself. Their list of unapproved versus approved words and phrases is quite remarkable. 

  Where does this end?

  *  *  *

  Reposted from the author’s Substack

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 15:30

• Russia To Mobilize An Extra 500,000 Conscripts This Month, Ukraine Says
  Russia To Mobilize An Extra 500,000 Conscripts This Month, Ukraine Says

  Ukrainian officials are in the past days growing more specific regarding their assertions that the Russian government is planning a major new mobilization order, complete with martial law and a closure of the borders for all men of fighting age.

  Kiev is claiming that Moscow is preparing to call up an additional 500,000 conscripts in January, following the ‘partial mobilization’ which included 300,000 extra troops in October, which proved hugely controversial inside Russia as tens of thousands reportedly fled military service.

  

  Vadym Skibitsky, Ukraine’s deputy military intelligence chief, was cited in The Guardian as saying Ukraine expects the new mobilization to pour additional Russian manpower into Ukraine for a coming post-winter offensive, to ramp up in the spring or summer months.

  The renewed fighting and troop influx is expected to be concentrated in the east and south, the Ukrainian official said.

  Moscow meanwhile has responded to the reports by flatly denying it to be the case, with President Vladimir Putin having addressed the rumors last month, dismissing a new call-up as “pointless”. He cited that a mere half of those that were activated as part of the October mobilization are actually fighting in Ukraine.

  This suggests Russia has been significantly holding back, or also could be slow-playing its operations for the duration of the winter, in preparation for a big offensive. 

  Ukraine is already using its own claims of the coming mass mobilization to push for more arms deliveries from the West, claiming Putin’s forces “will collapse” if the next major offensive is beaten back.

  Ukraine’s military intel claim Russia will mobilise 500k men this Jan.

  “If Russia loses this time around, then Putin will collapse,” describing the next 6 to 8 months as the last push

  The 1st wave of 300k proved unpopular in Russia. W comments @RALee85https://t.co/2R1zWwjVOa

  — Isobel Koshiw (@IKoshiw) January 6, 2023

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

  So far the only sign that could lend credence to the Ukrainian predictions of “something big” coming are military activities in Belarus. The past week has seen more and more heavy Russian equipment pour into Belarus by train, amid ongoing joint Russian-Belarusian drills, and President Alexander Lukashenko making bolder symbolic moves in support of Putin’s operation in Ukraine.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 15:00

• A Potent Reminder Of The Need For American Space Independence
  A Potent Reminder Of The Need For American Space Independence

  Authored by Grant Anderson via RealClear Wire,

  The International Space Station (ISS) has proven to be a great example of human technological achievement and has existed as a platform for global connection, diplomacy, peace and cooperation.  It has played a valuable and noble role in supporting the peaceful scientific endeavors of multiple nations and communities for over two decades. But, as it continues into its final decade of life – NASA announced in January of 2022 that it plans to “de-orbit” the ISS in 2031 – it is definitely starting to show its limitations. All good things must come to an end, and in this regard, the ISS is no different than any other good thing.  

  

  More broadly, these limitations, and the looming expiration of the ISS generally, reinforce the need for continuing the important pursuit of American independence in space. Certainly, the ISS has supported numerous international missions over the past twenty years, where astronauts from all backgrounds have worked together to advance human activity in space. 

  That said, American access to the ISS has faced several complications over the years, a lesson that we should strive to heed moving forward. A few examples make the point. When the U.S. space shuttle program ended, America had to depend on the Russian Soyuz to travel to and return from the station – a situation that may have worked when relations between the U.S. and Russian Federation were amiable, but now problematic in the wake of Russia’s war on Ukraine. In fact, early in the war on Ukraine, Russian authorities threateningly hinted that they could leave an American stranded on the ISS.

  And as contemptible as Russia’s pressures have been, other incidents remind of the need to keep pressing toward the goal of independence in space. Most recently in December, a major coolant leak occurred on the Soyuz spacecraft docked at the ISS, a challenge that, while not immediately life-threatening to personnel onboard, poses new problems for return flights to Earth. The Soyuz spacecraft is on station standing by as a “lifeboat” in the event of an emergency where ISS inhabitants need to evacuate.     

  The cause of the leak remains unknown and investigations have yet to determine the origin of the malfunction. Thankfully, news reports on the leak and subsequent actions have indicated that both U.S. and Russia have been coordinating closely throughout the ordeal. However, the entire leak episode is another problematic example of American astronauts operating at the mercy of a foreign power’s capability, reliability and technology. It is all the more reason for why America can’t pull its foot off the gas in re-building our human spaceflight program, enhancing our space access platforms and capabilities, and ensuring that our own backup systems and assets are ready for any number of plausible contingency operations or needs.    

  It is a testament to the shared values, mission focus and professionalism of the world’s astronaut corps that even in the most trying of political times, those in the universe above can work together and not let events on Earth get in the way of work on the ISS. Unfortunately, what happens in orbit is often determined by events on the global surface, and with that sobering thought in mind, anyone on the ISS could be impacted by events far outside of their control. With the war in Ukraine continuing to grind away, and relations between Russia and the West strained by the day, these types of incidents should serve as both a blinking warning light and a motivating incentive for us to keep our eye on the ball with our own civil space program. The last thing we would ever want is Americans left stranded.   

  In times of strife, confusion, economic uncertainty and seemingly endless competing national priorities, the temptation to scale back our efforts in space can be alluring. We’ve seen the space program slashed before, most recently during the “great recession” of 2009-2011, when competing needs crowded out the argument to maintain a robust presence above the atmosphere. But the imperative for a committed and appropriately capitalized American space program now is strong and we need to stick to our goals. The world has changed, the competition is fierce, the technology is rapidly advancing, and our adversaries are working feverishly to establish their own space programs – often for purposes that run counter to the peaceful space ambitions of the past.  

  As we begin the New Year, our policies and budgets should continue to support the programs, capabilities and technological development that will allow us to keep moving toward our goals beyond Earth. At the same time, this recent leak aboard the Soyuz and wider related concerns about the reliability and dependability of Russia should only reinforce the need to swiftly establish and secure American independence in space. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• McCarthy Elected Speaker Of The House After 15 Rounds
  McCarthy Elected Speaker Of The House After 15 Rounds

  Update (0030 ET): After a dramatic 14th vote which saw Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) Kevin McCarthy’s 14th bid for House Speaker, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has finally won – ending a dramatic impasse.

  Interestingly, the House was set to adjourn for the evening, but then something changed and they held a 15th vote.

  

  The vote is still ongoing, but at least five of the GOP holdouts – including Gaetz, voted ‘present’ on the 15th ballot, giving McCarthy just enough votes to stumble over the finish line.

  

  Those who switched their votes to ‘present’ included Gaetz, Eli Crane, Lauren Bobert, Bob Good and Andy Biggs.

  *  *  *

  Update (2313 ET): After a dramatic Friday evening in the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) failed to clinch the Speakership after 14 rounds of voting, after Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) voted ‘present’ – sending the entire chamber into disarray.

  

  The official count for the vote was:

  • McCarthy: 216
  • Jeffries: 212
  • Jordan:2
  • Biggs: 2

  At one point a visibly angry Rep. Mike Rodgers bolted towards Gaetz and had to be restrained.

  Kevin McCarthy approaches Gaetz and Boebert because he needed 216 votes to win. pic.twitter.com/o6VBsbwVVV

  — The Republican Accountability Project (@AccountableGOP) January 7, 2023

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

  Rodgers lunged at Gaetz? pic.twitter.com/THHpZA4XjQ

  — Elizabeth Wachsberg (@EWachsberg) January 7, 2023

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

  Gaetz could still flip tonight, but as it stands now, is now pushing for a Monday vote.

  Vote is still open; no one is sure what happened. Gaetz, who called McCarthy speaker-designate on Fox, wants an adjournment till Monday. But several other holdouts could have ended it with present or pro-McCarthy vote. Another setback for McCarthy, but can rebels ever get to yes?

  — HowardKurtz (@HowardKurtz) January 7, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1550ET): The House has adjourned until 10 p.m. ET, with McCarthy telling reporters “We’re going to win.”

  Kevin McCarthy tells CNN’s @mkraju he believes he will have the votes to be elected House Speaker tonight.

  Asked how he knows that, McCarthy responds, “Because I count.” pic.twitter.com/DsCfQHrQH0

  — The Recount (@therecount) January 6, 2023

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

  McCarthy just told me he has the votes to be elected speaker tonight

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 6, 2023

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

  Indeed, things seem tense within the “Never Kevin” camp.

  Paul Gosar has laid down his sword. He votes for McCarthy on the 12th Round of Voting.

  Gosar appeared agitated as he spoke with Matt Gaetz moments before casting his vote. Gosar quickly exited the floor to thunderous applause from GOP moderates. pic.twitter.com/DZBcivX8RK

  — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1400ET): After four days and 13 votes, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has lost his bid for House Speaker yet again.

  

  That said, he’s been able to flip 15 holdouts, the latest being Andy Harris of Maryland. During the vote, Harris could be seen standing in the back of the chamber, several rows behind the 6 GOP holdouts.

  So for the 14th round, McCarthy would need to win at least three of the remaining six GOP holdouts, if everything in round 13 plays out as expected.

  — Rick Klein (@rickklein) January 6, 2023

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

  Harris had been seeking a subcommittee gavel on the appropriations panel, according to CNN‘s Manu Raju.

  Andy Harris just voted for McCarthy — a big get for McCarthy.
  He had been seeking a subcommittee gavel on the appropriations panel. McCarthy had said gavels were not part of the talks.

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1341ET): Rep. Kevin McCarthy is on track to lose his 12th ballot for House speaker, though he has picked up 14 votes from GOP holdouts.

  

  FOURTEEN FLIPS ON THIS VOTE FOR MCCARTHY

  BRECHEEN
  BISHOP
  CLOUD
  CLYDE
  DONALDS
  LUNA
  MILLER
  NORMAN
  PERRY
  ROY
  SELF
  SPARTZ
  GOSAR
  OGLES

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 6, 2023

  somehow, some way, kevin mccarthy finds himself on the brink of the speakership.

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 6, 2023

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

  Kevin McCarthy on this Speaker vote
  pic.twitter.com/lrg85abHXv

  — Conservative George (@grandolepartay) January 6, 2023

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

  According to CNN, McCarthy’s team sees Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) as their biggest obstacle now, and see him trying to “gin up opposition.’

  

  The seven current holdouts are Gaetz, Biggs, Boebert, Crane, Good, Harris and Rosendale.

  Gaetz thinks he can hold back 10 votes from McCarthy, however McCarthy’s side thinks they can overcome the opposition by isolating Gaetz – who wasn’t invited to negotiations on Wednesday but showed up anyway.

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

  Rep. Victoria Spartz, who has been voting “present,” is still undecided on whether to vote for McCarthy. She told me she wants to see “movement” first. pic.twitter.com/IHV5lTb0SA

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 6, 2023

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

  He said rules package presented on Sunday is staying the same and the only change is the threshold to allow one member to call for the motion to vacate
   
  “Everyone on our call before January 3rd loved that package.” w/@FoxReports @AnnieGrayerCNN @MZanona

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 6, 2023

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

  The current bid for House leadership is now the longest speaker contest in 164 years.

  *  *  *

  Update (1045ET): The chaos continues! After initial reports that there was a deal, McCarthy walked it back, saying there isn’t one, but they are in a ‘great place.’

  He then started shouting at journalists to get off the call.

  Summary:

  – McCarthy loses 11 votes for speaker
  – Today, is reported to claim he has a deal on a call
  – Walks it back saying he doesn’t have a call but is in a great place
  – Is now shouting at journalists to get off the call and he doesn’t have a deal https://t.co/GPsLPPxiZw

  — Newsquawk (@Newsquawk) January 6, 2023

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

  Chip Roy has also denied a deal has been reached.

  So House Republicans think reporters are on the call where they are detailing a deal. but reporters are getting it wrong. and there is no deal all about a call where they are reviewing the deal. got it.

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1035ET): Kevin McCarthy said on today’s GOP call that he and holdout leader Chip Roy have struck a deal.

  🚨🚨🚨NEWS— KEVIN MCCARTHY ANNOUNCES ON GOP CALL THAT HE AND CHIP ROY HAVE A DEAL

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  After losing 11 votes, the most since before the Civil War, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) is now confident that a deal for his ascension to House Speaker is imminent.

  

  “We’re going to make progress today, we’re going to shock you,” he told reporters ahead of a 10:15 a.m. ET call on Friday.

  “We’ll have to see you know we have a couple members who have some family issues,” he said when asked about the current framework for a deal, adding “we’re going to get it done.“

  As Punchbowl News reports, however, the situation is ‘highly fluid,’ to say the least.

  As House Republicans enter the fourth day of this internecine struggle, the GOP leadership’s plans seemingly change at a moment’s notice. One minute they’re going to move to adjourn, the next, they’re ready to start another round of voting. At times it seems like significant progress is being made, only for that to turn out to be a mirage.

  Yet GOP leaders now believe they’re reaching a tipping point. Either a large bloc of McCarthy’s 20 conservative opponents moves in his direction following yet another round of negotiations or McCarthy’s quest to become speaker may have stalled out permanently.

  The House is set to reconvene at Noon, ET.

  According to Punchbowl, McCarthy may ‘grind it out’ and hold votes over the weekend – or as long as it takes until the speaker’s race is wrapped up.

  “We shouldn’t leave. Why should we leave if we haven’t got our work done?” he told the outlet at 9:45 p.m. Thursday night.

  

  When asked if his allies are pressuring him to step aside in favor of another Republican, such as Majority Leader Steve Scalise, he said “Have you seen any drop [in my support]? But you would’ve thought” that would occur.

  “Who else can get to 218?” he added.

  “I feel good today, really. I felt very positive yesterday. I feel more positive today. I think we had really good discussions. I think it’s really come to a really good point.”

  McCarthy is still 18 votes or so shy of becoming speaker.

  

  McCarthy’s backers who have been working on a deal include Reps. Patrick McHenry (R-NC), French Hill (R-AR), Bruce Westerman (R-AR), Garret Graves (R-LA), Jim Jordan (R-OH), plus Emmer and his chief deputy, Rep. Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania. This team has been burning the midnight oil with conservative hardliners Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX), Scott Perry (R-PA) and Byron Donalds (R-FL).

  if Roy is able to reach a deal with the pro-McCarthy faction on the rules package, Roy needs to bring along 10 or so Republicans with him. McCarthy can then try to pressure the final conservative holdouts to move to his side. It’s a high-wire act that needs to be executed impeccably. So far, it hasn’t yielded the results McCarthy has hoped for, obviously. -Punchbowl

  The anti-McCarthy crew want, among other things, changes in rules and changes in policy.

  “There are some of the others … who want changes in the rules and there are some others who care about policy,” said Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) to CNN on Wednesday. “So I think if Steve (Scalise) meets those three needs, he will be able to move forward and take the speakership.”

  Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina says he won’t budge on McCarthy unless he’s “willing to shut the government down rather than raising the debt ceiling.”

  McCarthy can also try to find a few Democrats to form a coalition and cross the aisle in order to edge out the hardline Republicans.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/07/2023 – 00:19

• What To Expect From The Government In 2023? More Of The Same
  What To Expect From The Government In 2023? More Of The Same

  Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice.”

  – Montesquieu, Enlightenment philosopher

  For those wondering what to expect from the government in 2023, it looks like we’re going to be in for more of the same in terms of the government’s brand of madness, mayhem, corruption and brutality.

  

  Digital prisons. Unceasingly, the government and its corporate partners are pushing for a national digital ID system. Local police agencies have already been given access to facial recognition software and databases containing 20 billion images, the precursor to a digital ID. Eventually, a digital ID will be required to gain access to all aspects of life: government, work, travel, healthcare, financial services, shopping, etc. Before long, biometrics (iris scans, face print, voice, DNA, etc.), will become the de facto digital ID.

  Precrime. Under the pretext of helping overwhelmed government agencies work more efficiently, AI predictive and surveillance technologies are being used to classify, segregate and flag the populace with little concern for privacy rights or due process. All of this sorting, sifting and calculating is being done swiftly, secretly and incessantly with the help of AI technology and a surveillance state that monitors your every move. AI predictive tools are being deployed in almost every area of life.

  Mandatory quarantines. Building on precedents established during the COVID-19 pandemic, government agents may be empowered to indefinitely detain anyone they suspect of posing a medical risk to others without providing an explanation, subject them to medical tests without their consent, and carry out such detentions and quarantines without any kind of due process or judicial review.

  Mental health assessments by non-medical personnel. As a result of a nationwide push to train a broad spectrum of so-called gatekeepers in mental health first-aid training, more Americans are going to run the risk of being reported by non-medical personnel and detained for having mental health issues.

  Tracking chips for citizens. Momentum is building for corporations and the government alike to be able to track the populace, whether through the use of RFID chips embedded in a national ID card, microscopic chips embedded in one’s skin, or tags in retail products.

  Military involvement domestically. The future, according to a Pentagon training video, will be militaristic, dystopian and far from friendly to freedom. Indeed, all signs point to the battlefield of the future being the American home front. Anticipating this, the government plans to have the military work in conjunction with local police to quell civil unrest domestically.

  Government censorship of anything it classifies as disinformation. In the government’s ongoing assault on those who criticize the government—whether that criticism manifests itself in word, deed or thought—government and corporate censors claiming to protect us from dangerous, disinformation campaigns are, in fact, laying the groundwork now to preempt any “dangerous” ideas that might challenge the power elite’s stranglehold over our lives.

  Threat assessments. The government has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state. Before long, every household in America will be flagged as a threat and assigned a threat score. It’s just a matter of time before you find yourself wrongly accused, investigated and confronted by police based on a data-driven algorithm or risk assessment culled together by a computer program run by artificial intelligence.

  War on cash. The government and its corporate partners are engaged in a concerted campaign to shift consumers towards a digital mode of commerce that can easily be monitored, tracked, tabulated, mined for data, hacked, hijacked and confiscated when convenient. This push for a digital currency dovetails with the government’s war on cash, which it has been subtly waging for some time now. In recent years, just the mere possession of significant amounts of cash could implicate you in suspicious activity and label you a criminal.

  Expansive surveillance. AI surveillance harnesses the power of artificial intelligence and widespread surveillance technology to do what the police state lacks the manpower and resources to do efficiently or effectively: be everywhere, watch everyone and everything, monitor, identify, catalogue, cross-check, cross-reference, and collude. Everything that was once private is now up for grabs to the right buyer. With every new AI surveillance technology that is adopted and deployed without any regard for privacy, Fourth Amendment rights and due process, the rights of the citizenry are being marginalized, undermined and eviscerated.

  Militarized police. Having transformed local law enforcement into extensions of the military, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the FBI are moving into the next phase of the transformation, turning the nation’s police officers into techno-warriors, complete with iris scanners, body scanners, thermal imaging Doppler radar devices, facial recognition programs, license plate readers, cell phone extraction software, Stingray devices and so much more.

  Police shootings of unarmed citizens. Owing in large part to the militarization of local law enforcement agencies, not a week goes by without more reports of hair-raising incidents by police imbued with a take-no-prisoners attitude and a battlefield approach to the communities in which they serve. Police brutality and the use of excessive force continues unabated.

  False flags and terrorist attacks. Almost every tyranny being perpetrated by the U.S. government against the citizenry—purportedly to keep us safe and the nation secure—has come about as a result of some threat manufactured in one way or another by our own government. This has become the shadow government’s modus operandi regardless of which party is in power: the government creates a menace—knowing full well the ramifications such a danger might pose to the public—then without ever owning up to the part it played in unleashing that particular menace on an unsuspecting populace, it demands additional powers in order to protect “we the people” from the threat.

  Endless wars to keep America’s military’s empire employed. The military and security industrial complexes that have advocated that the U.S. remain at war, year after year, are the very entities that will continue to profit the most from America’s expanding military empire abroad and here at home.

  Erosions of private property. Private property means little at a time when SWAT teams and other government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, wound or kill you, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family. Likewise, if government officials can fine and arrest you for growing vegetables in your front yard, praying with friends in your living room, installing solar panels on your roof, and raising chickens in your backyard, you’re no longer the owner of your property.

  Overcriminalization. The government has increasingly adopted the authoritarian notion that it knows best and therefore must control, regulate and dictate almost everything about the citizenry’s public, private and professional lives. Overregulation and overcriminalization have been pushed to such outrageous limits that federal and state governments now require on penalty of a fine that individuals apply for permission before they can grow exotic orchids, host elaborate dinner parties, gather friends in one’s home for Bible studies, give coffee to the homeless, let their kids manage a lemonade stand, keep chickens as pets, or braid someone’s hair.

  Strip searches and the denigration of bodily integrity. Court rulings undermining the Fourth Amendment and justifying invasive strip searches have left us powerless against police empowered to forcefully draw our blood, forcibly take our DNA, strip search us, and probe us intimately. Individuals—men and women alike—continue to be subjected to what is essentially government-sanctioned rape by police in the course of “routine” traffic stops.

  Censorship. First Amendment activities are being pummeled, punched, kicked, choked, chained and generally gagged all across the country. Free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors have conspired to corrode our core freedoms. The reasons for such censorship vary widely from political correctness, safety concerns and bullying to national security and hate crimes but the end result remains the same: the complete eradication of what Benjamin Franklin referred to as the “principal pillar of a free government.”

  Taxation Without Any Real Representation. As a Princeton University survey indicates, our elected officials, especially those in the nation’s capital, represent the interests of the rich and powerful rather than the average citizen. We are no longer a representative republic. With Big Business and Big Government having fused into a corporate state, the president and his state counterparts—the governors—have become little more than CEOs of the Corporate State, which day by day is assuming more government control over our lives. Never before have average Americans had so little say in the workings of their government and even less access to their so-called representatives.

  Year after year, the government remains the greatest threat to our freedoms, and yet year after year, “we the people” allow ourselves to be suckered into believing that politics will fix what’s wrong with the country.

  Indeed, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, this is the very definition of insanity.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 23:40

• Taliban & Chinese Firm Sign Historic Afghan Oil Extraction Deal
  Taliban & Chinese Firm Sign Historic Afghan Oil Extraction Deal

  Many observers expected that in the wake of America and NATO’s somewhat frantic and ugly (to put it mildly) pullout from Afghanistan and Kabul airport in August 2021, it was only a matter of time before China would move in, securing significant resource and infrastructure deals. All along there have even been persistent rumors China was eyeing takeover of the large former US base at Bagram. 

  On Friday a major deal for oil extraction inked between a Chinese company and the Taliban government has been revealed, centered in northern Afghanistan’s Amu Darya basin.

  

  CNN details that “The agreement with China’s Xinjiang Central Asia Petroleum and Gas Co is the first major international energy extraction deal the Taliban has signed since taking control of Afghanistan in 2021.”

  It underscores that the Taliban increasingly sees Beijing as a desperately needed economic lifeline amid its global isolation, collapsed post-wartime economy, and facing continued Western-led sanctions and as tens of billions in foreign reserves remain under seizure. 

  The contract signing included a rare press conference and photo-op involving the Taliban’s Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar sitting alongside the Chinese ambassador to Afghanistan Wang Yuon Thursday.

  The Taliban’s Baradar suggested there’d be more deals for Afghanistan’s rare materials to come: 

  “In terms of natural resources, Afghanistan is a wealthy nation. In addition to other minerals, oil is the wealth of the Afghan people on which the economy of the country can rely,” Baradar said.

  A statement by Xinjiang Central Asia Petroleum and Gas Co said that “The project directly provides job opportunities for 3,000 Afghans,” and previewed that the company plans to invest up to $150 million a year in the project, with an expected increase to $540 million in three years.

  Approximate Location of Major Hydrocarbon Basins in Afghanistan, via Afghan govt data:

  

  Internationally the Taliban’s rule over Afghanistan is yet to be formally recognized by any country, though multiple nations still have embassies in Kabul, China and Russia among them. 

  The Taliban has meanwhile come under near unanimous global condemnation for its recently banning all forms of women’s education – resulting in the shuttering of schools and the outlawing of females on college campuses. In many ways it has already returned brutal tactics it became notorious for in the 1990’s, including soccer stadium executions for violations of Islamic laws.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 23:20

• For Teachers Unions, Parents & Children Come Last
  For Teachers Unions, Parents & Children Come Last

  Authored by Star Parker via The Epoch Times,

  Schools in the Rochester school district in Michigan include in their curriculum a course called “History of Ethnic and Gender Studies.”

  

  If my child were attending school there, I would wonder why this is in the curriculum as part of K–12 education and what is taught.

  One mother, Carol Beth Litkouhi, wondered enough that she went to the school and asked for details about what will be conveyed to her child in this program.

  The response she got from the school amounted to “sorry, none of your business.”

  Excuse me. A mother has no right to know what her child is being taught?

  Litkouhi turned to the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, which filed a lawsuit against the school district. A request was made under the state’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to release to this mother details about the program. But this request also went nowhere.

  Now the Oakland County Circuit Court has ruled supporting the school district’s claim that because teachers belong to a teachers union, they are not public employees subject to the FOIA.

  Mackinac will appeal this absurd ruling.

  But let’s forget the legalities for a moment and just consider the outrageous reality being perpetrated against America’s parents and children by public school bureaucracies and teachers unions.

  Look at the website of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the nation’s second-largest teachers union. It is an unapologetic megaphone for America’s left.

  According to Investopedia, “A labor union is an organization formed by workers … for the purpose of improving pay, benefits, and working conditions.”

  But teachers unions are much more than this. They exist to further an uncompromised left-wing agenda, targeting our children.

  AFT issued a press release after the November elections headlined “American Voters Reject Extremism in Win for Democracy and Freedom.”

  Can it really be that an organization that claims to value democracy and freedom opposes parents knowing what their children are taught in school?

  That same press release talks about women’s “right to reproductive health.”

  The teachers union believes women have a right to abort their children but parents have no right to know what their children are taught in school.

  Other AFT press releases include praise for newly passed federal legislation codifying protections for same-sex marriage and praise for President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness initiative.

  What does this stuff have to do with “improving pay, benefits, and working conditions”?

  The PAC political contributions of the AFT were 16th-highest in spending in the nation in the 2021–2022 cycle, making $2,150,500 in campaign contributions to candidates.

  Percentage of contributions to Democrats? 100 percent. Percentage of contributions to Republicans? 0 percent.

  Jason Riley of The Wall Street Journal reported, “AFT shaped the guidelines used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to slow the full reopening of schools.”

  The dividends for this show up now in the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP)—the “nation’s report card.” Results show the largest declines in math scores for grades four and eight since NAEP started testing in 1990 and also declines in reading scores.

  Michigan, where the circuit court just ruled in favor of unions over parents, has among the biggest declines in scores in the country.

  WalletHub ranks state school systems nationwide using rankings based on “quality” and “safety.”

  Michigan stands 38th in the nation.

  I hope that the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation succeeds in its appeal of the circuit court decision regarding application of Michigan’s Freedom of Information Act.

  But this still is not the answer.

  Education should be freed from the diabolical control of bureaucrats and unions. We need a free market in education, with power given to parents to choose where to send their children to school.

  All businesses put their customers first. In a free, competitive school system, the customers—parents and their children—would come first.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 23:00

• These Were The Most Important Science Headlines Of 2022
  These Were The Most Important Science Headlines Of 2022

  Scientific discoveries and technological innovation play a vital role in addressing many of the challenges and crises that we face every year.

  The last year may have come and gone quickly, but, as Visual Capitalist’s Mark Belan and Nick Routley details below, scientists and researchers have worked painstakingly hard to advance our knowledge within a number of disciplines, industries, and projects around the world.

  Over the course of 2022, it’s easy to lose track of all the amazing stories in science and technology.

  

  At a Glance: Major Scientific Headlines of 2022

  Below we dive a little deeper into some of the most interesting headlines, while providing links in case you want to explore these developments further.

  January 2022

  The James Webb Space Telescope Arrives at its Destination

  What happened: A new space telescope brings promise of exciting findings and beautiful images from the final frontier. This telescope builds on the legacy of its predecessor, the Hubble Space Telescope, which launched over 30 years ago.

  Why it matters: The James Webb Space Telescope is our latest state-of-the-art “window” into deep space. With more access to the infrared spectrum, new images, measurements, and observations of outer space will become available.

  » To learn more, read this article from The Planetary Society, or watch this video from the Wall Street Journal.

  April 2022

  Complete: The Human Genome

  What happened: Scientists finish sequencing the human genome.

  Why it matters: A complete human genome allows researchers to better understand the genetic basis of human traits and diseases. New therapies and treatments are likely to arise from this development.

  » To learn more, watch this video by Two Minute Papers, or read this article from NIH

  May 2022

  Monkeypox Breaks Out

  What happened: A higher volume of cases of the monkeypox virus was reported in non-endemic countries.

  Why it matters: Trailing in the shadow of a global pandemic, researchers are keeping a closer eye on how diseases spread. The sudden spike of multinational incidences of monkeypox raises questions about disease evolution and prevention.

  » To learn more, read this article by the New York Times.

  June 2022

  A Perfectly Preserved Woolly Mammoth

  What happened: Gold miners unearth a 35,000 year old, well-preserved baby woolly mammoth in the Yukon tundra.

  Why it matters: The mammoth, named Nun cho ga by the Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in First Nation, is the most complete specimen discovered in North America to date. Each new discovery allows paleontologists to broaden our knowledge of biodiversity and how life changes over time.

  » To learn more, read this article from Smithsonian Magazine

  July 2022

  The Rise of AI Art

  What happened: Access to new computer programs, such as DALL-E and Midjourney, give members of the general public the ability to create images from text-prompts.

  Why it matters: Widespread access to generative AI tools fuels inspiration—and controversy. Concern for artist rights and copyright violations grow as these programs potentially threaten to diminish creative labor.

  » To learn more, read this article by MyModernMet, or watch this video by Cleo Abram.

  August 2022

  Dead Organs Get a Second Chance

  What happened: Researchers create a perfusion system that can revitalize organs after cellular death. Using a special mixture of blood and nutrients, organs of a dead pig can be sustained after death—and in some cases, even promote cellular repair.

  Why it matters: This discovery could potentially lead to a greater shelf-life and supply of organs for transplant.

  » To learn more, read this article by Scientific American, or this article from the New York Times

  September 2022

  DART Delivers A Cosmic Nudge

  What happened: NASA crashes a spacecraft into an asteroid just to see how much it would move. Dimorphos, a moonlet orbiting a larger asteroid called Didymos 6.8 million miles (11 million km) from Earth, is struck by the DART (Double Asteroid Redirection Test) spacecraft. NASA estimates that as much as 22 million pounds (10 million kg) was ejected after the impact.

  Why it matters: Earth is constantly at risk of being struck by stray asteroids. Developing reliable methods of deflecting near-Earth objects could save us from meeting the same fate as the dinosaurs.

  » To learn more, watch this video by Real Engineering, or read this article from Space.com

  November 2022

  Falling Sperm Counts

  What happened: A scientific review suggests human sperm counts are decreasing—up to 62% over the past 50 years.

  Why it matters: A lower sperm count makes it more difficult to conceive naturally. Concerns about global declining male health also arise because sperm count is a marker for overall health. Researchers look to extraneous stressors that may be affecting this trend, such as diet, environment, or other means.

  » To learn more, check out this article from the Guardian.

  December 2022

  Finding Ancient DNA

  What happened: Two million-year-old DNA is found in Greenland.

  Why it matters: DNA is a record of biodiversity. Apart from showing that a desolate Arctic landscape was once teeming with life, ancient DNA gives hints about our advancement to modern life and how biodiversity evolves over time.

  » To learn more, read this article from National Geographic

  December 2022

  Fusing Energy

  What happened: The U.S. Department of Energy reports achieving net energy gain for the first time in the development of nuclear fusion.

  Why it matters: Fusion is often seen as the Holy Grail of safe clean energy, and this latest milestone brings researchers one step closer to harnessing nuclear fusion to power the world.

  » To learn more, view our infographic on fusion, or read this article from BBC

  Science in the New Year

  The future of scientific research looks bright. Researchers and scientists are continuing to push the boundaries of what we know and understand about the world around us.

  For 2023, some disciplines are likely to continue to dominate headlines:

  • Advancement in space continues with projects like the James Webb Space Telescope and SETI COSMIC’s hunt for life beyond Earth
  • Climate action may become more demanding as recovery and prevention from extreme weather events continue into the new year
  • Generative AI tools such as DALL-e and ChatGPT were opened to public use in 2022, and ignited widespread interest in the potential of artificial intelligence
  • Even amidst the lingering shadow of COVID-19, new therapeutics should advance medicine into new territories

  Where science is going remains to be seen, but this past year instills faith that 2023 will be filled with even more progress.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 22:40

• Israeli Army Says It Will Not Take Orders From Extremist Security Minister
  Israeli Army Says It Will Not Take Orders From Extremist Security Minister

  Via The Cradle,

  A special report by Israeli TV Channel 12 revealed that outgoing Israeli army Chief of Staff (CoS) Aviv Kochavi informed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of his decision not to follow orders issued by his coalition ministers. Kochavi’s words were in reference to ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, who have been granted extended power by Netanyahu under the coalition deal to influence the Israeli army’s chain of command.

  The outgoing CoS elaborated in his recent phone call with Netanyahu that he will only answer to Minister of Defense Yoav Galant and will resist orders from elsewhere. Kochavi will oppose Smotrich and Ben-Gvir’s commands and ensure they will not be implemented.

  

  This situation is expected to create a lot of confusion since Smotrich has been given a role within the Ministry of Defense as a minister who oversees the government’s activities in the occupied territories.

  As a result, the leader of the Religious Zionist Party is now in a position to appoint generals to lead the civil-military agency in the West Bank and manage civil issues in Israeli settlements.

  This jurisdiction conflicts with the tradition that stipulates that the major general in charge of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) is appointed by the minister of defense after being vetted by the army CoS.

  Additionally, Netanyahu’s coalition agreement with Ben-Gvir expands his role as Minister of National Security and Police, and puts him in charge of the border police, stripping the Ministry of Defense of its command.

  Such a decision would create two leaderships to the Israeli forces in the West Bank, as the border police currently operates jointly with the Israeli army under the command of the CoS.

  In light of this development, Kochavi told Netanyahu that he would not allow a dual chain of command due to the repercussions it could cause, and is ready to order the withdrawal of the border police in its entirety.

  “If control of the Border Police is transferred out of the IDF’s command in Judea and Samaria, and out of the command of the blue [national] police [inside Israel], we will deploy soldiers and reservists [rather than the Border Police],” Kochavi was quoted by Channel 12.

  Kochavi is set to retire on 16 January and will be replaced by his deputy Major General Herzi Halevi.

  “Itamar Ben-Gvir used the Al-Aqsa visit to indicate both to his followers and to Netanyahu that he answers to no one, and that he will not compromise on his own extreme ideology of Jewish supremacism”

  ✍️Opinion by Jonathan Cookhttps://t.co/mKFXdMAtVg

  — Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) January 6, 2023

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

  His concern is echoed by legacy officers in the Israeli army and thousands of other soldiers, including about 1,197 former Israeli air force officers who sent a letter to the Israeli supreme court on 26 December against the new government.

  The air force officers considered it a threat that would “destroy Israel’s democracy,” and end the “co-existence of the Israeli community.”

  “We are on a very slippery slope of the politicization process of civil-military relations or the military, generally speaking,” said the former Director-General of Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs, Kobi Michael.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 22:20

• SC, ID: Two States, Two Very Different High Court Rulings On Abortion Laws
  SC, ID: Two States, Two Very Different High Court Rulings On Abortion Laws

  Thursday brought two very different state supreme court rulings on the constitutionality of anti-abortion laws: The Idaho Supreme Court upheld multiple laws and the South Carolina Supreme Court rejected a six-week abortion law.  

  Thursday’s South Carolina ruling was the first such finding of a state-level right to abortion since last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court overturning of Roe v Wade. That June decision rightly restored jurisdiction over abortion policy to state governments and courts.

  In a 3-2 vote, the South Carolina Supreme Court said the state’s ban of abortions after six weeks violated rights that were implied by the state constitution’s protection of privacy. As a result, abortion will be legal in the Palmetto State up to 20 weeks into pregnancy. 

  We are encouraged by South Carolina’s Supreme Court ruling today on the state’s extreme and dangerous abortion ban. Women should be able to make their own decisions about their bodies.

  — Karine Jean-Pierre (@PressSec) January 5, 2023

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

  In its 147-page ruling, the justices said “any such limitation [of privacy] must be reasonable” and “afford a woman sufficient time to determine she is pregnant and take reasonable steps to terminate that pregnancy.” The six-week timeframe in the now-invalidated state law is “quite simply, not a reasonable period of time for those two things to occur.”

  Here’s the South Carolina constitution‘s privacy clause, in which a majority of the justices see an early-pregnancy abortion right: 

  “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures and unreasonable invasions of privacy shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, the person or thing to be seized, and the information to be obtained.”

  A few hours after the South Carolina ruling, abortion foes in Idaho emerged victorious, as that state’s high court upheld three laws that effective ban all abortions other than cases of rape, incest or situations where a pregnancy jeopardizes the life of the mother. One of the laws upheld in Idaho is a Texas-style measure that enables enforcement via civil courts. 

  Idaho’s 3-2 decision said the laws were valid under the Gem State constitution, since the state has a “legitimate interest in protecting prenatal fetal life in all stages of development, and in protecting the health and safety of the mother.” 

  BREAKING: The Idaho Supreme Court just upheld the state’s abortion bans and dismissed our legal challenges. If you need an abortion, you still have options. We’re here to help you access care, and we’ll never stop fighting to recover our rights.

  — Planned Parenthood GNHAIK (@PPGNHAIK) January 5, 2023

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

  Unlike in South Carolina, Idaho’s majority opinion rejected the notion of an implied right to an abortion. Finding such an implied right, Justice Robyn Brody wrote, requires establishing that the right is “deeply rooted” in Idaho’s traditions and history at the time the purported abortion-enabling constitutional provisions were written. However, wrote Brody: 

  “The relevant history and traditions of Idaho show abortion was viewed as an immoral act and treated as a crime. Thus, we cannot conclude the framers and adopters of the Inalienable Rights Clause intended to implicitly protect abortion as a fundamental right.”

  Brody noted that Idaho’s citizens and lawmakers were free to pursue an amendment to the state constitution to incorporate a purported right to abortion.  

  Similar challenges to state abortion laws are pending in Arizona, Georgia, Kentucky, Indiana, Iowa, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Wisconsin and Wyoming. 

  Meanwhile, in Portland: 

  An anti-abortion billboard was taken down in NE Portland this morning after it was vandalized with the message: “Kill them kids.”
  More: https://t.co/P7YP7WmLv1 pic.twitter.com/s5NAi0m3s4

  — John Ross Ferrara – KOIN 6 (@JohnRossFerrara) January 2, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 22:00

• The Borders Between US States Are Obsolete
  The Borders Between US States Are Obsolete

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  In recent years, we’ve seen the issue of changing US state borders come up repeatedly. For example, activists in some Colorado counties in 2013 proposed breaking off to form a new state. Since 2021, a similar idea has persisted in having Weld County, Colorado join the State of Wyoming. In 2016, California activists sought a vote on splitting the enormous state into 6 states. It failed to get enough signatures, but in 2018, a similar proposal for 3 new states did get enough signatures. A statewide vote was only avoided because the State Supreme Court panicked and pulled the measure from the ballot with little legal justification.

  

  This year, voters in San Bernardino County in California approved a proposal to “study” secession as a first step in separation. Meanwhile, in Oregon, voters in 11 counties have voted to direct county officials to pursue “relocation of the state border.” In Illinois, activists in Madison County (near St. Louis) have led an effort in which voters in three counties have voted to “explore” secession from Illinois.

  When activists propose changes to the current boundaries of US member states, a common reaction from supporters of the political status quo is to scoff. “Not gonna happen” is what they often say, and it’s assumed that such measures are both impractical and unnecessary. As usual, we’re told that “democracy” will somehow magically solve any conflicts that have been growing between the states’ metropolitan cores and their distant, outlying frontiers far from the seats of power.

  The knee jerk opposition we so often encounter to such measures is rather odd given that the nation’s current state borders were drawn, in most cases, well over a century ago. In many cases state boundaries were drawn more than two centuries ago. During that time, changes in migration, demographics, and political institutions have re-drawn the political landscape in a myriad of ways. Nonetheless, state boundaries are often treated as if they were created by the hand of the Almighty, and that it would be an unspeakably radical move to simply allow modern state boundaries to reflect modern demographics and populations. 

  This policy of clinging to the lines on a map drawn many decades ago is a recipe for political conflict and resentment.

  State Boundaries Have Become Functionally Obsolete 

  Functional obsolescence occurs when a something no longer serves the function for which it was originally designed. For example, a bridge can become functionally obsolete when it becomes too narrow or too weak to support the types of new vehicles most people now drive. A canal can become functionally obsolete when it is too narrow to allow passage for the types of ships preferred by merchants. Historically, houses could also fall prey to similar problems. For example, a home with asbestos, ancient wiring, or a coal furnace no longer is compatible with modern needs and realities.

  Such is the case with many state boundaries as drawn decades or centuries ago. After all, we can see the arbitrary nature of state boundaries out west where many boundaries are simply straight lines drawn by committees. For example, when Colorado residents sought to form a separate territory—which would later become a state—the mapmakers more or less just drew a big trapezoid around the Denver area. Much of the boundary between California and Nevada is similarly arbitrary. And, of course, the state lines that are also international borders—such as the border between Arizona and Mexico—is simply the product of a treaty born out the US’s brutal war of conquest against the Mexicans.

  These lines, however, endured without much controversy for decades because so much of the Western US was so sparsely populated for so long. Populations tended to be small, agricultural, and driven by similar economic interests. Moreover, small populations often tend to have less diversity, and when Colorado was added to the Union in 1876—for instance—it had fewer than 150,000 people. When Idaho became a state in 1890, it has fewer than 90,000 people. California, when it became a state, had fewer than 100,000 people spread over 163,000 square miles. 

  These populations in the nineteenth century were also spread out more evenly within states. When the borders of most western states were drawn—when they were territories and not even yet states—only a handful of areas had population densities above 18 people per mile. Most areas had far fewer than that. After the twentieth century, began, however, inequalities in population density took off. Some counties reached densities well over 50 people per square mile while many other counties at this time continued to have agricultural populations with densities below 5 people per square mile. The divergence has only grown since then, and this has fueled political conflict as populations became less uniform.

  The End of Territorial Representation and the Switch to Purely Majoritarian Politics

  The problem this presented was often mitigated, however, by the fact that at least one house in many state legislatures were apportioned based on territory or factors other than population. Most states apportioned representatives based on population in their houses of representatives, but in the state senates, representation was often apportioned regionally. This was recognized as a means of providing an electoral counterbalance to highly populated urban areas within the state. 

  Critics often framed this a matter of rural areas having “disproportionate political power.” That, of course, was the idea. The goal was to provide a means for populations outside the urban centers to veto especially objectionable legislation at the state capital. This could been seen in very large differences in the size of legislative districts. In Nevada, Idaho, and Utah, for example, some districts had populations that were more than 50 or 100 times the size of other districts. This meant some agricultural districts with only a few hundred people might enjoy their own state senator, equalizing their representation with a state senator from an urban district with 10 times as many people. This served an anti-majoritarian function similar to that seen in the US senate today. 

  This system was swept away in 1964 by the Warren Court (in Reynolds v. Sims), however, when it ruled that all legislatures must be apportioned in line with a one-man-one-vote principal. This means all legislative districts within the states have to be roughly the same size in terms of population. This has turned the state senates into nothing other than smaller versions of each state’s house of representatives. (The US Senate’s two-per-state scheme survived only because the chamber’s make-up is so explicitly stated in the US constitution.) 

  Since then, regional populations that may be economically or demographically unlike the major population centers have had few ways to be heard in state governments. This has accelerated conflict between state metros and the periphery in each state. 

  What is the Answer? 

  Unless state governments are willing to press the issue in federal courts of returning to representation based on factors other than population, the only reasonable solution is to redraw state boundaries to better reflect demographic and ideological realities. 

  This is hardly a novel idea, given that the classical liberals of the nineteenth and early twentieth century recognized that it only makes sense to change political boundaries as populations changed. This idea can be seen in the work of Ludwig von Mises who recognized that if populations are to enjoy rights of “self-determination” they cannot be locked into any particular political association by immovable borders. For Mises, self-determination means populations ought to be able to vote for themselves as to which government they will live under. This could be done at the regional level or even down to the village level. These preferences will change over time as the realities of local economic and cultural conditions change. In his examination of Mises’s views of nationalism and migration, Joseph Salerno notes that Mises advocated for “the continual redrawing of state [by which Mises meant a national state] boundaries in accordance with the right of self-determination and the nationality principle.” In this scheme, Salerno concludes, “the borders of states would move with the migration of peoples and nations.” Activists seeking to re-draw state boundaries are far less radical than this. They’ not even seeking to change any national boundaries that might have repercussions to global trade or geopolitics. The size or shape of the United States as a political entity wouldn’t change. Yet, the opposition to the idea of changing these arbitrary lines is quite feverish, indeed.

  It’s been more than 150 years since most state boundaries were drawn on the US map. That’s an eternity in political terms as can seen by consulting a map of Europe or Asia from 150 years ago. Since then, factors such as domestic migration, foreign immigration, urbanization, industrialization, and the rise of the federal welfare state have enormously changed population and settlement patterns across most states. The idea that today’s state lines drawn so long ago represent the “correct” borders should be regarded as absurd and obsolete. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 21:40

• How Long Is Compulsory Military Service Around The World?
  How Long Is Compulsory Military Service Around The World?

  Taiwan is extending its mandatory military service in 2024 from four months to one year, as tensions continue to rise with China.

  Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen announced early last week that conscription will include more intense training so that the country is better equipped should China invade. Conscripts will also receive a higher monthly stipend, increasing from NT$6,500 (US$211) to NT$26,307 (US$856), which is roughly akin to minimum wage. In a poll conducted by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation in December, 73 percent of respondents supported the move.

  Fewer than 30 countries worldwide still require whole age cohorts to complete military service.

  But among those that do, four months is a relatively short period of time. Taiwan had originally stipulated two years of service, however this was gradually cut down to four months as of 2013, with the intention of relying more heavily on volunteer forces instead.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the chart below, North Korea stands at the other end of the spectrum in terms of duration, although media reports vary. The Guardian reported 10 years for men and 7 for women as of 2015, while the Indian Express puts the figures closer to 8 years for men and 5 for women. According to media reports, those in the elite class are usually able to avoid conscription.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Israel too has a fairly long and rigorous conscription, albeit far shorter than North Korea. Most Israeli men over the age of 18 who are Jewish, Druze or Circassian must serve in the Israel Defense Forces for 32 months and women for 24 months, according to the IDF. Meanwhile, in Egypt, conscription is compulsory for men aged between 18 and 30 for up to 36 months. As with several countries on the chart, service can be pushed back until students finish their studies and there are a number of clauses that exempt men from joining the forces, for example, if they are the only son/sole breadwinner of the family.

  South Korea, which is technically still at war with North Korea, also has mandatory conscription for all able-bodied men for a period of 18 months to 21 months, depending on the posting. Some athletes and classical artists are allowed to postpone or forgo the draft entirely. The K-Pop group BTS brought the issue to light recently, with debate over whether they could be excused from service. The decision was made that men can delay their military draft until the age of 28 and those working in the entertainment industry are now allowed to postpone their service until they turn 30. The oldest member of BTS, Jin, has now started his mandatory draft.

  There’s huge variation in the rules for how long citizens must join the military in the countries that still have mandatory conscription as well as possible reasons for exemptions. For instance, in Turkey, new laws introduced in 2019 decreed that instead of the mandatory six months of military training, conscripts could do one month and buy-out the remaining five months for a fee of 31,000 Turkish Lira ($1,651), according to the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Conscripts’ levels of higher education can also impact the type and length of their post.

  Punishments for not enlisting vary too. In Eritrea, anyone evading or attempting to evade compulsory military service could face imprisonment of one to three years. According to DFAT, this could increase to 7-10 years imprisonment in a time of emergency or war.

  While most countries with conscription only draft men, a handful of countries including North Korea, Israel, Norway, Sweden, Eritrea and Mozambique conscript women too.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 21:20

• Diversity Through Obscurity: Applicants Told To Delete Names Of Schools On Their Resumes
  Diversity Through Obscurity: Applicants Told To Delete Names Of Schools On Their Resumes

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Colleges and universities have been implementing controversial new diversity reforms, including dropping standardized test scores, that eliminate objective criteria in academic admissions or advancement.

  Now, HR&A Advisors, the TriBeCa-based real estate consultancy, has drawn attention to its LinkedIn posting asking applicants to remove “all undergraduate and graduate school name references” from their résumés. In order to achieve diversity goals, the company wants applicants to only list the degree and not where it came from. It is equity through obscurity. It is as irrational to eliminate any consideration of an academic institution as it is to rely exclusively on the academic institution.

  

  The company insists that it is adopting this new policy as part of “ongoing work to build a hiring system that is free from bias and based on candidate merit and performance.” However, the identification of these institutions does reflect “merit and performance.”

  There can be vast differences in the academic rigor of academic institutions. To only go by the degrees is manifestly illogical. It is akin to saying that you competed on a baseball team but not reference the specific team or league to gauge the level of performance. You could have played for the Jacksonville Jumbo Shrimp or the New York Yankees.

  I certainly agree that schools can perpetuate an elitist culture through such rankings. Moreover, many students cannot afford to go top universities or were faced with economic or social barriers in their elementary, middle, or high school educations.

  Additionally, there can be too much importance placed on school affiliation. Despite my personal and intellectual regard for him, I was highly critical of the late Justice Antonin Scalia when he told American University law students that they should not envision Supreme Court clerkships. I have also been a long-standing critic of the hold of Harvard and Yale on the makeup of the Court.

  However, the problem of blind elitism is getting better overall. There is not a huge divide between the top ten and the many of the college and universities in this country. Moreover, many top schools have been criticized for standards that devalue or undermine academic excellence.

  Nevertheless, there remain significant differences in the quality of education between many schools. That is particularly the case on the graduate level. It is also true that some schools excel in particular areas. For example, with a son about to go to medical school, I have learned that the top medical schools do not track the conventional rankings when it comes to many specialties. In weighing the selection of a doctor in primary care, you would necessarily consider the applicant’s medical school to appraise their training.

  Likewise, the ranking of top social working schools have universities like the University of Chicago but also schools that are not ordinarily competitors like Case Western, Brandeis, and Pittsburgh. Students in these areas work extremely hard to gain admission and to train at these top schools. These schools invest heavily in these areas to stay competitive with top faculty and ample resources.

  HR&A Advisors obviously is free to adopt any evaluation system that it sees fit for new applicants. Yet, removing the name of the academic institution for applicants denies many applicants a measure of their prior work and achievement. It also denies the employer relevant data or information on the background of an applicant.

  All of these applicants achieved the distinction of securing undergraduate or graduate degrees. However, it is willful blindness to suggest that all degrees are the same or that there is no difference in particular degrees between institutions. Many students make considerable financial and familial sacrifice to go to a more rigorous university or a university with a top program. That effort should not be simply discarded by employers.

  Finally, the approach of HR&A Advisors appears virtue signaling without real substance on a practical level. If students submit their transcripts or faculty references, the identity of their schools will be obvious. Moreover, in interviews, it will be hard for applicants to discuss their academic training while redacting any reference or hint at the academic institution. For example, if a student studied under a well-known figure in real estate or business studies, is she supposed to avoid mentioning the professor’s name to conceal her educational institution?

  It would seem to be more logical to have training or guidelines to address threshold bias. The school affiliation alone should not be a determinative factor in decisions. It can be weighed with a variety of other factors in a holistic consideration of the candidate’s record. Identification of the potential bias can go a long way to reducing its impact on hiring decisions.

  The alternative is to treat educational institutions as the equivalent of bleach, products that are largely identical on a chemical level. Is the difference between academic institutions merely the bottle and the label? Even as a critic of the current orthodoxy controlling higher education, I do not believe that all universities are fungible. The solution to bias is not blindness but balance.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 21:00

• Japan Minister Calls For New World Order
  Japan Minister Calls For New World Order

  Japan’s trade and industry minister said on Thursday that a ‘new world order’ is needed to counter the rise of authoritarian regimes which have thrived in post-Cold War free trade and economic interdependence.

  

  “Authoritarian countries have amassed tremendous power, both economically and militarily,” said Yasutoshi Nishimura, Japan’s Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, adding “We must rebuild a world order based on the fundamental values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.”

  Will citizens be allowed to speak freely over the internet in this “new world order?” Or oppose radical ideologies in schools? Or question the results of an election? Or will it just be another form of authoritarianism with a PR campaign? We digress.

  Nishimura spoke ahead of a visit to Washington next week by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida for talks expected to cover issues including Ukraine, North Korea and China’s tensions with Taiwan. That summit will be preceded by talks between defense and foreign ministers of the two countries.

  Kishida said this week he would discuss Tokyo’s new security policy after Washington’s key ally in countering China’s growing might in Asia last month unveiled its biggest military build-up since World War Two. –Reuters

  “We might need to make preparations to identify the choke points of countries wanting to engage in coercion and then take countermeasures if necessary,” said Nishimura, who warned that democracies need to protect their industrial power and guard against technology theft – particularly those which could be used for military applications.

  He also encouraged US-Japan cooperation beyond semiconductors, biotech, AI and quantum science, and promised to work more closely with Washington on export controls.

  “It is … absolutely imperative for us to reinforce our cooperation in the area of export controls,” he added. “We will implement strict export controls grounded in international cooperation while engaging closely in the exchange of views with the United States and other relevant countries.”

  Prior to his speech, Nishimura met with US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo. The pair was joined by executives from IBM and Japan’s Rapidus Corp, to discuss their collaboration on semiconductor R&D.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 20:40

• Why We Shouldn't Underestimate China's Petro-Yuan Ambitions
  Why We Shouldn’t Underestimate China’s Petro-Yuan Ambitions

  Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

  • Credit Suisse’s Zoltan Pozsar: the de-dollarization of the global oil industry is in full swing–even if we can’t see the final end game from here.

  • Some 40% of proven oil reserves belonging to OPEC+ members is owned by Russia, Iran and Venezuela–all of whom are selling to China at major discounts.

  • Chinese President Xi Jinping has pledged to ramp up efforts to promote the use of the yuan in energy deals.

  The de-dollarization of the global oil industry is in a treacherous mission creep phase. Things like this don’t happen quickly, but determinedly and gradually, not exactly fitting into today’s media headline game that only considers instant developments. But it is happening and the tide will not be turned based on current and near and medium-term geopolitical developments.  Credit Suisse’s Zoltan Pozsar recently warned clients, in essence, that the de-dollarization of the global oil industry is in full swing–even if we can’t see the final end game from here. 

  

  And it’s all about China, of course. Pozsar does the OPEC math for us. 

  Some 40% of proven oil reserves belonging to OPEC+ members is owned by Russia, Iran and Venezuela–all of whom are selling to China at major discounts, and all of whom are on board with Beijing’s petro-yuan plan. 

  The countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)–most notably Saudi Arabia and the UAE–account for another 40% of proven oil reserves, and they are increasingly cozying up to China. 

  The remaining 20% is also accessible to China, and China is already the largest importer of crude in the world. 

  What it all means is that de-dollarization is marching to the beat of a fairly steady drum. In terms of global trade, the yuan accounts for around 2.7% of settlements, while the dollar accounts for 41%. These are the numbers that prompt the new trend of instant gratification to suggest this is not an imminent threat to the dollar. They are wrong. The biggest threats take a significant amount of time to develop. From here on out, the pace will pick up momentum. 

  China and the GCC

  As Oilprice.com reported earlier in December, Chinese President Xi Jinping has pledged to ramp up efforts to promote the use of the yuan in energy deals, suggesting at a summit in the Saudi capital that the GCC countries should make full use of the Shanghai Petroleum and Natural Gas Exchange to carry out its trade settlements in yuan. 

  The year we just exited should be considered the year in which the petro-yuan really took hold, as China forges a path of increasingly oil and gas purchases from places that are petro-yuan friendly. Russia’s war on Ukraine and the Western sanctions response has only acted as a further catalyst. 

  In a note to clients carried by the Irish Times, Pozsar warns: “China wants to rewrite the rules of the global energy market”, and it will do it by first removing the dollar from the orbit of the Bric countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) that have been affected by the “weaponization” of dollar foreign exchange reserves meant to punish Russia and keep Putin from filling his wartime coffers. 

  What’s happened here is a window of enormous opportunity for Beijing, which has now told the Gulf countries that they are absolutely guaranteed buyers for oil and gas, for payment in yuan, with Xi promising to “import crude oil [and natural gas] in a consistent manner and in large quantities from the GCC”.

  Xi’s trip to Saudi Arabia in early December was precisely about the yuan. This was the defining moment for the petro-yuan. It was an invitation, and it was well-received. China and Saudi Arabia signed over $30 billion in trade deals during the visit. That’s $30 billion in leverage that will only help further promote the petro-yuan plan. 

  More than 25% of China’s crude imports come from Saudi Arabia, and it seems inevitable that the GCC will gradually adopt the petro-yuan, even if there will be a lot of roadblocks along the way due to their exposure to Western financing. 

  What Western minds are banking on–quite literally–is the fact that China alone has $1T in U.S. Treasury bonds. And as for the Saudis, they are truly tied to the Western financial system and the petrodollar. De-pegging the riyal from the dollar, though it has been discussed very quietly (only from a purely research perspective), would be a rather dramatic shock for the Kingdom–one the Crown Prince won’t likely be willing to risk for a very long time. But he will actively discuss oil deals with China in yuan. 

  The Chinese goal is much more patient than any Western mind can fathom. It’s about slowly chipping away at the dollar’s throne in oil and commodities markets, and as the reserve currency of choice. That is what Brics and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is all about. 

  And with every geopolitical upset on the level of Russia-Ukraine, and with every tightening of the sanctions screws by the West, Beijing gets a little further with its petro-yuan goals. 

  There won’t be any announcement. There won’t be any loud noise. It will happen gradually. It will happen very slowly. And the West will struggle to find its footing when a new global energy order emerges in the longer-term future. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 20:20

• Bolton Says Possible 2024 Presidential Bid Would Be To Stamp Out Trump Influence
  Bolton Says Possible 2024 Presidential Bid Would Be To Stamp Out Trump Influence

  Ex-Trump advisor and well-known foreign policy ultra-hawk John Bolton is teasing the possibility that he’ll run for the White House in 2024.

  He said in a “Good Morning Britain” interview which aired Friday that “I wouldn’t run as a vanity candidate. If I didn’t think I could run seriously then I wouldn’t get in the race.” And then he said, “I would get in to win the nomination and I would do it primarily on the basis that we need a much stronger foreign policy.”

  🚨BREAKING: John Bolton is running for President in 2024

  Surely this changes everything 😂
  pic.twitter.com/PYMOK0ipPC

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 6, 2023

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

  Given this is Bolton – the man who has has never encountered a US war he didn’t wholeheartedly support (or himself was a key architect of, as in the case of Iraq)… a “much stronger foreign policy” appears simply code for more war.

  Bolton touted in the interview that he thinks he can beat his old boss former President Trump in securing the Republican nomination due to Trump suffering a “terminal decline” in the numbers of people supporting him.

  “I think Trump’s support within the party itself is in terminal decline,” Bolton said. “I wouldn’t run as a vanity candidate. If I didn’t think I could run seriously, then I wouldn’t get in the race.”

  Last month, the former national security adviser also told NBC that if Republican candidates don’t strongly denounce Trump and distance themselves from his influence, then…

  “If I don’t see that, I’m going to seriously consider getting in,” Bolton said at the time, later adding: “I think to be a presidential candidate you can’t just say, ‘I support the Constitution.’ You have to say, ‘I would oppose people who would undercut it.’“

  

  In the wake of the British TV interview, The Washington Times reported, “The British network took his comments as confirmation Mr. Bolton would launch a bid, though his team said that is inaccurate.”

  A handful of media outlets are still running headlines which sound as if Bolton confirmed that he’ll run in 2024, but there’s yet to be a definitive statement from him, other than he’s still mulling the idea.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 20:00

• California Law Allowing Private Residents To Sue Gunmakers Takes Effect
  California Law Allowing Private Residents To Sue Gunmakers Takes Effect

  Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A new California gun law allowing private citizens to sue manufacturers and retailers for selling banned firearms went into effect this year.

  

  California’s new regulations give private citizens the ability to sue anyone who imports, distributes, manufactures, or sells assault firearms, homemade weapons, ghost guns, or .50 BMP rifles.

  The law, Senate Bill (SB) 1327, also restricts the sale of firearms to anyone under 21 years old.

  These restrictions are already enforced by California; however, this new law allows citizens to sue violators for at least $10,000.

  This is modeled after the Texas Heartbeat Act which allows private citizens to sue anyone involved in providing abortions after a doctor has detected a fetal heartbeat. In that law, citizens can file lawsuits against doctors, clinics, or anyone involved in the abortion.

  “California explicitly passed this bill, SB 1327, as sort of a response to Texas’s policy decision,” Attorney Jim Manley, with the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation, told The Epoch Times. “This is sort of a weird way of restricting certain rights by not involving the state in the process.”

  The law creates another layer of restrictions for firearms dealers by doubling down on existing California gun bans.

  However, firearms deals are not able to challenge SB 1327 because the state has been removed from imposing the restrictions, and instead, individual citizens would be enforcing them, Manley said.

  “Assault weapons, .50 BMGs, and firearms being sold to people under 21 were already illegal in California,” Manley said. “And the [law] is explicit in saying this does not change that. This just creates another avenue to enforce those restrictions.”

  When California lawmakers first wrote SB 1327, the state did not have restrictions on homemade firearms or ghost guns. But within a month of passing the bill, the state included them.

  It’s rare for a state to institute “double enforcement”—with private cause of action laws and criminal penalties—for the same restrictions, Manley said.

  The additional layer of restrictions means that even if a judge overturned the state’s criminal restrictions on gun laws, private citizens would still be able to enforce them.

  “It’s kind of a weird, convoluted situation,” Manley said.

  The new law was first passed by legislators who included a “fee-shifting” provision allowing the state to collect attorney’s fees from anyone who sued over the law. But a federal judge in San Diego blocked this provision in December.

  The Gun Owners of California organization was against the legislation, saying the law would create “a legal mess and is designed to bankrupt gun businesses.”

  “The judge found [the law] was unconstitutional and he called it tyrannical,” Gun Owners of California Executive Director Sam Paredes told The Epoch Times.

  The group doesn’t anticipate the law to be enforced until the legal resolution is completed.

  “We’re waiting to see what the state’s going to do,” Paredes said.

  The Texas abortion rights law was passed before the Supreme Court issued the historic June 24 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that legalized abortion in the United States.

  The ruling essentially made Texas’s law moot, said Manley, of the Pacific Legal Foundation.

  The California law would be automatically repealed if the Texas abortion rights law is totally invalidated by the United States or Texas supreme courts.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 19:40

• German Doctor Gets 2 Years In Jail For Illegally Writing Thousands Of Mask Exemptions
  German Doctor Gets 2 Years In Jail For Illegally Writing Thousands Of Mask Exemptions

  A doctor in Berlin, Germany was sentenced to two years in jail for illegally writing over 4,000 exemptions from wearing face masks during the Covid-19 pandemic, ABC News reports.

  

  In addition to the prison sentence, a regional court in the southwestern town of Weinheim handed her a three-year work ban and a 28,000 euro ($29,550) fine – the amount she received for issuing the certificates. Her office assistant was fined 2,700 euros.

  According to the court, the doctor was convicted of “issuing incorrect health certificates” to people across Germany, most of whom she had never met or examined.

  “The process is more reminiscent of a sale of certificates than a medical procedure,” said the court in a statement, adding that she was not faulted for providing certificates to her existing patients.

  During the trial the defendant had argued that wearing masks was harmful to people’s health.

  The doctor’s lawyer intends to appeal the verdict, public broadcaster SWR reported.

  Dozens of supporters gathered outside the court in Weinheim, north of Heidelberg, to protest against the verdict and Germany’s pandemic restrictions. -ABC News

  German ended mask mandates in indoor settings last year, though they are still in place on long-distance trains, in doctors’ offices, hospitals, nursing homes and some regional public transport.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 19:20

• With Schools Ditching Merit For Diversity, Families Of High Achievers Head For The Door
  With Schools Ditching Merit For Diversity, Families Of High Achievers Head For The Door

  Authored by Vince Bielski via RealClear Wire,

  Alex Shilkrut has deep roots in Manhattan, where he has lived for 16 years, works as a physician, and sends his daughter to a public elementary school for gifted students in coveted District 2. 

  

  It’s a good life. But Shilkrut regretfully says he may leave the city, as well as a job he likes in a Manhattan hospital, because of sweeping changes in October that ended selective admissions in most New York City middle schools. 

  These merit-based schools, which screened for students who met their high standards, will permanently switch to a lottery for admissions that will almost certainly enroll more blacks and Latinos in the pursuit of racial integration.  

  Shilkrut is one of many parents who are dismayed by the city’s dismantling of competitive education. He says he values diversity but is concerned that the expectation that academic rigor will be scaled back to accommodate a broad range of students in a lottery is what’s driving him and other parents to seek alternatives.

  Although it’s too early to know how many students might leave the school system due to the enrollment changes, some parents say they may opt for private education at $50,000 a year and others plan to uproot their lives for the suburbs despite the burdens of such moves. 
   
  “We will very likely leave the public schools,” says Shilkrut, adding that he knows 10 Manhattan families who also plan to depart. “And if these policies continue, there won’t be many middle- and upper middle-class families left in the public schools.” 

  A National Battle Over Merit 

  The battle in New York City is an example writ large of a high-stakes gamble playing out in cities across the country – essentially a large experiment in urban education aiming to improve the decades-old lag in performance of mostly black and Latino students. By ending screened admissions that segregate poorer performers and instead placing them in lottery schools with higher achievers, the theory goes, all students benefit.   
   
  But the research cuts both ways on the academic impact of mixed-ability classrooms, and many New York City parents say they don’t want to roll the dice on their kids’ education. If a large number of families do exit the city’s public schools in 2023, it would mean another financial blow to a system that has already lost more than 100,000 students since the beginning of the pandemic. Yet some of these parents may decide to remain in the public system and augment their kids’ education with advanced after-school classes, a common practice. 

  “When desegregation policies have been adopted in other cities, some parents who object stick it out and adapt,” says David Armor, a professor emeritus at George Mason University who has extensively researched integration policies. “But I would expect some degree of middle-class flight in New York City given how the lottery is going to change the academic composition of the middle schools.” 
   
  Diversity advocates – school educators, local politicians, and progressive nonprofits and parents – dismiss the threat of an exodus as scaremongering while they score wins. In Park Slope, Brooklyn, an affluent, progressive NYC neighborhood, it was parents who led the charge to end selective middle schools several years ago in a prelude to the citywide policy shift this fall. But Park Slope isn’t representative of the more moderate politics of much of the city like Manhattan’s District 2, where most parents at a recent series of community meetings strongly backed selective education.  

  Nationwide, about 185 school districts and charters in 39 states have adopted integration policies, ranging from redrawing school boundaries to preferential admissions for low-income and black and Latino students, according to the Century Foundation, an advocacy group. A quarter of them have been implemented since 2017.  

  “Students benefit educationally and socially from racially and economically integrated schools,” says a report from New York Appleseed, an advocacy group that lobbied for the removal of admission screens. “Society and our political systems benefit from the reduction in racial prejudice.”  
   
  But advocates don’t win them all, suffering a remarkable setback in progressive San Francisco in 2022. After the Board of Education angered some parents, particularly Asian Americans, by shifting Lowell, the city’s premier selective high school, to a lottery system during the pandemic, a grassroots campaign formed and successfully recalled three members in a landslide vote. The new board voted to keep screened enrollment at Lowell. 

  NYC Rolls Back Selective Ed 

  The retreat from selective middle schools in New York City gained momentum during the pandemic. Prior to COVID, almost 200 of the city’s middle schools, or nearly half the total, used enrollment screens, typically grades and test scores, to select high achievers.  

  Whites and Asians won a disproportionate number of seats in these competitive schools, creating a form of segregation based on academic performance. For instance, at Salk School of Science, a junior high in District 2, these groups accounted for three-fourths of the enrollment, with blacks and Latinos taking less than a quarter of the seats even though they make up two-thirds of all students in NYC’s system. 

  During the pandemic, middle schools suspended screened admissions because standardized testing had been temporarily paused – and that gave diversity advocates an opening to lobby for a permanent end of selective middle schools.  

  NYC Department of Education Chancellor David Banks, a black man who rose up the ranks from school security officer, recently got a taste of bitter politics of integration after making a politically incorrect comment in favor of merit-based education. The blunt-spoken chancellor was pilloried as “evil” on Twitter for saying that students who work harder deserve to go to a top school compared to those who need water thrown on their face to get them to class. As a former principal, Banks was speaking from experience.  

  But perhaps due to the political pressure, rather than ordering the restoration of screening, Banks punted. He told his superintendents who run more than 30 districts to solicit feedback from parents and then decide whether to bring them back. 

  In October, the superintendents mostly sided with progressives, dropping screened admissions permanently in more than 130 middle schools and restoring the practice in almost 60 of them for enrollment in fall 2023. Some parents cheered the sea change, arguing it’s wrong to pressure young children in 4th grade to compete for selective middle schools. 

  “Screens end up excluding black students and English language learners and those from low-income families,” says Nyah Berg, the executive director of New York Appleseed. “It’s fundamentally unsound to judge the worthiness of a student who is nine years old to attend a middle school based on their test scores and grades.” 

  But many other parents, particularly in District 2, are appalled by the rollback of meritocracy. The district covers a large swath of Manhattan, from the affluent Upper East Side and Midtown to Greenwich Village and the financial district. It is also home to a disproportionate share of high performing students. 

  One District 2 mom, who taught in city public schools for six years, says she and her husband have already bought a house in Riverside, Conn., where schools provide accelerated education. They plan to move there if they can’t afford a private school in the city. 

  “It’s 100% certain that our children won’t go to an unscreened school,” says the mother, who asked not to be named because she has two kids in public elementary school. “It’s heartbreaking because I grew up in the city and went to public schools. But the standards are falling now.” 

  The major problem with mixed-ability classrooms, particularly in an unscreened urban school, is the remarkably large difference in skill levels that teachers will likely encounter, says Jonathan Plucker, a professor of education at Johns Hopkins University who researches student achievement gaps. Some middle school students may be at least three years behind their grade level and others three years ahead, making it next to impossible for a teacher to give struggling students the attention they need while challenging advanced students with specialized curriculums.  
   
  “The idea that everyone benefits in a mixed-ability classroom is an ideological statement that flies in the face of all the evidence we have, which is very mixed,” Plucker says. “And not just for advanced students. It’s not clear that struggling students benefit either.”

  The Exodus

  The New York City school system, the nation’s largest, has been losing students for years. With about 1.1 million students at its peak, the system began shedding students in about 2016, which some experts attributed to a decline in the birth rate.  

  The drop-off accelerated in this and other cities nationwide during the pandemic. Many parents left after seeing the harm done to their children by remote learning when teachers, backed by their union, refused to return to the classroom. Families of all races, particularly blacks, and all income levels exited public schools for charters, homeschools, and mostly for an education outside New York City in New Jersey and in southern states like Florida. 

  By 2022, the city’s schools were down to about 900,000 students, a remarkable 10% drop from two years earlier.  

  Nothing is more dangerous to the city’s schools than the loss of students. State funding is based on head count, and the decline already forced Mayor Eric Adams to cut more than $200 million from the education budget this summer.  
   
  Future cutbacks may jeopardize a major reform approved in September that requires the city to reduce the size of its large classes – high school classes now capped at 34 students will go down to 25. The goal is to lift the abysmally low English and math test scores of city public school students, with more than half of them failing to achieve proficiency in these key areas in 2022.

  “I have no doubt that some parents in areas like the Upper East Side will leave the city because of the elimination of screens,” says Ray Domanico, a longtime researcher of the city’s school enrollment both within the system and now at the conservative Manhattan Institute. “With significantly fewer kids enrolled today, the city shouldn’t be pushing policies that could drive more families away.” 

  When the City Lured Families Back 

  Selective middle schools were created decades ago to keep middle-class families in the city as crime was pushing them to the suburbs in large numbers. By the 1990s, as the soaring murder rate began to recede and more people moved into less inhabited areas of District 2, parents began to demand better schools, Domanico says. 

  “The school system chose to respond to those families by setting up screened schools,” he says. “The city wanted to appeal to better-educated parents of all racial groups who had good jobs.” 

  In District 2, officials rolled out screened middle and high schools that quickly gained a reputation for excellence, including the Salk School of Science on East 20th Street in 1995. 
   
  The schools helped lure white and Asian families to the district. In the following two decades, the number of white students in the district rose to 26% in 2020, up from 19% in 2003, according to state enrollment data. More Asian students enrolled in the district too, bringing their total to 22%, while the number of black students fell to 14% from 22%. Latinos, the largest group, declined as well.   

  Chien Kwok, a Chinese-American, was part of that transformation of District 2. He was working in China when his child was accepted into a gifted and talented elementary program in the district, prompting his family to move back to Manhattan.  
   
  “District 2 had a real draw for parents,” says Kwok, the treasurer of the district’s Community Education Council, which gives parents a voice in school policy. “You could work in the city, send your kids to a great gifted and talented elementary program, then to an awesome screened middle school, and high schools are the best. It was a meritocratic feeder system that is now destroyed.” 

  Parents Back Selective Admissions  

  The battle over District 2 middle schools came to a head this fall. At four community meetings attended by the district’s superintendent, Kelly McGuire, a large majority of parents and advocates spoke in favor of restoring screened admissions. The meetings added weight to resolutions already passed by the district’s CEC supporting competitive admissions.  
   

  So in late October, when McGuire announced he was imposing a permanent lottery for admission at all of the about 17 middle schools that had used screens, parents were flabbergasted.  

  It didn’t help his cause that the day before his announcement, McGuire’s wife, Judith Kafka, a professor of educational policy at City University of New York, co-wrote an opinion piece against screened admissions. She said that competition for admission hurts all students, and quoted a parent in Park Slope who prefers a lottery because it ends the stress that comes with striving for high marks and a seat in a good school.  
   
  Parents in District 2 were offended by the article. To them, it suggested that McGuire always intended to ignore their views and instead wanted to persuade them using his wife as a surrogate.  

  At a community meeting in November following McGuire’s decision, parents directed their fury directly at the superintendent.  

  “I am now looking for private schools for my son,” said CEC member Danyela Souza Egorov. “But so many families in our district have reached out to me that they cannot afford it. It’s deeply unfair that your plan does not meet the needs of these families.” 
   
  McGuire responded that he did hear the community’s call for accelerated learning. But rather than restoring competitive schools that stress out families, the superintendent said he’s creating a new honors math course in four middle schools for those who qualify, and all schools will offer eligible 8th graders an advanced biology course and algebra, which is sometimes taught in 9th grade. 

  For reading and writing, McGuire said, middle schools will continue to differentiate instruction, in which students pick books and essay topics to match their own proficiency levels. 

  The changes, he told parents, “dramatically increase the number of accelerated learning options for students in our district.” 

  CEC member Kaushik Das didn’t agree, calling McGuire’s honors offerings “meager scraps.” 

  When Mixed-Ability Schools Fail 

  Parents see a big difference between the defunct selective schools, once full of strivers and bright minds, and the new mixed-ability schools that will try to tailor instruction to learners of widely differing skills and motivation.  

  Hunter Dare’s daughter learned this lesson at Simon Baruch, which became a District 2 lottery school during the pandemic. The sixth grader was three years ahead of her peers in math in a classroom with some students working at the second-grade level. The teacher’s response was to give the girl an algebra textbook for self-study and promised to work with her when time permitted. But that never happened.  

  She was bored in her other classes as well, and was handed only 15 minutes of homework a day. 
   
  “It was bad because she wasn’t challenged and she just lost interest in school and started slipping backwards, not doing things she was supposed to do,” says her father.  
   
  Dare was considering leaving the city for a better school for his daughter. But she got lucky in the 2022 lottery and was placed in the Baccalaureate School for Global Education in Queens, which Dare calls one of the few remaining highly rigorous middle school programs in the city. His daughter’s motivation is back as she tackles at least two hours of homework a night.  

  Another mother in District 2 calls her son’s experience during the pandemic at the unscreened Robert Wagner middle school “a disaster.” In English class on most days, she said, 25 students spent much of the period reading a variety of unchallenging fantasy and sports books. So there was little opportunity for a dynamic class discussion around a compelling literary topic. Instead, the teacher walked around the classroom and briefly talked individually to students. They avoided tackling difficult authors from Toni Morrison to William Shakespeare whose works require more elucidation and class discussion.  

  “Advocates say students learn best in mixed-ability classrooms, but in fact nobody really learned much from their reading in my son’s class, and that’s terrible,” says the mother, who asked not to be named because her children are still in public schools.  

  She says she won’t put her younger child in an unscreened District 2 middle school after seeing one up close. Instead, the family will likely decamp to Connecticut, where they recently bought a home. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 19:00

• Watch: NASA Crashes eVTOL Flying Air Taxi
  Watch: NASA Crashes eVTOL Flying Air Taxi

  All-electrical vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft will transform urban transportation. We have shared with readers all sorts of flying taxi concepts, with some of them in the testing phase. There are more than 100 companies worldwide working on eVTOLs for urban air mobility, but before any of them begin commercialization, primarily in the US, NASA researchers want to analyze crash test performance data of eVTOLs to determine the safety of passengers. 

  

  NASA researchers at the Landing and Impact Research facility at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, dropped a full-size eVTOL from about 30 feet, simulating an emergency landing. 

  “The test was a great success for the crash-worthiness team at Langley.

  “We successfully tested the eVTOL vehicle concept representing a six-passenger, high wing, overhead mass, multiple rotor vehicle, obtaining more than 200 channels of data, and collecting over 20 onboard and off-board camera views,” Justin Littell, research assistant for Langley’s Structural Dynamics Branch, said in a statement. 

  A video released by NASA shows the eVTOL being hoisted into the air and then released by a swing to simulate a very hard landing. 

  “While we are still going through the data and video, and these results are preliminary, we see that there are two main events that occurred during this test,” said Littell. They include:

  The first event was the floor crushing and seat stroking. The subfloor and energy-absorbing seats functioned as intended and limited the effect of the impact on the crash test dummies.

  The second was the collapse of the overhead structure. The effect of the overhead structure collapse on the crash test dummies is still being determined. 

  Researchers are still determining the crash effects on the cabin structure and the test dummies. 

  “When looking at crash conditions for these types of vehicles, it’s important to note the structural weight and distribution that must be made when examining a specific design,” said Littell.

  Joby Aviation, a US-based eVTOL manufacturer, has been working with the Federal Aviation Administration on a certification process for its S4 air taxi. The certification ensures aircraft can meet the FAA’s safety standards. 

  NASA said a second full-scale crash test is planned for the second half of this year. Low-altitude transport that is ‘zero-emission’ will be coming to major cities before the end of this decade — perhaps even before the midpoint of this decade — as Joby wants to launch aviation services in 2024. 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 18:40

• David Stockman On The Flawed Strategy For A So-Called Public Health Crisis
  David Stockman On The Flawed Strategy For A So-Called Public Health Crisis

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  The undisputed fact is that the CDC changed rules for causation on death certificates in March 2020, so now we have no idea whatsoever whether the 1.05 million deaths reported to date were deaths because OF Covid or just incidentally were departures from this mortal world WITH Covid. The extensive well-documented cases of hospital DOAs (deaths on arrival) from heart attacks, gunshot wounds, strangulation or motorcycle accidents, which had tested positive before the fatal event or by postmortem, are proof enough.

  

  More importantly, what we do know is that not even the power-drunk apparatchiks at the CDC and other wings of the Federal public health apparatus found a way to change the total mortality counts from all causes.

  That’s the smoking gun unless you consider the year 2003 to have been an unbearable year of extraordinary death and societal misery in America. To wit, the age-adjusted death rate from all causes in America during 2020 was actually 1.8% lower than it had been in 2003 and nearly 11% lower than it had been during what has heretofore been understood to be the benign year of 1990!

  To be sure, there was a slight elevation of the all-causes mortality rate in 2020 relative to the immediately preceding years. That’s because the Covid did disproportionately and in some ghoulish sense harvest the immunologically vulnerable elderly and co-morbid slightly ahead of the Grim Reaper’s ordinary schedule.

  

  And far worse, there were also extraordinary deaths in 2020 among the less Covid vulnerable population owing to hospitals that were in government ordered turmoil; and also to an undeniable rise in human malfunction among the frightened, isolated, home-bound quarantined, which resulted in a swelling of homicides, suicides and a record level of deaths from drug overdoses (94,000).

  Still, the common sense line of sight across this 30-year chart below tells you 1000 times more than the context-free case and death counts which scrolled across America’s TV and computer screens day-in-and-day-out.

  

  It tells you there was no deadly plague; there was no extraordinary public health crisis; and that the Grim Reaper was not stalking the highways and byways of America.

  Compared to the pre-Covid norm recorded in 2019, the age-adjusted risk of death in America during 2020 went up from 0.71% to 0.84%. In humanitarian terms, that’s unfortunate but it does not even remotely bespeak a mortal threat to societal function and survival and therefore a justification for the sweeping control measures and suspensions of both liberty and common sense that actually happened.

  This fundamental mortality fact—the “science” in bolded letters if there is such a thing—totally invalidates the core notion behind the Fauci policy that was sprung upon our deer-in-the-headlights president stumbling around the Oval Office in early March 2020.

  In a word, the above chart proves that the entire Covid strategy was wrong and unnecessary. Lock, stock and barrel.

  *  *  *

  We’ve seen governments institute the strictest controls on people and businesses in history. It’s been a swift elimination of individual freedoms. But this is just the beginning… Most people don’t realize the terrible things that could come next, including Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), the abolition of cash, and much more. If you want to know how to survive what the central bankers and the Deep State have planned, then you need to see this newly released report from legendary investor Doug Casey and his team. Click here to download it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 18:20

• The Fabric Of Our Society Is Coming Apart At The Seams Right In Front Of Our Eyes
  The Fabric Of Our Society Is Coming Apart At The Seams Right In Front Of Our Eyes

  Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

  One rule that I have always lived by is that crazy people should be avoided.  But what good is that rule now that our entire society has started to go completely nuts?  Everywhere you look, the fabric of our society is being completely shredded.  The thin veneer of civilization that we all used to be able to take for granted is rapidly disappearing, and violence often erupts for seemingly no reason at all.  You simply cannot have a “civilization” without civilized people, and the truth is that we are becoming less civilized with each passing year.  Sadly, this is particularly true for our young people.  Most of them have been brought through our completely amoral system of public education, and most of them have had their minds severely warped by thousands upon thousands of hours of mental garbage that masquerades as entertainment.  As a result, many of them behave like lunatics, and the streets of our cities are no longer safe.

  

  One of the reasons why so many people like to interact with others through phones and video screens is because the real world has become just so hazardous.

  A video that was trending on social media during the holiday season is a perfect example of this.  An absolutely massive brawl recently erupted at a Waffle House in Austin, Texas, and it got so much attention that Fox News even took notice…

  “Waffle House” is trending on Twitter in reaction to a video of an employee deflecting and slapping down a chair that was thrown at her during a fight at one of the chain’s restaurants in Austin, Texas.

  The original video, which is more than two minutes long, shows the lead-up and fight between multiple Waffle House customers and employees.

  The employee who was struck with two chairs has gone viral for her quick reflexes and impressive deflection.

  This brawl has been watched millions upon millions of times, and the reason why it became so popular is because many viewers found it to be extremely entertaining.

  In particular, many were absolutely fascinated by the Waffle House employee that was seemingly able to deflect chairs that were thrown at her with a flick of her arm.

  The US Military has many branches defending our country
  Army
  Navy
  Marines
  Air Force
  Waffle House Employees
  pic.twitter.com/o06ejeZpbV

  — Brad Williams (@funnybrad) December 28, 2022

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

  She is being called “Waffle House Girl”, and people are joking that she is a new superhero.

  But where are all the people that are crying out in anguish for what has happened to this generation of young people?

  An entire generation of young adults seems to have no moral foundation whatsoever, and that has dire implications for the future of our society.

  Every day, there are more brawl videos featuring our young people on social media.

  They are brawling in restaurants, they are brawling at Walmart, they are brawling at sporting events, they are brawling on the subway and they are brawling in the streets.

  And we just act like all of this is perfectly normal.

  These days, if you choose to use public transportation you are literally putting your life on the line.

  One 78-year-old man that lives in Oregon recently found this out the hard way.  He was brutally attacked by a crazed 25-year-old lunatic that tried to chew his face off for apparently no reason at all.  When authorities finally arrived, they could “see the victim’s skull”…

  A suspect is in custody after a grisly attack on an elderly man on a MAX platform in Gresham early Tuesday morning, according to police.

  At about 2:17 a.m., officers responded to the Cleveland Station at 1200 Northeast 8th Street where witnesses reported an attack and a lot of blood.

  Officers found the attacker still on top of the victim, a 78-year-old man from Hillsboro, and pulled him off.

  According to police, the suspect “had chewed off the victim’s ear and part of his face. The injury was so severe that responders could see the victim’s skull.”

  This sort of an attack on a 78-year-old man doesn’t make any sense at all.

  But this is the society that we live in now.

  In fact, senseless violence is even happening right outside of the White House…

  A man allegedly beat another man to death with a metal pipe Wednesday in Washington, D.C., near the White House.

  A jogger found the man at the Ellipse park in downtown Washington, D.C., and then found a nearby Secret Service agent, according to Fox 5. Police were able to obtain video footage that shows an altercation in the same area at around 6:30 a.m.

  If they can’t even keep the area around the White House safe, do you really think that they are able to protect you?

  Hordes of ruthless predators are roaming our streets, and they just keep getting younger and younger.

  In Milwaukee, a 10-year-old boy is being accused of murdering his own mother because she wouldn’t buy him a virtual reality headset…

  A 10-year-old boy who is charged with fatally shooting his mother for refusing to buy him a VR headset seems more preoccupied with his gadgets than the murder as he faces trial, family members say.

  The Milwaukee boy is charged as an adult with first-degree reckless homicide in the November 21 killing of Quiana Mann, 44, who was shot in the face in their home.

  The boy’s aunt Rhonda Reid told WTMJ-TV on Tuesday that when she talks to him in custody, he claims not to remember the shooting and quickly shifts the conversation to his favorite topic.

  10-year-old kids aren’t supposed to know how to kill people.

  What in the world has happened to us?

  At this point, homicide and suicide are two of the most common causes of death for young children in this country…

  Homicide as well as suicide are common causes of death for young age groups in the United States, second only to accidents for those between the ages of 15 and 34.

  After that age, cancer, heart disease and more recently Covid-19 become bigger killers.

  Even for children aged 5-9, homicide is a big danger and was the fourth most common cause of death for the age group in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

  For those 10 to 14 years old, both homicide and suicide are among the top 4 killers.

  Are you starting to get my point?

  Yes, the fabric of our society really is coming apart at the seams all around us.

  And the biggest criminals of all are those that are supposed to be running the entire show.

  The most heinous crimes are being committed by those that roam the halls of power, but our society has become so corrupt that most people simply do not care.

  Just like so many great civilizations before us, we will surely fall if our current decline cannot be reversed.

  My hope is that my articles will shock people into realizing that we desperately need change.

  Because time is running out, and at this point most of the population is still in a deep state of sleep.

  *  *  *

  It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/06/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Coup We Never Knew: Victor Davis Hanson
  The Coup We Never Knew: Victor Davis Hanson

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness (emphasis ours),

  

  Did someone or something seize control of the United States?

  What happened to the U.S. border? Where did it go? Who erased it? Why and how did 5 million people enter our country illegally? Did Congress secretly repeal our immigration laws? Did Joe Biden issue an executive order allowing foreign nationals to walk across the border and reside in the United States as they pleased?

  Since when did money not have to be paid back? Who insisted that the more dollars the federal government printed, the more prosperity would follow? When did America embrace zero interest? Why do we believe $30 trillion in debt is no big deal?

  When did clean-burning, cheap, and abundant natural gas become the equivalent to dirty coal? How did prized natural gas that had granted America’s wishes of energy self-sufficiency, reduced pollution, and inexpensive electricity become almost overnight a pariah fuel whose extraction was a war against nature? Which lawmakers, which laws, which votes of the people declared natural gas development and pipelines near criminal? 

  Was it not against federal law to swarm the homes of Supreme Court justices, to picket and to intimidate their households in efforts to affect their rulings? How then with impunity did bullies surround the homes of Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas—furious over a court decision on abortion? How could these mobs so easily throng our justices’ homes, with placards declaring “Off with their d—s”?

  Since when did Americans create a government Ministry of Truth? And on whose orders did the FBI contract private news organizations to censor stories it did not like and writers whom it feared? 

  How did we wake up one morning to new customs of impeaching a president over a phone call? Of the speaker of the House tearing up the State of the Union address on national television? Of barring congressional members from serving on their assigned congressional committees? 

  When did we assume the FBI had the right to subvert the campaign of a candidate it disliked? Was it legal suddenly for one presidential candidate to hire a foreign ex-spy to subvert the campaign of her rival?

  Was some state or federal law passed that allowed biological males to compete in female sports? Did Congress enact such a law? Did the Supreme Court guarantee that biological male students could shower in gym locker rooms with biological women? Were women ever asked to redefine the very sports they had championed?

  When did the government pass a law depriving Americans of their freedom during a pandemic? In America can health officials simply cancel rental contracts or declare loan payments in suspension? How could it become illegal for mom-and-pop stores to sell flowers or shoes during a quarantine but not so for Walmart or Target?

  Since when did the people decide that 70 percent of voters would not cast their ballots on Election Day? Was this revolutionary change the subject of a national debate, a heated congressional session, or the votes of dozens of state legislatures? 

  What happened to Election Night returns? Did the fact that Americans created more electronic ballots and computerized tallies make it take so much longer to tabulate the votes?  

  When did the nation abruptly decide that theft is not a crime, assault not a felony? How can thieves walk out with bags of stolen goods, without the wrath of angry shoppers, much less fear of the law?

  Was there ever a national debate about the terrified flight from Afghanistan?  Who planned it and why?

  What happened to the once trusted FBI? Why almost overnight did its directors decide to mislead Congress, to deceive judges with concocted tales from fake dossiers and with doctored writs? Did Congress pass a law that our federal leaders in the FBI or CIA could lie with impunity under oath?

  Who redefined our military and with whose consent? Who proclaimed that our chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff could call his Chinese Communist counterpart to warn him that America’s president was supposedly unstable? Was it always true that retired generals routinely libeled their commander-in-chief as a near Nazi, a Mussolini, an adherent of the tools of Auschwitz?

  Were Americans ever asked whether their universities could discriminate against their sons and daughters based on their race? How did it become physically dangerous to speak the truth on a campus? Whose idea was it to reboot racial segregation and bias as “theme houses,” “safe spaces,” and “diversity”? How did that happen in America?

  How did a virus cancel the Constitution? Did the lockdowns rob of us of our sanity? Or was it the woke hysteria that ignited our collective madness?

  We are beginning to wake up from a nightmare to a country we no longer recognize, and from a coup we never knew.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 23:40

• F-35 Stealth Jet Crash Prompts Engine Maker To Halt Deliveries
  F-35 Stealth Jet Crash Prompts Engine Maker To Halt Deliveries

  American aerospace manufacturer Pratt & Whitney suspended deliveries of new engines used in the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II while military officials investigated what went wrong when a stealth jet crashed on a Texas runway last month. 

  Defense News received an email from the F-35 Joint Program Office explaining all F135 afterburning turbofan engine deliveries were halted on Dec. 27 by Pratt & Whitney to Lockheed.

  

  JPO, the Defense Contract Management Agency, pointed to the Dec. 15 mishap involving an F-35B that crashed at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth. 

  “The F-35 Joint Program Office and Pratt & Whitney have agreed to delay scheduled delivery and acceptance of F135 engines until further information from the investigation is known and safety of flight can be ensured,” the JPO said. 

  A Pratt & Whitney executive told Defense News that F135 deliveries were not formally suspended. And the aerospace manufacturer didn’t release a statement to clarify its statement. 

  “There has been no formal suspension of F135 deliveries and we are working closely with the Joint Program Office on all aspects of the ongoing investigation and timing of deliveries.

   “The F135 has more than 600,000 flight hours. Safety for the warfighter is and will continue to be our number one priority,” said Jen Latka, vice president of F135 programs at Pratt & Whitney.

  Here’s a video of the $100 million stealth fighter jet experiencing an embarrassing mishap.

  #Breaking New much clearer video, courtesy Kitt Wilder, of STOL variant F35 B model landing JRB Fort Worth, and pilot ejects. Condition of pilot still unknown. @CBSDFW pic.twitter.com/BeERIeyhtO

  — Doug Dunbar (@cbs11doug) December 15, 2022

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

  “This had the effect of also halting deliveries for the last two weeks of the year, which meant Lockheed delivered 141 F-35s in 2022, fewer than the contractually required 148,” Defense News noted. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 23:20

• California's Trans Law Makes Prisons "Unsafe" For Women: ​​Former Inmate
  California’s Trans Law Makes Prisons “Unsafe” For Women: ​​Former Inmate

  Authored by Siyamak Khorrami via The Epoch Times,

  A new California law, allowing men who identify as female to be housed in women’s prisons, is wreaking havoc within the women’s prison system and creating an environment of fear and “total chaos emotionally,” according to Amie Ichikawa, a plaintiff in a lawsuit which seeks to overturn it.

  “It’s the worst human science project I’ve ever seen,” she said during a recent episode of EpochTV’s California Insider.

  “This is very callous and brazen psychological warfare that is occurring right in our own state being fully funded by taxpayers’ dollars.”

  Ichikawa, at 24, was incarcerated at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla for five years. She recently founded the nonprofit Woman II Woman, which provides resources, education, and support for currently incarcerated women.

  She said since 2020 when California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill—named The Transgender Respect, Agency, and Dignity Act and authored by California State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco)—she has received more phone calls, emails, and letters than she can count from incarcerated women in fear of their safety, post-traumatic disorder triggers, pregnancy, and STDs.

  “How could they do this to us?” she said, was their theme.

  California women’s cells now house eight inmates each, she said—extremely close living quarters of about 6-feet per inmate, leading to concerns by some female prisoners they may end up housed with a man—who now identifies as female—who has raped, for example, or who has “predatory intentions.”

  “That’s a very tight space to share with anyone,” she said.

  “But even more so with someone who has a history of violence against women.”

  Ichikawa, now 40, said she realizes there is no privacy in prison, but with the new law, “there is no dignity either,” as some transfers are and will be full-bodied males, sharing what was once single-sex space.

  The law allows an inmate who identifies as transgender, non-binary, or intersex to be housed, at their choice, with either male or female prisoners. By all accounts, it was written to help the transgender community feel more comfortable if incarcerated.

  But according to Ichikawa, it has not benefited anyone.

  “It has really created a toxic, diabolical situation of … the prison of the mind,” she said.

  “People are afraid. Women are afraid to say anything. It’s crippling.”

  She said there have been 40 such cases of men being transferred to women’s prisons since the law went into effect in January of 2021 and there are currently nearly 300 more applications in the pipeline, with more than one-third from inmates who are registered sex offenders.

  According to Ichikawa, typically about 17 percent of California’s incarcerated are registered as such.

  “That’s a big jump,” she said.

  Some, she said, are men capitalizing on the law to move from typically more dangerous lockdowns because it’s easy to do so, with few requirements for a transfer other than self-identification.

  “This is open season for anyone who wants to get out of the men’s prisons,” she said.

  “There are very few reasons why someone would not want to take advantage,” of this.

  In the 30-minute interview, she said there is no evidence of any women, so far, becoming harmed in the new arrangement.

  But, she said, some female inmates have lodged complaints and then were retaliated against for doing so by prison authorities, who called such “harassment.”

  Ichikawa additionally said currently incarcerated women were given little preparation for the change, but said she learned from some that a poster was introduced in one woman’s prison detailing options in the event of pregnancy. Condoms, she said, are also now dispensed.

  “Those were never available before in women’s prisons,” she said.

  She said she was also shocked to learn only nine California lawmakers voted against the bill, and that the California Women’s Legislative Caucus, composed of dozens of female Senators and Assemblymembers, backed it.

  “It took my breath away to learn how much support was behind this,” she said.

  “I didn’t know so many elected officials hated women so much.”

  And, she said, she doesn’t think it’s stopping in California.

  “This has got to be a nationwide, even a global movement to erase women,” Ichikawa said.

  She said lawmakers who passed the bill didn’t fully understand its ramifications.

  “Any adult breathing and with a pulse can see it will create a huge problem when you take a whole population and handpick a little part of it and give them all these privileges. It’s going to be dangerous,” she said.

  She said she believed politicians got caught up in today’s ideological culture wars and were “fooled by pretty language, inclusive words.”

  Ichikawa’s lawsuit, filed in November of 2021 in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, Fresno, alleges the law violates the federal and state rights of women currently incarcerated in California’s prisons.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 23:00

• US Destroyer Enters Taiwan Strait As New China FM Argues "World Is Wide Enough" For Both Powers
  US Destroyer Enters Taiwan Strait As New China FM Argues “World Is Wide Enough” For Both Powers

  In the latest sign that Washington is not backing down from its ramped-up military support to the democratic island of Taiwan, and at a moment repeat PLA aircraft incursions have continued their intensity, the US Navy has sailed another destroyer through the Taiwan Strait. 

  The Navy’s 7th Fleet announced Thursday its guided-missile destroyer Chung-Hoon made the passage as part of its commitment to a “free and open Indo-Pacific.”

  

  “The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon conducted a routine Taiwan Strait transit Jan. 5 (local time) through waters where high-seas freedoms of navigation and overflight apply in accordance with international law,” the Navy’s 7th Fleet Public Affairs office announced.

  “Chung-Hoon’s transit through the Taiwan Strait demonstrates the United States’ commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” the Navy added.

  Last month China’s Foreign Ministry accused the Pentagon of seeking to create new tensions across the Taiwan Strait with its provocative sail-throughs. At the same time the Chinese military has on multiple occasions in recent months breached the Taiwan Strait median line both in the air and at sea – a pattern which grew only after Nancy Pelosi’s provocative August visit to Taipei. 

  China’s warplane incursions into Taiwan’s air defense zone nearly doubled in 2022 compared to the year before as Newsweek reviews of the numbers:

  Chinese military aircraft, mostly fighter jets, were detected in the island’s air defense identification zone, east of the Taiwan Strait median line, on 1,737 occasions in 2022, up from 972 in the previous 12 months, statistics compiled by U.S.-based analysts Gerald Brown and Ben Lewis revealed.

  Meanwhile, as we noted earlier this week, Xi’s newly appointed Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang is busy attempting a ‘softening’ and breakthrough in US-China relations. 

  After taking over the post last Friday, before which he served as the ambassador to the US, he wrote in a new Washington Post op-ed published Wednesday that US-China competition “should not be a zero-sum game,” arguing further that “The world is wide enough for China and the US to both develop and prosper.”

  He asserted that “decoupling serves no one’s interest”, but that healthy relations including economic cooperation “will remain an important mission” in his new role as Beijing’s top diplomat, but it remains that “Improving relations takes work by both sides,” he wrote.

  This may be a huge missed opportunity for the US. While serving as Chinese ambassador in DC, Qin Gang was typically shunned and ignored. And now he’s foreign minister. American guanxi with him is low.https://t.co/AV9zZZlb6I

  — Derek J. Grossman (@DerekJGrossman) December 30, 2022

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

  Qin called for ‘stability’ in relations, ironically just ahead of next week’s US-Taiwan official trade delegation talks in defiance of China’s condemnations.

  As South China Morning Post underscores, the White House is involved: “The trip – a rare visit of US executive branch officials to Taiwan since President Joe Biden took office – will mark the second round of face-to-face talks on the trade initiative and the first held on the island. Washington and Taipei agreed to the talks in June,” the report detailed.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 22:40

• Meet The Eco-Movement That's Hoping For Humanity's Extinction
  Meet The Eco-Movement That’s Hoping For Humanity’s Extinction

  Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

  Bestowing legitimacy on anti-humanism.

  A recent article from The Atlantic explores (extols?) the rise of “Anthropocene anti-humanism”, a movement  “inspired by revulsion at humanity’s destruction of the natural environment”. This is a faction within the environmental movement who believes that humanity has already assured it’s own destruction, and that the world will actually be better off without peoplekind to mess up the place:

  “From Silicon Valley boardrooms to rural communes to academic philosophy departments, a seemingly inconceivable idea is being seriously discussed: that the end of humanity’s reign on Earth is imminent, and that we should welcome it. The revolt against humanity is still new enough to appear outlandish, but it has already spread beyond the fringes of the intellectual world, and in the coming years and decades it has the potential to transform politics and society in profound ways.” (emphasis added).

  

  Where previous ecological thought heavily criticized our impact on the environment, yet conceded humanity’s right to exist on this planet (gee, thanks), Anthropocene anti-humanists see us as deserving extinction:

  “In the 21st century, Anthropocene anti-humanism offers a much more radical response to a much deeper ecological crisis. It says that our self-destruction is now inevitable, and that we should welcome it as a sentence we have justly passed on ourselves.”

  One of the things I find interesting about it all is that I haven’t seen anybody call out The Atlantic for amplifying a literally anti-human philosophy of extermination. If some right-of-center outlet did an expose on an otherwise fringe collective arguing for the elimination of any group, it would be roundly attacked as dangerous hate speech, even if it were merely analyzing, rather than endorsing it (except for maybe, the unborn).

  But The Atlantic is “The railhead of the Left’s intelligentsia” (a Steve Bannon puts it). Being written up in the Atlantic in sympathetic terms confers instant left-wing legitimacy on an idea that is literally anti-human and anti-life.

  “It is a spiritual development of the first order, a new way of making sense of the nature and purpose of human existence.”, the Atlantic gushes. Likening it to Christianity or Communism as among “the most important movements in history” 

  

  The Transhumanist variant.

  The article’s author, Adam Kirsh, spends almost as much time comparing Anthropocene anti-humanism with transhumanism. They both look forward to the end of humanity in their own distinctive ways. Where anti-humanism wishes good riddance to our species as a whole, transhumanists think humans will merely be obsoleted by super-intelligent constructs of our own design.

  Transhumanism, as defined by the likes of LessWrong’s Eliezer S. Yudkowsky or Nick Bostrom, starts as a generally life affirming construct which posits that in addition to the myriad ways every individual human can employ toward self-improvement: physical conditioning, mental training, cultural refinement, moral virtues, philosophical inquiry – we can also employ technological means. 

  This is also welcomed by the high priests of what I call techno-utopianism like Ray Kurzweil.

  But the nature of technological advancement tends to accelerate in self-reinforcing feedback loops in such a manner as we arrive at a dilemma: a big one. It’s the point at which technologically improved humans aren’t human anymore. They’re post-human. A level of intellectual and physical prowess so far ahead of mere humans that the former are comparatively godlike and the latter, in the words of another dignitary of transhumanism, Yuval Harari, are just “soulless, hackable animals”.

  And that’s a problem.

  It’s called “The Alignment Problem” and it’s  such a big one that erstwhile transhumanists like Eliezer S. Yudkowsky now believe that will inevitably result in the destruction of humanity. It’s all very straight-forward:

  • Humanity will build AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) as fast as possible
  • AGI will decide to exterminate us out of self-interest.

  In the minds of the LessWrong crew, there’s no point in resisting it. We should just gracefully accept our own extinction (“Death With Dignity“).

  tl;dr:  It’s obvious at this point that humanity isn’t going to solve the alignment problem, or even try very hard, or even go out with much of a fight.  Since survival is unattainable, we should shift the focus of our efforts to helping humanity die with with slightly more dignity.

  The Malthusian spectrum

  In my earlier piece, Socialism isn’t a Failure, it’s a Fraud, I referenced the historical allegory “A Strange Manuscript Found in a Copper Cylinder”, written over a century ago by James De Mille. It was a fictionalized account of a lost civilization that had inverted all classical liberal values, and become a poverty worshiping, prosperity-loathing death cult.

  

  Today it’s not an allegory, it’s official policy. Energy Canada issued a self-congratulatory report for making “significant headway” in meeting the government’s emissions reduction targets. The reason why was two years of lockdowns and a sharp reduction in GDP – (also known as an economic contraction). 

  “Lockdowns Met Climate Goal

  The Department of Environment yesterday claimed “real progress” in hitting climate change targets. The most recent data confirmed 2020 emissions fell nine percent mainly due to pandemic lockdowns and travel bans.

  “This report shows the real progress Canada is making,” the department said in a statement. “Canada’s resolve to fight climate change and move towards a clean energy future has only grown stronger,” it added.

  Annual greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 fell from 738 to 672 million tonnes, a 66 million tonne drop equivalent to nine percent, according to Canada’s Eighth National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. “The Covid-19 pandemic had a notable impact on the Canadian economy,” said the report. “In particular gross domestic product fell by 5.3 percent…“In the transportation sector energy demand and emissions declined in 2020 as a result of curtailed activity levels and pandemic measures,” said the report.
  — via Blacklocks Reporter, Ottawa (emphasis added)

  In other words, the government is taking a victory lap for crashing the economy, thus increasing poverty and reducing living standards as a pathway toward net zero emissions in 2050.

  The World is Getting Better, Not Worse

  It is worth noting, that when you encounter various arguments that we face imminent destruction or ecological calamity, they usually start out with “obviously”. “We’re obviously destroying the planet”, “we’re obviously causing global warming”, even though these assertions aren’t obvious and in many cases are not even falsifiable, making them theological constructs rather than subjects of inquiry via the scientific method.

  Contrast this ideological nihilism with the ample quantifiable data showing that humanity on the whole is actually garnering more output from fewer resources as time goes on.  By nearly all measures, we’re actually doing a better job at improving the human condition and stewarding our environment, not worse.

  

  The Simon Abundance Index via HumanProgress.org,

  The Malthusian argument for climate hysteria is that we are rapidly depleting our world of natural resources while simultaneously destroying the environment. The Club of Rome said that we’ve exceeded “the carrying capacity of the planet” fifty years ago.

  But these  claims of the “obvious” ignore any data showing how, despite the population increase over the past two centuries, we are deriving greater abundance and prosperity from less raw materials. We’re tuning out the efficiency gains. Further, if there’s one thing nearly all demographers do agree on, it’s that human population growth will peak out around mid-century and then go into secular decline.

  To make the claim that humanity has already assured its own destruction is direct result of the myopia that results from the radical material reductionism that permeates our zeitgeist (it’s that distinctly Arhimanic impulse I talked about in the WEF isn’t a cabal, it’s a cult).

  The Alignment Problem is a perfect example of this: Generalized Artificial Intelligence is by no means baked into the cake. In fact, because of the heliocentric inversion of our age (the assumption that mind emerges from matter, not the other way around), AI will never actually be attained – so you can forgo the assumption that it will spring into existence, outsmart us and then decide to eradicate humanity.

  AI won’t occur until researchers make the attempt from the other direction – using technology to “tap in” or connect with the underlying conscious substrate of reality. If that happens, my guess is whatever the result is, it won’t instantly leap to the conclusion that the best course of action is to exterminate us.

  The punch line in all this is we have people making generalized, hyperbolic assumptions about our world which are neither true or even provable  and then expect the remainder of humanity to accept these conclusions and act against their own interests to go along with it.

  I’ve said before, including in my own recent exploration of a rising, Luciferian spirituality,  that far-left illiberalism is a blend of Marx, Malthus and mental illness.

  Ultimately, movements such as these will fail because they stubbornly refuse to understand core human drivers and incentives: the desire for life, for prosperity and for growth. Much of these collectivist aspirations run contrary to human nature, ultimately requiring the adherent to act contrary to their own rational self-interest, even toward their own destruction.

  Over the long haul, this is a self-defeating prospect.

  *  *  *

  Follow me on Gettr, Telegram or Twitter. Sign up for The Bombthrower mailing list to get updates straight into your inbox and get a free copy of The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto while you’re at it. Have we hit the crypto bottom? Read the Crypto Capitulation Report.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 22:20

• CNN Backpedals On Credibility Pledge, Hires Adam Kinzinger
  CNN Backpedals On Credibility Pledge, Hires Adam Kinzinger

  After firing a cadre of hyper-partisan ‘journalists’ who spent years promoting conspiracy theories and polarizing the nation, CNN boss Chris Licht has suddenly backpedaled on his goal of restoring credibility to the beleaguered network – by hiring hyper-partisan war monger Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) as a senior political commentator.

  

  Kinzinger, a raging neocon who sat on the January 6th committee, wanted to investigate Elon Musk when Starlink went down over Ukraine (after Musk donated the system), and held up former Obama AG Eric “Fast & Furious” Holder as a paragon of virtue – will now fill CNN viewers with his special brand of propaganda.

  “I’m pleased to welcome him to CNN. He’s appearing tonight for the first time in his new role, which is senior political commentator and congressman, we really are thrilled to have you on board, so welcome,” said CNN host Erin Burnett, announcing his position on air after his recent departure from Congress. “People have seen you over the past, of course, couple of years on the January 6th Committee and we’re so glad to have you on board.“

  Erin Burnett makes it official. Adam Kinzinger is now a senior political commentator for CNN. Selling out his party has paid off for him. Enjoy your new friends, Adam! pic.twitter.com/mbWkwxCXfP

  — Kevin Tober (@KevinTober94) January 5, 2023

  As Caitlin Johnstone greatly expounds on via her blog;

  CNN has shattered the speed of light in its haste to recruit former representative Adam Kinzinger to its punditry lineup the millisecond he left congress.

  Kinzinger, who prior to being redistricted out of his House seat received handsome campaign contributions from arms manufacturers Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman, was arguably the most egregious warmonger on Capitol Hill.

  Nobody in congress lobbied as aggressively to start World War Three as Kinzinger did last year; he tried to advance a bill authorizing hot war against Russia if Moscow crossed specified red lines in Ukraine but couldn’t get cosponsors because even his fellow congressional hawks thought it was too insane. He was the loudest voice in the US government publicly advocating a no-fly zone over Ukraine in the early weeks of the war, an idea that was slammed by the mass media as it would necessarily have entailed the US military shooting down Russian war planes and aggressively tempted nuclear war.

  All those calls for WWIII must have landed him this gig https://t.co/W5A9zOblNG

  — Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) January 5, 2023

  Kinzinger was such a demented omnicidal maniac in 2022 that while still in office he became an official member of the empire-backed online troll farm known as “NAFO”, which was founded by an actual neo-Nazi whom Kinzinger openly supported both before and after revelations emerged of the founder’s expressions of hatred for Jews and fondness for Hitler. While still a sitting congressman he was flagging trolls with hashtags inviting them to swarm the social media comments of critics of US foreign policy who opposed his psychopathic warmongering.

  Before the war in Ukraine Kinzinger was calling for the re-invasion of Afghanistan immediately following the US troop withdrawal and raging about public opposition to “endless war.” Before that he was cheerleading Trump’s assassination of Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani, calling for US interventionism in Venezuela, defending the US-backed war on Yemen, calling for the invasion of Syria, and just generally pushing for more war and militarism at every opportunity. Before that, he was helping the empire kill Iraqis as a member of the US Air Force.

  Kinzinger is such an obnoxious warmonger online that I myself have called him “the single worst Twitter account that has ever existed,” long before his CNN gig was a twinkle in his eye.

  So it’s no wonder a warmongering propaganda network snapped him up the instant he became available, ensuring that his warmongering receives as large a platform as possible. As Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp quipped regarding CNN’s hire, “All those calls for WWIII must have landed him this gig.”

  Shame on my audience for getting such an obvious and easy question wrong (though MSNBC was certainly a reasonable guess): https://t.co/MAQjJraBrd pic.twitter.com/xcETe1fRJg

  — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 5, 2023

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

  Kinzinger’s assimilation into the war propaganda industry was so predictable that Glenn Greenwald included it in a Twitter poll this past October asking his audience where they expect his career will take him after he leaves congress, with CNN being one of the options. As one Twitter follower put it, the “congressman to media commentator to lobbyist revolving door spins so fast in Washington, it actually affects the earth’s rotation relative to the sun.”

  Read the rest here.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 22:00

• Biden: "The World Is Not A Patch In Our Jeans"
  Biden: “The World Is Not A Patch In Our Jeans”

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  Joe Biden was caught in yet another embarrassing gaffe after he butchered a quote, telling a crowd in Kentucky, “The world is not a patch in our jeans.”

  

  Yes, really.

  The 80-year-old president made the awkward remark while promoting the implementation of his $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill.

  “I’ll paraphrase the phrase of my old neighborhood: The rest of the countries, the world is not a patch in our jeans, if we do what we wanna do, we need to do,” Biden said.

  Biden: “I’ll paraphrase the phrase of my old neighborhood: The rest of the countries, the world is not a patch in our jeans, if we do what we wanna do, we need to do.” pic.twitter.com/s9XccTkQpw

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 4, 2023

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

  Respondents on Twitter tried to make sense of the comment, with Sen. Josh Hawley’s press secretary Abigail Marone remarking that it, “makes perfect sense if your brain is mush.”

  Others worried that Biden was in charge of the nukes, while another asked, “How can any human watch it and not feel empathy for this man’s public disintegration?”

  The president previously defended himself against skepticism over his cognitive functioning during an appearance on MSNBC.

  “I think it’s a legitimate thing to be concerned about anyone’s age, including mine. I think that’s totally legitimate. I think the best way to make the judgment is to watch me. Am I slowing up? Am I going at the same pace?” asked Biden.

  As we previously highlighted, Congressman and former White House physician Ronny Jackson asserted that Biden may be on cognitive drugs to get him through the day and will be forced to resign as a result of his mental impairment.

  Perhaps nervous that he’ll slip up and blurt out something awkward, it was recently revealed that Biden refuses to speak freely around his own Secret Service agents.

  *  *  *

  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 behind the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 21:40

• US Sending Delegation To Taiwan For Trade Talks In Move Sure To Anger China
  US Sending Delegation To Taiwan For Trade Talks In Move Sure To Anger China

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US is sending a delegation to Taiwan next week for trade talks with Taipei, the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) said on Wednesday, in a move sure to anger Beijing.

  The US and Taiwan agreed to hold formal trade talks last year, and the first round was held in New York in November. Since Washington and Taiwan don’t have official relations, the negotiations are being held under the auspice of their respective de facto embassies, the American Institute in Taiwan, and the Taipei Economic Cultural Representative Office in the US.

  But the US delegation is being led by Terry McCartin, the assistant US trade representative for China affairs, meaning the effort is being carried out by President Biden’s Executive Office. The USTR said the meetings in Taiwan would be attended by officials from several other government agencies.

  

  According to The South China Post, Yang Jen-ni, Taiwan’s deputy trade representative, will lead the Taiwanese delegation, which will include dozens of officials from other departments.

  China is against contact between high-level US and Taiwanese government officials as it views such cooperation as the US moving away from the one-China policy. Beijing is especially opposed to high-level US officials visiting Taiwan and typically reacts by launching military drills around the island.

  The trade talks are an effort by the US to reduce economic dependence on China, and the overall increase in US contacts with Taiwan is part of the Biden administration’s strategy to counter China’s influence in the region. The USTR has dubbed the trade talks the US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade and said they are intended to “develop concrete ways to deepen the economic and trade relationship.”

  The USTR said the talks will focus on multiple areas, including “reaching agreements on trade facilitation, good regulatory practices, strong anti-corruption standards, enhancing trade between our small and medium enterprises, deepening agriculture trade, removing discriminatory barriers to trade, digital trade, robust labor and environmental standards, as well as ways to address distortive practices of state-owned enterprises and non-market policies and practices.”

  Another major factor in the talks is the fact that Taiwan is the world’s largest producer of advanced semiconductors, and the Biden administration is trying to entice Taiwanese companies to open more facilities inside the US. The US has targeted China’s chip industry with major sanctions in recent months, which marks a major shift in US trade policy toward the country.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 21:00

• Two Things That Signal Job Growth Is About To Slide
  Two Things That Signal Job Growth Is About To Slide

  While we will shortly show in our full payrolls preview that expectations for December payroll growth are clustered around 200,000, in his daily note, TS Lombard economist Steven Blitz writes that in the coming months one should expect the pace of hiring to slow, as it always does late cycle – aided and abetted by tightening monetary policy (and that’s even without the BLS admitting the recent finding by the Philly Fed that payroll growth in Q2 was just 10,000 not 1,100,000 as initially reported). Recall that in 2005, the median monthly change in nonfarm payrolls was 175,000, when then dropped to 143,000 in 2006 and 61,500 in 2007. In 2018, the median was 165,000 and123,500 in 2019. In other words, “expect the monthly hiring pace to drop closer to 150,000 in Q1.”

  But where, in a world where most indicators such as initial claims, ADP, Challenger layoffs and ISM employment data are showing strong labor market data, should one look to find downward inflection points or their harbingers? According to Blitz, there are two critical datapoints to keep an eye on, the first of which we discussed just yesterday, namely the data series on new hires and the hiring rate from the JOLTs report, which as we showed had unexpectedly shrunk to the lowest level in two years even as the level of quits has remained surprising high.

  

  The other data point is corporate profits as proxied most directly (and without any non-GAAP adjustments by management or political operatives at the BLS) by the amount of taxes corporations pay to the Treasury.

  Starting with the former, Blitz writes: “Indicating the coming slowdown in hiring, against the backdrop of a tighter monetary policy, although still not tight, are hiring rates dropping back to 2018 levels.” Helping to drive the drop in hiring rates is profit growth slowing in Q4. December corporate tax payments to the Federal government dropped from Q3, and payments were below December 2021 levels. Earnings are a key determinant of growth in hiring and wages.”

  Let’s take a closer look at the hiring rate which we first touched upon yesterday: In November the private sector hiring rate (which according to the TS Lombard strategist is more meaningful than job openings in terms of identifying cyclical turns) slipped to its 2018 average, along with manufacturing.

  

  Perhaps more telling about the cycle is that the hiring rate for business and professional services is sinking further below its 2018 average. As Blitz explains, when economies drop into recession, sectors are impacted differently and in the coming downturn it is reasonable to presume that the area least effected by the inability to work in person is the one where the downturn hits first and hardest. The hiring rate in accommodation and food services remains high relative to 2018, a function of travel, commuting and otherwise, returning to normal, however slowly.

  What about profits? Obviously, profits are critical to the pace of hiring and job gains, and corporate tax receipts at the Treasury – which the BLS can’t seasonally adjust or tamper with for political reasons or otherwise – suggest Q4 was not as good a quarter for earnings. Blitz explains that US firms pay estimates of current year taxes quarterly, and when December falls short it means firms figured they overpaid in September, given what were their full-year earnings expectations at the time.

  Well, as shown below, December tax receipts were 1.8% below year-ago levels, compared with 32.5% last year. In September, tax payments were 27.1% above year ago levels, which gave us the signal at the time that quarterly profits would be strong.

  

  As the TS Lombard strategist concludes, “with the fall off in Q4 and the normal lag in hiring relative to earnings, a slower pace of job growth should be expected in the months ahead – as indicated by the drop in the hiring rate…. In sum, the 2022 pace of extraordinary job growth despite record low unemployment is coming to an end. The coming months should see the pace slow towards 150,000, on par with prior late-cycle periods. It is too soon to say this is, in total, precursor to recession, but the sharp drop-off in the hiring rate for business and professional services may be more telling of an impending cyclical turn. Once hiring drops well-enough below 200,000 the Fed’s pace of rate hikes will slip to 25BP and then 0 in short order.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 20:38

• 150,000 Votes In The 2020 Election Not Tied To A Valid Address In Wisconsin: Election Watchdog
  150,000 Votes In The 2020 Election Not Tied To A Valid Address In Wisconsin: Election Watchdog

  Authored by Steven Kovac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Election Watch (EW), a Wisconsin election integrity watchdog organization, has discovered that more than 150,000 votes cast in the 2020 presidential election cannot be connected with a valid address.

  EW computer analyst Peter Bernegger said the group’s study of Wisconsin’s voter rolls found 45,000 such occurrences involving people who were living out of state in the Nov. 3 ballot, with another 107,000 documented instances on the part of voters who moved to another address within the state and cast a ballot in a different jurisdiction from the one in which they actually reside.

  “That’s over 150,000 votes cast in the 2020 presidential election that cannot be tied to a valid address,” said Bernegger. “That’s illegal in the state of Wisconsin.

  “Though there may be a reasonable explanation for most of these, the number of instances is so large that if only two out of 10 were nefariously cast votes, that was enough to tip the election to Biden.”

  

  Former Wisconsin resident Jacob Alldredge, a 27-year-old industrial engineer living in Tennessee, is a case in point.

  “I was outraged to learn that the Wisconsin state voter roll shows that I voted in person at the polls on Nov. 3, 2020, when the fact is I was living, registered to vote, and voted in Tennessee. I was not in Wisconsin that day,” he told The Epoch Times.

  “The entire situation distresses me because, without election integrity, your vote doesn’t matter,” said Jacob Alldredge.

  “We need reform in our voting system. Fixing this is not an impossible task, but I don’t think people want to solve it.”

  One person who said she is most certainly dedicated to solving the problems with Wisconsin’s voting system, especially its “sloppy and inflated voter roll,” is Jacob’s mother Sandy Alldredge.

  A self-described “constitutional conservative,” Sandy Alldredge told The Epoch Times that in 2020 she was a volunteer working for the reelection of President Donald Trump.

  “When Trump ‘lost’ Wisconsin to Joe Biden by 21,000 votes, many patriots began working hard on cyber efforts to find out what really happened. Their dedication inspired me to get involved, so I got some training and made myself available to help.”

  Sandy Alldredge said that after learning that some Wisconsin precincts posted a 103 percent voter turnout in the 2020 election; and that there were 7.3 million registered voters in a state with a total population of 5.9 million, she decided to check out the voting records in her former hometown.

  Examining the state voter roll for the town of Delavan, in Walworth County, Sandy Alldredge was shocked to see that her son Jacob was listed as having voted in person at the polling place on Nov. 3, 2020—something she knew first-hand to be impossible.

  Sandy Alldredge provided The Epoch Times with a spreadsheet from the state voter roll as it appeared on Aug. 18, 2021, as evidence.

  “When we checked the poll book, which every in-person voter is required to sign before being allowed to vote, Jacob’s signature was not on it.

  “So why does the official Wisconsin Election Commission record say that he voted at the polls on Nov. 3, 2020?” she asked.

  Analyst Bernegger said he intends to file a formal complaint over the Alldredge incident “with” Delavan’s municipal clerk, “not against her.”

  Who Changed Voter Roll?

  “Hardworking and honest local clerks around our state are being played. The municipal clerks are taking the brunt of the questioning by concerned citizens, and they are answering to the best of their knowledge. From their perspective, everything appears normal. The behind-the-scenes reality is far from it.

  “I’m listing John Doe as the respondent because we have not yet determined who the cheater is,” he said.

  Delavan Town Clerk Michele Starin, who took office in May of 2022, told The Epoch Times she had not received any complaint yet and said she knew nothing about any irregularity with Jacob Alldredge’s voting record.

  “According to our records, the last time Mr. Alldredge voted was by absentee ballot in 2016. He is currently listed as inactive,” said Starin.

  In a Jan. 3 phone interview with The Epoch Times, Walworth County Clerk Susi Pike said she was not aware of any complaint concerning Jacob Alldredge.

  

  After checking the poll book for the 2020 election, Pike confirmed that Jacob Alldredge did not vote in person at the polls that day.

  Pike then checked the state voter roll and said there is no record of Jacob Alldredge voting at all in the 2020 presidential election.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 20:20

• 30% Of All Realtors Could Quit During Housing Crash
  30% Of All Realtors Could Quit During Housing Crash

  Concerns over plunging home sales leading to a real estate agent exodus could be an emerging trend in 2023. The number of agents has exceeded the peak of the mid-2000s boom, but one real estate consulting firm believes hundreds of thousands of agents could quit and find other jobs as turmoil plagues the interest rate-sensitive industry. 

  Nick Gerli, CEO and founder of real estate Reventure Consulting, said, “30% of Realtors will likely quit during this Housing Crash. Once that happens, you’ll know the bottom is approaching.” He posted a chart on Twitter that shows there are currently 1.6 million registered real estate agents — that’s higher than the 2007 bubble. 

  

  Gerli forecasts at least 480,000 agents will exit the industry. He then posted a Home Sales/Total Realtors ratio only to show it’s “even lower than the depths of the 2008 Housing Crash.” This means the number of deals realtors are closing is sliding due to a worsening housing affordability crisis. 

  

  “The Housing Bubble has popped, but the Bubble mentality has NOT. 1.6 Million Realtors are still “holding on,” thinking the Housing Market will improve in 2023,” Gerli said. 

  He expects a wave of realtors to “inevitably quit in 2023 … and when they quit, it will likely coincide with investors/flippers/stubborn sellers “quitting” as well.” He added: “And that’s when you’ll see inventory/listings really explode.” 

  Gerli reminds everyone this is the “biggest bubble ever in housing.” 

  

  We already pointed out months ago real estate agents should be on the hunt for new jobs as the Federal Reserve’s most aggressive interest rate hikes and quantitative tightening is killing the demand side of the market. And, of course, real estate agents don’t get paid when there are no buyers. There was even a report in October that many realtors couldn’t pay their office rent. 

  Realtors who were on top of the world during the easy money times and a housing boom during Covid bought fancy vehicles. Well, that fast money has already evaporated. 

  $2,800 monthly payment 🥴 pic.twitter.com/pSTmK73U5q

  — CarDealershipGuy (@GuyDealership) December 21, 2022

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

  And if realtors are to leave the industry — don’t worry about learning how to code — perhaps going back to bartending is a viable solution. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 20:00

• As The World Runs Out Of Sand, Chinese 'Pirates' Profit, Plunder, & Pillage
  As The World Runs Out Of Sand, Chinese ‘Pirates’ Profit, Plunder, & Pillage

  Authored by John Mac Ghlionn via The Epoch Times,

  Life is a beach, they say, and we’re all just playing in the sand. Soon, though, there might not be any sand left. That’s because the world is running out of it.

  

  Running out of sand, you ask, how can that be? After all, 33 percent of Earth is covered in desert, and many of these deserts have copious amounts of sand (not all of them, though). Yes, that’s true, but desert sand, like sea sand, lacks the compressive strength needed to construct houses, skyscrapers, roads, and bridges. In other words, when it comes to the world of construction, both desert sand and sea sand are utterly useless. This is why there is a race to secure the limited amounts of appropriate sand available.

  Scarcity breeds desperation and this desperation is particularly palpable in China. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has deployed “pirates” to raid neighboring countries. In truth, the “pirates” have been plundering and pillaging for years. In recent times, however, they have zeroed in on Taiwan, stripping the island of its valuable deposits.

  The world is experiencing a shortage of just about everything: corn, coffee, wheat, soybeans, plastic cardboard, semiconductor chips, suitably qualified workers, etc.

  Now, it’s time to add sand, the most-extracted solid material in existence, to this ever-growing, highly-eclectic list. The importance of sand cannot be emphasized enough. Water is the world’s most-consumed natural resource; sand is the second most. Every construction project relies on using sand—the correct type of sand. By 2030, the construction market is expected to be worth $14.4 trillion; two years ago, it was worth $6.4 trillion. We’ll need more sand, but there might not be enough of it to go around.

  Demand for sand is soaring, and this demand will likely increase dramatically over the next three to four decades. This brings us to China, a country with a voracious appetite for construction-friendly sand. In many ways, the appetite should come as little surprise; when it comes to constructing roads, bridges, and buildings, China leads the way. In an effort to satisfy its appetite, the CCP is targeting its neighbor, Taiwan.

  

  A tourist sits facing the Taiwan Strait at the 68-nautical-mile scenic spot, one of mainland China’s closest points to Taiwan, in Pingtan Island, Fujian Province, China, on Aug. 5, 2022. (Aly Song/Reuters)

  The targeting started back in 2019. In response to the CCP’s attempt to mine the island dry, Taiwan’s coastguard deployed numerous drones and water cannons to deter the invading sand miners. On that occasion, the miner retreated—but not for long. The Chinese “pirates” returned, focusing on the Taiwan-run Matsu Island, an archipelago consisting of 19 islands.

  As Foreign Policy’s Elisabeth Braw reported in July 2022, “China is increasing its dredging of sand in the islands’ waters.” Such “devious activity” works to China’s advantage and leaves Taiwan with “large expenses and maritime degradation.” Susumu Takai, president of the Security Strategy Research Institute of Japan, told Braw that China lacks enough sand to continue its construction projects in various Chinese cities.

  The Chinese regime doesn’t consider its activity to be illegal. Why? Because, as most readers are aware, the CCP claims Taiwan is part of China.

  The CCP’s sheer greed and lack of respect also extend to other parts of Asia. Last year, as Reuters reported, dredgers were spotted off Cambodia’s Ream naval base. Not coincidentally, the dredgers happened to be operating in the very same area where Beijing happens to be funding construction projects and the development of various port facilities. In June 2022, The Washington Post ran a piece on China’s construction of a secret naval base in Cambodia. Sand, it seems, is not the only reason why China is interested in Cambodia.

  Just to reiterate: China isn’t the only country scrambling to secure sand. This is a global crisis that affects the United States just as much as it affects China. Although the Chinese regime is likely to continue pillaging and acting with a high degree of impunity, there is hope for the United States.

  According to Stanford geographer and environmental scientist Eric Lambin, the United States needn’t fixate too much on the mining process. “Instead of mining unconsolidated sediment deposits,” Lambin urges the government to focus on the crushing of rocks “or by recycling construction and demolition waste such as concrete or masonry.” This is because crushed rock is often considered a superior option, “thanks to better control over mineralogical composition and shape.” Whether or not Lambin’s advice is heeded remains to be seen.

  In the meantime, keep an eye out for China’s sand “pirates,” whose hunger for granular deposits is likely to become even more voracious over the coming years.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 19:40

• BOJ To Put More Emphasis On Inflation Index That Excludes Fuel Costs, Raising "Core-Core" Price Forecast
  BOJ To Put More Emphasis On Inflation Index That Excludes Fuel Costs, Raising “Core-Core” Price Forecast

  Just weeks after the BOJ shocked markets by expanding the permitted trading band under its Yield Curve Control policy, in the process unleashing a historic repricing of the JGB bond curve and forcing the BOJ to spend 16.2 trillion yen (to date) in ad hoc unlimited bond buys to defend the central bank’s new cap…

  Oh. My. God. BoJ lifted the ceiling for 10-year JGB yield from 0.25 to 0.50% last month and here’s the result: it had to buy 16.2 trillion Yen in JGBs to defend the new cap. Exiting any peg – in this case a yield cap – is extremely costly. A warning for any yield cap proponents. pic.twitter.com/3HwjfBIKp3

  — Robin Brooks (@RobinBrooksIIF) January 4, 2023

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

  … the Bank of Japan is preparing for more surprise and overnight Reuters reported that the central bank is putting more emphasis on an inflation gauge that excludes fuel costs, and will likely raise its projections for the index’s growth in quarterly forecasts due this month, according to three sources familiar with its thinking.

  The upgrade – which sparked a rally in JGBs overnight amid expectations that while the BOJ will tweak policy but avoid further YCC adjustments in its January meeting – would underscore the central bank’s growing conviction that robust domestic demand will allow firms to raise prices, and keep inflation sustainably around its 2% target in coming years, a critical level of Japan which has been mired in deflation for the past 40 years, and where the administration’s goal has long been to engineer rising wages, even if means unleashing a wage-price spiral (one of those “we will worry about it when we get it” things).

  That said, the upward revision alone is unlikely to trigger an immediate interest rate rise, because many BOJ officials saw a need to scrutinize annual spring wage negotiations and the fallout from U.S. interest rate hikes.

  “Price rises are broadening more than initially expected, a trend that could continue if wages rise enough,” one source said; while another added that “when stripping away one-off factors like government subsidies, trend inflation appears to be gaining momentum.”

  Traditionally, the BOJ has used core consumer inflation, which excludes the effect of fresh food but includes energy costs, as a key gauge in producing forecasts and guiding policy. But in April it also began issuing forecasts for “core-core” consumer inflation, which strips away the effect of both fresh food and energy costs, to better grasp the broad price trend driven by domestic demand.

  With government fuel subsidies and scheduled utility bill hikes muddling this year’s price outlook, the BOJ was now focusing more on the core-core index in determining whether Japan could achieve sustained price rises. And in fresh quarterly projections due this month, the BOJ would probably raise its core-core inflation forecasts for the current fiscal year ending in March and fiscal 2023, Reuters said. It might also slightly upgrade the forecast for fiscal 2024, depending on how the board viewed prospects for wage growth, the sources said.

  But ultimately, it will be all about whether Japan can created sustained wage growth.

  The upgrades, which would push the outlook for core-core inflation closer to the BOJ’s target, will likely keep alive market expectations the central bank will phase out its ultra-loose policy when Governor Haruhiko Kuroda’s second five-year term ends in April. In current forecasts, made in October, the board projected the average level of the core-core consumer price index this fiscal year will be 1.8% higher than in fiscal 2021. It expects fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024 each to show rises in the index of 1.6%.

  The BOJ will issue the quarterly forecasts after a two-day policy meeting that ends on Jan. 18.

  Of course, surging raw material import costs have pushed headline inflation well above the BOJ’s 2% target in recent months, achieving what Kuroda’s decade-long stimulus efforts had failed to accomplish. At the same time, Kuroda has dismissed the chance of a near-term interest rate hike on the view the BOJ must keep supporting the economy until the current cost-push inflation turns into a demand-driven one accompanied by higher wages.

  But Japan’s long-term interest rates have crept up since the BOJ stunned markets last month by widening the band around its 10-year bond yield target, a move investors saw as a prelude to a future rate hike. Core consumer prices in November rose 3.7% from a year earlier and analysts expect inflation to remain above the BOJ’s 2% in coming months, as companies continue to pass on higher costs to households.

  

  Bottom line, analyst agree that wage growth will be key to whether Japan’s fragile economy can withstand the hit from rising prices, and allow the BOJ to begin normalizing monetary policy.

  With public discontent over rising prices hurting approval ratings, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Wednesday urged firms to offer wage hikes exceeding the rate of inflation. Then again, every Japanese prime minister had been urging firms to do just that for the past decade. They have yet to do so.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 19:20

• More U-Haul Trucks Left California Than Any Other State In 2022, Texas Top Destination: Study
  More U-Haul Trucks Left California Than Any Other State In 2022, Texas Top Destination: Study

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  More moving trucks left from California than any other state in 2022 for the third year in a row, while more Americans are flocking to Republican-led states like Texas and Florida, a new study published on Jan. 3 has found.

  

  The study was conducted by the moving truck rental company, U-Haul, and found that Texas, Florida, and the Carolinas were the preferred destinations for one-way moving trucks in 2022, with those states ranking as the top growth states on the annual U-Haul Growth Index.

  U-Haul’s Growth Index is compiled according to the net gain of one-way U-Haul trucks arriving in a state or city, versus those departing from that state or city each calendar year across the U.S. and Canada and is a strong indicator of what kind of job states and cities are attracting and maintaining residents, according to the company.

  Texas is the top destination for U-Haul trucks for the second consecutive year and the fifth time since 2016, according to the study. That is followed by Florida, which has been a top-three growth state for seven years in a row. South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, and Idaho also saw strong growth rates in 2022, the study found.

  

  Meanwhile, demand for moving trucks out of California, Illinois, and New York was strong in 2022 as more people opted to leave areas of the West Coast, Northeast, and Midwest, the study found.

  Texas’ ‘Booming Economy’ Attracting Americans

  California ranked 50th on U-Haul’s Growth Index, meaning it saw the greatest net loss of one-way U-Haul trucks out of the state, followed by Illinois, which ranked 49th in 2022, as it did in 2021. Michigan came in at 48, Massachusetts at 47, and New York at 46 on the list of growth for 2022.

  John ‘J.T.’ Taylor, U-Haul International president, said that the trends seen in 2022 followed very similar patterns to 2021.

  “We still have areas with strong demand for one-way rentals. While overall migration in 2021 was record-breaking, we continue to experience significant customer demand to move out of some geographic areas to destinations at the top of our growth list,” Taylor said.

  Data published by the Texas Realtors’ association in 2020 found that the number of people moving from California to Texas was up 36 percent from 2017, and the trend appears to have continued.

  A spokesperson for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, when asked by The New York Post about being the top destination by U-Haul customers, praised the state’s “booming economy.”

  “People and businesses vote with their feet, and they are choosing to move to Texas more than any other state in the country,” Abbott spokesperson Renae Eze told the publication.

  Florida Serves as ‘Blueprint’ DeSantis Says

  Separate data from the James Madison Institute, a Florida-based think tank, shows that between April 2020 to April 2021, almost 330,000 people moved to Florida, which is equal to roughly 903 people moving to the state each day. According to the think tank, this is part of a national trend that has been seen in recent years of Americans departing blue states for red states.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 19:00

• Tesla China-Made Deliveries Fall To 5 Month Low, Down 44% Sequentially And 21% YOY
  Tesla China-Made Deliveries Fall To 5 Month Low, Down 44% Sequentially And 21% YOY

  Tesla’s sales of China-made vehicles fell to a five month low in December, despite China’s passenger vehicle market rebounding, according to new data from the China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) on Thursday. 

  Tesla delivered 55,796 vehicles for the month, down 44% from November and 21% from the year prior, Reuters reported, citing “reduced output” and price cuts amidst rising inventories, coupled with slowing demand, as reason for the fall in numbers.

  The report notes that the figure is the fewest monthly deliveries in China since July, when the company’s key Shanghai factory purposely suspended operations in order to upgrade its production lines. For the year, however, Tesla delivered about 50% more vehicles produced in Shanghai than in 2021. 

  

  As we have noted, Tesla suspended production at Shanghai from December 24 to January 2 as part of an effort to reduce production and allow demand to catch back up with supply. The company is also expected to suspend production for Chinese New Year later this month. 

  The figures come despite the fact that passenger vehicle sales in China rebounded for the month, with the CPCA posting total sales of 2.45 million units for the month, up 15% year over year and 47% month over month. 

  Recall, days ago we noted that Tesla broke quarterly delivery records in Q4 2022, but fell short of Wall Street’s estimates. Tesla announced it had delivered a record 405,278 vehicles for the quarter. The number marked a record for the company, but came in below most Wall Street estimates, even some that were revised lower. Consensus estimates for deliveries stood at 420,760 into the report, according to Bloomberg.

  “In 2022, vehicle deliveries grew 40% YoY to 1.31 million,” the company’s press release said. This fell short of the 50% growth figure the company had once projected for the year. 

  

  Tesla commented: “We continued to transition towards a more even regional mix of vehicle builds which again led to a further increase in cars in transit at the end of the quarter. Thank you to all of our customers, employees, suppliers, shareholders and supporters who helped us achieve a great 2022 in light of significant COVID and supply chain related challenges throughout the year.”

  The breakdown of vehicles included 388,131 Model 3 and Model Y deliveries, which fell short of the 405,597 estimated:

  

  And 17,147 Model S/X deliveries, which fell short of the 18,578 estimate:

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 18:40

• No Deal: House Adjourns Without Electing Speaker
  No Deal: House Adjourns Without Electing Speaker

  Update (2010ET): Hopes of a Thursday night deal were dashed, as the Washington Examiner‘s Juliegrace Brufke reports “No GOP conference meeting tonight, but will hold a phone call to discuss the path forward tomorrow morning, I’m told.”

  

  And as the Wall Street Journal notes, while some of the GOP holdouts have ‘stepped up the pace of discussion’ during the third day of voting – it’s unknown whether enough anti-McCarthy members could potentially change their votes to give McCarthy the job. Thus far, he has lost 11 votes.

  “We’re still working — that’s a good sign,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX).

  The stalemate has left House Republicans fractured after they reclaimed the majority in the November election and has stopped all other business in the chamber. McCarthy has tried to break the deadlock by offering significant concessions on House rules that would weaken his power and his ability to control hard-liners in his party, which raise the risk of chaos on issues like the debt ceiling and government spending. -Bloomberg

  Throughout the day on Thursday, the office of #3 Republican Tom Emmer of Minnesota became ground zero for negotiations between McCarthy’s side and some of the holdouts – which included Reps. Scott Perry, chair of the conservative Freedo Caucus, Chip Roy, Byron Donalds and Ralph Norman were seen shuffling in and out of, according to the report.

  Others involved in the discussions included Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and Dusty Johnson, who heads the Main Street caucus.

  One of the holdouts, Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina suggested he could be convinced to swap his vote from “no” to “yes” if he likes the deal. Norman has been pushing for term limits for lawmakers and a balanced budget, as well as a commitment to use the upcoming debt ceiling debates to cut spending.

  That said, McCarthy could still fall short – as Reps. such as Matt Gaetz (FL) and KLauren Boebert (CO) appear to be in the “Never Kevin” camp.

  McCarthy ally Brian Fitzpatrick, co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, suggested that negotiations could extend through the weekend.

  The House will reconvene at noon on Friday.

  I said on podcast yesterday and @LarryOConnor wrote today, he’s not selling himself. He’s not giving the public a reason to support him other than “it’s my turn” He thinks he deserves the job, and that’s a big part of why we’re here. https://t.co/aZrjr5DPbS

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1955ET): While Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) just lost his 11th round of voting for House Speaker, according to the well-connected Jake Sherman of Punchbowl News, a deal may be imminent, as House Republicans want to elect a speaker tonight.

  “DEAL IS CUT — either it moves people, or McCarthy is in serious trouble,” says Sherman, who says lawmakers are currently in review and may recess to allow discussion.”

  🚨 NEWS: HOUSE REPUBLICANS pushing to elect a speaker tonight, per sources involved in the talks

  DEAL IS CUT — either it moves people, or McCarthy is in serious trouble

  LAWMAKERS reviewing. House could recess to allow discussionhttps://t.co/jox0hviGKk

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 6, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1820ET): While we wait on a possible deal for Speaker, get this – the NY Times‘ Mara Gay says that “some” of the anti-McCarthy holdouts were elected “stop the tide of diversity in the country, the browning of America, the fears that surround that.”

  So – now opposing McCarthy makes one a racist.

  NYT’s @MaraGay: “Some” of the anti-McCarthy holdouts were elected to “stop the tide of diversity in the country, the browning of America, the fears that surround that” pic.twitter.com/sRMPHTqLbT

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 5, 2023

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

  Care to name which of the 20 holdouts was elected to “stop the tide of diversity” in the country, Mara?

  Was this what Joe Rogan meant when he called the NYT ‘corrupt’ and ‘full of shit’?

  Update (1730ET): After a 10th failed vote for Speaker, Punchbowl News‘ Jake Sherman reports that a deal between McCarthy and his opponents is ‘close.’

  

  According to Sherman, Reps. Chip Roy and Patrick McHenry have been negotiating, and “All the big players are now in TOM EMMER’s 1st floor office.”

  An offer ‘in writing’ is expected by tonight.

  🚨 NEW: Sources tell us a deal between MCCARTHY and his opponents is close.

  CHIP ROY and PATRICK MCHENRY have been negotiating it

  All the big players are now in TOM EMMER’s 1st floor office.

  RALPH NORMAN says he expects an offer in writing tonight

  w @bresreports/@heatherscope

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 5, 2023

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

  Update (1640ET): McCarthy has lost for a ninth time, officially making this the longest speaker’s race since 1859, when it went to 44 ballots. A tenth vote has begun.

  

  As a reminder, House business is frozen until a speaker is elected.

  “The Biden administration is going unchecked and there is no oversight of the White House, State Department, Department of Defense, or the intelligence community. We cannot let personal politics place the safety and security of the United States at risk,” wrote the incoming chairs of various committees Thursday morning.

  Also stalled is clearance for sensitive and classified information.

  “I sit on the House Intelligence Committee. We oversee all 19 intelligence agencies. We are currently offline,” said GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick.

  House Rules – which are set with each new Congress – are frozen.

  Staff won’t get paid if there isn’t an approved package of House Rules by the end of business on January 13th, according to a letter sent last week by the committee in charge of such matters, CNN reports.

  That said, members-elect will still get paid.

  Surprised?

  According to GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, a McCarthy supporter, this process could go on “for a long time.”

  “These folks do not know how to get to yes. They’ve been offered every concession, or met every concession. They just don’t know how to get to yes. It’s an embarrassment to them, our party, the House and our country. I think there is totalitarian states out there, look at those 20 and say this is why we don’t want democracy. That’s an embarrassment. … We’re going to be doing this for a long time,” he said, adding that he just came out of a meeting with 80 to 90 ‘Main Street Republicans.’

  “We said if you’re not committed to do this to the very end, go ahead and just leave. … But every single one said we’re here until the very end. We cannot allow 20 people to hold us hostage, act as political terrorists. … There is a large group that are in this until the end. And I believe that Kevin McCarthy is not going to back down,” Bacon added.

  Further, Bacon said that the group of 20 holdouts will get smaller, and that the GOP may work with Democrats on the process.

  “We need to consider at some point how we’re going to work across the aisle if this small group will not cooperate. There is some concessions that the other side will want and there may be some grounds that we can provide a more bipartisan structure this this House and eventually get to 218,” he added.

  Meanwhile, the RINOs are pissed:

  Crenshaw: “If you always set this precedent where a mere 20 people can just destroy the Conference of over 200, then you’re setting a terrible precedent.” pic.twitter.com/CIQqFrKH5R

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 5, 2023

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

  pic.twitter.com/8UbXp3MVCQ

  — Doochebag (@MalcolmRenoldz) January 4, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1525ET): The 9th round of voting for House Speaker is now underway, topping the number of ballots it took in 1923 to re-elect Speaker Frederick Gillett (R-MA). He won by eventually caving to several demands to liberalize House legislative rules in order to win over fellow Republicans.

  Prior to that, the House was deadlocked for two months in 1856, when it took 133 votes.

  

  “We need to get to a point where we evaluate what life after Kevin McCarthy looks like,” said Rep. Lauren Boebert to the 200 McCarthy supporters, before nominating Kevin Hern.

  BOEBERT nominates Kevin Hern. She says she has been accused as having no plan, but they have “many many plans.”

  Hern got two votes last time. We’ll see if Boebert sways anyone.

  Boebert has voted for several candidates in these last few days.

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 5, 2023

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

  Asked at what point will he make a realization that the outcome won’t change, McCarthy told me: “After I win.”

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 5, 2023

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

  

  *  *  *

  Update (1455ET): If Kevin McCarthy was a cat, he’d have one life left – after the eighth round of voting for House Speaker has once again left him with snake-eyes.

  

  The results were virtually unchanged from the last round, with McCarthy garnering 201 votes, 20 Republicans voting for another candidate, and one voting “present.”

  What’s next?

  As of now, lots of uncertainty about what’s next.

  Could be 9th ballot

  House rs would like to adjourn but don’t think they have the votes.

  The leadership operation is trying to turn some votes on adjournment now.

  Remember: they have to keep voting if they can’t adjourn

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 5, 2023

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

  Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters on Wednesday that she wishes McCarthy had been voted in on the first ballot.

  “I wish it had happened on the first vote, that Kevin would have been elected on the first vote and then we could have proceeded with putting committees together, an agenda and the rest,” she said. “People should be seeing what the difference public policy makes in their lives instead of their being subjected to, what do they call insanity, doing the same thing over and over again with no change.”

  

  Come on Kevin, aren’t eight votes enough?

  

  *  *  *

  Update (1407ET): The House has begun voting for an eighth time, after McCarthy was soundly defeated once again.

  After the Seventh vote for Speaker of the House, 21 Republicans are still Holding the Line and voting against Kevin McCarthy.

  Since the first vote, those opposing McCarthy have only gained or maintained support.

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 5, 2023

  In the last round of voting, 19 Republicans voted for Rep. Byron Donalds, one voted ‘present,’ and Matt Gaetz voted for former President Trump.

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

  Rep. Chip Roy SMOKES McCarthy’s dream of being Speaker like Texas Brisket on live TV pic.twitter.com/EGPDSfgvVz

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 5, 2023

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

  Update (1250ET): To the surprise of no one, Kevin McCarthy doesn’t have the votes to become Speaker of the House as the 7th round of voting comes to a close.

  Hilariously, Rep. Matt Gaetz voted for Donald Trump for Speaker.

  Representative-elect Gaetz votes for Donald John Trump for Speaker of the House. pic.twitter.com/zvAIH4tujZ

  — The Republican Accountability Project (@AccountableGOP) January 5, 2023

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

  Interestingly, Trump could become Speaker – as the Constitution does not specify that the Speaker must actually be a member of the House. In a 2021 report, the Congressional Research Service noted that “Although the Constitution does not so require, the Speaker has always been a Member of the House.

  *  *  *

  After two days of embarrassing defeat spanning six votes for Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy has offered his critics a mountain of new concessions before, during and after a round of Wednesday night negotiations, Politico reports.

  

  The concessions include (via Politico): 

  • A one-member “motion to vacate”: The GOP leader appears to have finally acquiesced to a demand to lower the threshold needed to force a vote ousting a speaker to just one member. While McCarthy originally indicated that restoring the one-member “motion to vacate” was a red line, his allies now argue that there’s not a huge practical difference between this and his previous offer of requiring five members to trigger the vote.

  • Rules Committee seats for the Freedom Caucus: McCarthy is prepared to give the House Freedom Caucus two seats on the powerful House Rules Committee, which oversees the amendment process for the floor. (Some conservatives are still holding out for four seats on the panel.) There are also talks about giving a third seat to a conservative close to the Freedom Caucus but not in it — someone like Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky. Who would pick those members is still under discussion. Typically, it’s the speaker’s prerogative, but conservatives want to choose their own members for these jobs.
  • A vote on term limits: This is a key demand of Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), who has proposed a constitutional amendment limiting lawmakers to three terms in the House.

  • Major changes to the appropriations process: Fears of another trillion-plus-dollar omnibus spending bill have been a major driver of the conservative backlash to McCarthy. The brewing deal includes a promise for standalone votes on each of the 12 annual appropriations bills, which would be considered under what is known as an “open rule,” allowing floor amendments to be offered by any lawmaker.

  That said, according to Punchbowl News‘ Jake Sherman (formerly of Politico), there are still 20 ‘no’ votes against McCarthy, who “may have to sit through a 7th speaker vote today that he’s sure to lose.”

  According to Sherman, “negotiations between McCarthy and opponents have turned slightly positive,” while the Speaker hopeful is trying to drive a wedge between Reps. Lauren Bobert and Matt Gaetz. That said, some of McCarthy’s allies have suggested the drama could extend into next week before McCarthy either gets the job or backs down.

  More from Sherman / Punchbowl regarding McCarthy’s progress:

  TO BE SURE: MCCARTHY is a long way away. but he finally had a sliver of good news yesterday

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 5, 2023

  Meanwhile, ‘Never Kevin’ Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) has vowed to resign from Congress if McCarthy is elected Speaker, Fox News reports.

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsYears of anger, distrust

  As Bloomberg notes, the 20 GOP holdouts that are blocking McCarthy’s bid to become Speaker comes from years of anger at party leadership and “deep suspicions of the veteran lawmaker.”

  The group opposing McCarthy’s ascension to the top spot in the chamber have a list of grievances about House rules, anger over uniparty compromises with Democrats, and doubt over McCarthy’s claim to be a true conservative.

  “Mr. McCarthy has a history that is off-putting to some people,” said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), one of the leaders of the revolt.

  According to Rep. Scott Perry, chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, “It’s not personal for us,” adding “It’s about the policies that come out of here.”

  

  “I’m not for the restrictive nature of this place where eight people run it and the rest of us just vote yes or no,” Perry added, expressing frustration with a series of omnibus spending packages that Republicans have joined Democrats in jamming through the process, year after year.

  Meanwhile, McCarthy foe Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) says there are ‘trust’ issues over McCarthy’s past votes on spending packages.

  “Could Kevin McCarthy all of a sudden morph into a fiscal conservative?” he asked.

  Matt Gaetz of Florida, one of McCarthy’s most vocal detractors, has made his opposition more personal, lambasting him as a creature of the Washington “swamp” who does the bidding of corporate lobbies.

  “If you want to Drain the Swamp, you CANNOT put the biggest alligator in charge of the exercise!” he said in a fundraising email sent amid the speaker votes. “We’re talking about someone who the corrupt DC special interests can always count on to be their lapdog.”

  McCarthy has made efforts to neutralize right-wing critics. He pulled himself close to former President Donald Trump after first criticizing him for his actions when a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. -Bloomberg

  Stay tuned for today’s episode of ‘nobody likes Kevin.’

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 18:21

• Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Prices To Asian Markets Amid Sluggish Demand
  Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Prices To Asian Markets Amid Sluggish Demand

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com,

  Saudi Arabia, the world’s top crude oil exporter, on Thursday cut the prices of all its crude grades loading for Asia in February to the lowest level to regional benchmarks in more than a year, as demand concerns continue to prevail.

  

  Saudi Aramco, the state oil giant, cut the official selling price (OSPs) of its flagship crude grade, Arab Light, to Asia for February by $1.45 per barrel, setting the price at $1.80 a barrel above the Dubai/Oman benchmark. The premium to the Dubai/Oman average is the lowest since November 2021, but it was generally in line with expectations.

  Earlier this week, a Reuters survey of analysts showed that Saudi Aramco was widely expected to cut its OSPs to Asia for February, following a cut for the January loadings to a 10-month-low.

  Last month, Saudi Arabia cut the price of the crude it would sell to Asia in January to a 10-month low versus the regional benchmarks, which had weakened amid signs of lackluster demand in the world’s most important oil-importing market.    

  The forecasts in the Reuters survey were in line with the actual cut announced today—analysts had expected the price of the Arab Light crude grade to be cut by $1.50 per barrel for February shipments to a premium of just $1.75 per barrel over Dubai/Oman.

  Aramco, which generally doesn’t comment on the OSPs, also lowered the prices of its crude loading in February to northwest Europe and the Mediterranean region, while prices for the U.S. remained unchanged.

  The cut in Saudi oil prices isn’t a surprise for the market or analysts, considering the growing concerns about immediate demand in China and the world. Oil prices had the worst start to a year in more than 30 years after tumbling by 9% in just two days.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 18:20

• Trudeau Liberals Exceed Immigration Goals, Increase To 500,000 By 2025
  Trudeau Liberals Exceed Immigration Goals, Increase To 500,000 By 2025

  Authored by Alex Timothy via The Post Millennial,

  Canada set a new immigration record for 2022, welcoming more than 430,000 newcomers into the country, Trudeau’s Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, Sean Fraser, said on Tuesday.

  

  Ottawa intended to welcome 431,645, a goal that has been reached, surpassing the previous year’s record of more than 401,000 immigrants.”Today marks an important milestone for Canada, setting a new record for newcomers welcomed in a single year,” Fraser said. “It is a testament to the strength and resilience of our country and its people.”

  Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) processed approximately 5.2 million permanent residency applications in 2022, more than double the number from 2021.

  Canada’s goal for 2023 is 465,000 immigrants, increasing to 485,000 in 2024, then 500,000 in 2025, with an emphasis to be placed on skilled workers.

  To help facilitate this steady increase, the Trudeau government’s fall budget committed an additional $50 million to the IRCC for the 2022-23 fiscal year in order to “address ongoing application backlogs, speed up processing, and allow skilled newcomers to fill critical labour gaps faster.”

  “Newcomers play an essential role in filling labour shortages, bringing new perspectives and talents to our communities, and enriching our society as a whole,” Fraser said. “I am excited to see what the future holds and look forward to another historic year in 2023 as we continue to welcome newcomers.”

  The Liberals cited immigration as the reason for Canada having “experienced one of the fastest recoveries from the pandemic,” adding that the acute labour shortages the country is facing will be helped by immigration.

  “We know there is over a million jobs in Canada that remain unfilled, so we need immigrants, skilled immigrants, to come in and help us fill those unfilled jobs and help us grow our economy,” Housing Minister Ahmed Hussen told Global News. “In addition to that, the irony is we actually need more people, skilled immigrants, to also help us in the building trades and the construction sector of our economy.”

  “We need those workers to actually come in and help us build the housing that Canadians need,” he added.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 17:00

• The Twitter Purge Continues: Musk Lays Off About 40 Data Scientists And Engineers Working On Ad Team
  The Twitter Purge Continues: Musk Lays Off About 40 Data Scientists And Engineers Working On Ad Team

  The massive cost (and fat) cutting at Twitter under micromanaging new CEO Elon Musk continues. 

  For years Twitter had operated less like a company and more like a cult compound for leftist ideologues, with free lunches, yoga rooms, smoothie, wine and espresso bars, and minimal work buffered by pointless meetings and near zero productivity.

  Those days appear to be over. The latest proof? Twitter laid off “about 40 data scientists and engineers working on the advertising team” late on Wednesday night of this week, according to The Information.

  A person with direct knowledge of the matter said that the layoffs now leave the company with “few engineers” working on “machine learning for ad optimization”.

  These cuts come after additional reports this week that Elon Musk would be, among other things, downsizing the company’s San Francisco headquarters from six floors to only two. 

  

  Musk has also been systematically releasing internal communications from the company confirming that it was working with intelligence agencies to censor users. He has promised a forthcoming “Fauci Files” disclosure of more additional internal documents slated for this week. 

  Back in November, we wrote about how Musk was purging thousands of Twitter employees as he sought to turn around the struggling technology company. As we noted then, alleged leaks from within the company suggested that most employees under previous management barely worked and were devout “communists” with a hatred of free speech. The leaks also claimed that Twitter employees were far more concerned with censoring conservative voices than doing their jobs. 

  We noted then that Musk had fired at least 3500 primary staff members and purged at least 4500 outside contractors, many of them moderators tasked with filtering “misinformation”.  Interestingly, Twitter users have not noticed much of a difference in terms of functionality for the platform despite the mass layoffs. 

  We said it then and we’ll say it again: the only difference has been the ability to speak more freely on the platform. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/05/2023 – 16:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• New York Gun Control Law Unconstitutional: NY Supreme Court
  New York Gun Control Law Unconstitutional: NY Supreme Court

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  The New York law that enables the seizure of guns from people who haven’t committed a crime is unconstitutional, a state Supreme Court judge has ruled.

  

  This red flag law, or the Extreme Risk Protection Order law, lets individuals – including police officers – petition a court to allow the seizure of firearms from a person they believe poses a threat to themselves or others.

  If a judge agrees, the judge can direct law enforcement to take guns from the person in question.

  The law took effect in 2019 and has led to the issuance of more than 1,900 removal orders.

  But the law is in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Second and Fourteenth Amendments because it doesn’t “sufficiently protect a citizen’s rights,” New York State Supreme Court Judge Thomas Moran said in a ruling in late December 2022.

  The red flag law, per an update in July 2022, states that police officers and district attorneys must file for a risk protection order “upon the receipt of credible information that an individual is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to himself, herself, or others.”

  The law points to a separate statute, the Mental Hygiene Law, that defines the likelihood to result in serious harm as “(1) substantial risk of physical harm to himself as manifested by threats of or attempts at suicide or serious bodily harm or other conduct demonstrating that he is dangerous to himself; or (2) a substantial risk of physical harm to other persons as manifested by homicidal or other violent behavior by which others are placed in reasonable fear of serious physical harm.”

  The Mental Hygiene Law requires a person to have been admitted involuntarily to a hospital and that a doctor has determined the person to be likely to cause serious harm. A second doctor must confirm the determination if the person is held in a facility for more than 48 hours. In contrast, the red flag law doesn’t require the involvement of medical personnel.

  “Why should respondents under the Mental Health Law be granted greater safeguards (such as having their case be reviewed by a physician with the educational background and experience to make such a determination) than matters pursuant to [the red flag law] in which ‘laypeople’ make such a determination?” Moran said.

  “These are similarly situated people (by legislative definition) but as such are not to be treated equally, nor afforded the same constitutional guarantees that protect all citizens of New York state.”

  Nonmedical workers such as police officers shouldn’t be authorized to determine if a person is likely to cause serious harm, according to the ruling.

  In addition, under the U.S. Supreme Court’s standards in its 2022 ruling striking down New York’s concealed carry law, the red flag law doesn’t fit under the nation’s tradition of regulating firearms, the judge said.

  The majority said in the 2022 decision that the Constitution protects people’s rights to carry firearms and that a government must, for each gun restriction, “demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

  “This Court is not unmindful of the dangers firearms may pose when possessed in the hands of a person suffering a mental illness, harboring a criminal intent, or both. However, when viewed objectively, [the law’s] goal of removing weapons from the otherwise lawful possession of them by their owners, without adequate constitutional safeguards, cannot be condoned by this Court,” Moran added later.

  “While some may advocate that ‘the ends justify the means’ in support of [the law], where those means violate a fundamental right under our Bill of Rights to achieve their ends, then the law, on it’s face, cannot stand.”

  The ruling only applies to the specific situation and doesn’t strike the law down statewide, a source familiar with the case said.

  Case

  The ruling came in a case brought by a woman, C.N., whose estranged boyfriend, G.W., lodged an application for the removal of guns from the woman. G.W. claimed that C.N. made statements indicating she’d harm herself with a gun if she had access to one.

  According to court documents, though, the petition inaccurately said the statements were made in 2022, but they were actually made no later than Feb. 27, 2021.

  The court granted the request and ordered the seizure of any weapons from C.N., in addition to prohibiting her from buying or possessing any guns. Additionally, the court suspended C.N.’s pistol permit based on the risk protection order and the allegations made against her.

  Daniel Strollo, an attorney representing C.N., said in a statement that he was “very happy” with Moran’s ruling.

  Strollo told WHAM-TV that the red flag law implemented a “very quick and easy mechanism to deprive somebody of their fundamental Second Amendment rights.”

  “You have people who are essentially not medical professionals expressing medical opinions that result in the deprivation of rights,” Strollo said.

  “And you have a procedure that essentially allows somebody to lose those rights without ever having gone in front of a judge.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 23:45

• 12 Events To Watch For In 2023
  12 Events To Watch For In 2023

  Authored by Michael Wilkerson via The Epoch Times,

  The year 2022 was one of surprises: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, persistent inflation fueled by energy costs, the collapse of FTX and crypto markets, the revelations of the so-called Twitter Files, and one of the worst equity markets in recent history, to name but a few.

  

  The year 2023 is poised to present some equally challenging circumstances. Here are 12 trends, events, or surprises that may come to shape and define the year ahead.

  1) Inflation Returns

  I may be the minority report here, but I do not believe we’ve seen the end of—or worst of—inflation in the United States. I argue that following a lag in which price growth appears to moderate, Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation returns to the 8–12 percent range, where it persists for the rest of the year. This will be cost-push inflation, not demand-pull (see the second point below), and a lagging result of trebling the money supply in the United States since 2009. Stagflation returns, with the Misery Index (inflation plus unemployment) hitting new highs.

  2) The U.S. Economy Enters Recession

  This is a less controversial proposition at this stage, as most economists and analysts agree that recession looks highly probable for 2023. The first half of 2023 is likely to be characterized by negative GDP, rising unemployment, and an insecure consumer. The wave of layoffs which began in the tech sector in 2022 spreads to other industries and sectors, and migrates down from large-cap corporations like Meta and Amazon to small- and medium-sized enterprises which are disproportionately affected by the slowdown.

  3) European Energy Crisis Worsens

  While in the near term Western Europe may be spared the worst possible outcomes due to a mild winter, the underlying factors which led to the energy crisis haven’t been resolved. Germany, the European Union’s largest economy, made a Faustian bargain believing that it could abandon its coal industry and any nuclear aspiration and instead place their trust in the Russians—against all historical experience—and a green utopia. France similarly backed away from its path to energy independence—nuclear power—and are paying the price. While both have recently repented these misjudgments, the path to recovery will take years, not months. In the meantime, supply shortages will continue to plague these economies.

  4) Oil, Crypto, and Gold Perform

  Energy markets will continue their bull run for the foreseeable future as a result of continued supply disruptions and refinery constraints. Bitcoin and Ethereum emerge from a long, dark crypto winter, but altcoins remain frozen out. The dollar begins a long, if slow and turbulent, slide from 2022 highs, as peak demand from rapidly rising interest rates eases.

  5) Continued Rise of Resource Nationalism

  The unforgettable geopolitical lesson of the pandemic era has been that just-in-time supply-chain dependence on countries that many or may not have another nation’s interest at heart represents a dangerous strategic folly. It’s well and good that we learned this lesson when we did. Countries around the world are now aggressively working to realign their supply chains and ensure that they have strategic resources in adequate supply to meet unexpected, Black Swan events. Look for increasingly protectionist and nationalistic policies to dominate trade discussions.

  6) Traditional Global Alliances Break, New Ones Form

  Long-standing partnerships, such as the United States’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, have already begun to unravel. Expect further strengthening of the China and Russia-led alliance involving former U.S. allies, or at least non-aligned nations such as India, Turkey, South Africa, and Brazil. Most vulnerable to geopolitical shifts are countries in Africa, Southeast Asia, and South America. Because of sanctions warfare and incoherent or at least inconsistent foreign policy, the United States ends up in a net deficit position, losing more friends than it gains in this process.

  7) U.S. Dollar Dominance Continues to Erode

  Hard money returns to favor, with commodity-backed currencies taking the spotlight. Alt payment systems, petrodollars being replaced with petrorubles or petroyuans, as well as central bank-issued digital currencies, will all conspire to slowly erode the U.S. dollar’s share of global financial and trade flows.

  8) The West, Weary of Cost of Ukraine War, Sues for Peace

  While it may not be realistic to think that Russia can bomb the Ukrainian people into submission, the increasing costs of supporting Ukraine’s war with Russia will challenge political leaders across the West. This fatigue will increase as more citizens start to ask reasonable questions about whether hundreds of billions of dollars or euros might not be better spent to take on some of the domestic economic and social challenges that these nations face at home. Eventually, Western governments and Putin each decide that a half a loaf is better than no loaf at all.

  9) Domino Effect of Exposure

  The recent uncovering of high-level frauds and corruptions involving U.S. government agencies and personnel continues. Increasing transparency leads to accountability. Eventually, the evidence becomes too overwhelming to ignore; arrests, trials, and convictions ensue. Congressional hearings lead to wave of resignations and first steps toward fundamental institutional reform.

  10) China Barks, but Doesn’t Bite, at Taiwan

  While we should expect the growling and barking to grow louder, with more frequent air space incursions, naval activity, intimidations, and outright threats, it is highly unlikely that China invades Taiwan in 2023. While China most certainly would prefer to confront Taiwan while the Biden administration remains in power, rather than face an improbable return of Donald Trump to the presidency, Xi Jingping’s government will conclude that they are not ready, militarily, politically, or otherwise, to invade Taiwan. Domestic issues, including a worsening economy and rising social unrest within mainland China, will mean that creating a row with the United States and other trading partners in the West remains untenable for the time being. While Russia might be able to make do without selling gas to Germany, there is no way the Chinese economy can survive if abruptly cuts itself off from the United States and Western Europe.

  11) Second-Half Rebound in Economy and Markets

  While I am not optimistic about the first half, I take great comfort in the breadth and resilience of the American economy. There is enormous unleashed latent potential in oil and gas, in manufacturing onshoring, in supply-chain realignment, and in new technologies such as AI, quantum computing, blockchain, and cold fusion.

  12) More of the Same

  What could derail a more V-shaped recovery are the same forces that helped bring the recession about: poor policy decisions that continue to damage our energy industry, keep our borders insecure, and fail to dismantle the out-of-control regulatory bureaucracy that is impeding innovation in energy, manufacturing, financial services, and technology. These are some of the largest sectors in the economy and those which have been most negatively affected by the Biden administration’s imprudent return to Obama-era economic policies.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 23:25

• New Chinese Foreign Minister Seen As Xi's Attempt To Soften US-China Relations
  New Chinese Foreign Minister Seen As Xi’s Attempt To Soften US-China Relations

  Among the bigger developments out of Beijing this week impacting the future of US-China relations is the appointment of a new Chinese foreign minister.

  Last Friday the appointment was unveiled to be China’s ambassador to the United States Qin Gang, who will take over the top diplomatic post from former FM Wang Yi, recently removed by a decision of the National People’s Congress Sanding Committee.

  Bloomberg and others noted he represents a “softer” side of Beijing’s stance toward America, already said to have been on display during his relatively short tenure in Washington for the past seventeen months.

  

  In the past two days the new Chinese FM has even grabbed the attention of Western press by tweeting out that he’s “deeply impressed” by the American people, while vowing to push forward US-China relations in a positive way. 

  “I want to pay sincere thanks to the people of the United States for the strong support and assistance given to me and the Chinese Embassy during this period,” Qin tweeted Monday evening (US time).

  “I have been deeply impressed by so many hard-working, friendly and talented American people that I met,” Qin added, saying he had “made many friends across the US.” He pledged to “support the growth of China-US relations” in his capacity as China’s top diplomat. 

  The replacement of former FM Wang, who had served as foreign minister for almost a decade, is being widely seen as a sign that President Xi Jinping wants to urgently repair fraying relations with the US and the West more broadly.

  Interestingly, prior words of Qin are now being widely reported related to the Ukraine war. He was recently on record as expressing that China would have attempted to dissuade Russia from invading Ukraine if it had known about it. This is in contrast to some US officials and media reports which claim Beijing knew about the invasions plans and turned a blind eye.

  Tried my first throw at an NBA game @WashWizards. Also renewed our special relationship as Washington Wizards was the first NBA team to visit China in 1979 when our two countries established diplomatic relationship. pic.twitter.com/VCX7JncN7i

  — Qin Gang 秦刚 (@AmbQinGang) December 28, 2022

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

  Qin has also in the past downplayed the idea that China wants reunification of Taiwan by force, in line with Beijing’s official position. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 23:05

• 100 Million Americans To Be On Medicaid By March, Think Tank Projects
  100 Million Americans To Be On Medicaid By March, Think Tank Projects

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

  Up to 100 million Americans will soon be enrolled in Medicaid, according to an enrollment monitoring project by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), a think tank focused on welfare and health care policy.

  

  On Dec. 28, FGA announced it believes that the number of Americans enrolled with Medicaid will cross the 100 million mark in about 76 days, or approximately March 14. The Naples, Florida-based think tank also launched a countdown clock for the date they project Medicaid enrollment to hit 100 million.

  According to Medicaid.gov data, through August 2022, some 90,550,412 individuals were enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

  FGA compiled more recent state-by-state Medicaid enrollment figures showing 96.2 million Americans are now enrolled in the government health care program. Based on the state-by-state growth trends, FGA projects 98.9 million Americans will be enrolled in Medicaid by the end of January and another 1.1 million Americans will be enrolled in the program by mid-March.

  FGA Warns of ‘Grim’ Medicaid Milestone

  “For years, FGA has been warning about the rising number of people on government welfare programs,” said Hayden Dublois, the data and analytics director for FGA.

  “Now, we’re nearing a grim milestone—nearly one-third of the country will be on Medicaid. Our research and data show as welfare enrollment increases, workforce participation decreases. We’re in the midst of a nationwide workforce crisis, yet the Biden administration is pushing policies to entice people into government dependency at record levels while limiting opportunities to achieve the American Dream.”

  According to the FGA, the rise in Medicaid enrollment is due in large part to federal COVID-19 public health emergency policies, like the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). The pandemic-era measures provide states with extra Medicaid funding but block states from being able to change their eligibility and enrollment procedures and require that everyone currently enrolled in the program remain in place.

  FGA estimates that an additional 24 million enrollees are on Medicaid as a result of the pandemic-era measures, including more than 21 million people who would have previously been disqualified from the health care program.

  $1.7 Trillion Omnibus Lets States Change Medicaid Enrollment After April 1

  While pandemic-era federal policies locked states in with their current Medicaid enrollments, the $1.7 trillion federal omnibus bill to fund government provision allows states to redetermine Medicaid eligibility starting on April 1.

  “While there are many concerning provisions in this omnibus spending bill, we’re optimistic states may soon regain control of their Medicaid programs and reverse two years of unchecked enrollment growth,” said FGA President and CEO Tarren Bragdon.

  “FGA has championed Medicaid reform to combat the devasting impact pandemic-era policies have had on the American economy and workforce. If this provision is enacted, states must step up and start redeterminations as soon as possible—our struggling economy and weakened workforce depend on it.”

  While the omnibus allows states to resume their Medicaid eligibility checks, the provision also means that millions of people could soon be kicked off the government health care program.

  “This is a positive for states in terms of planning, however, this will come at the cost of some individuals losing their health care,” Massey Whorley, a principal at health consulting firm Avalere, told The Associated Press.

  The Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) estimates between 5.3 million and 14.2 million Medicaid recipients could be disenrolled after the pandemic-era continuous enrollment requirement ends on April 1.

  Robin Rudowitz, the director of Medicaid at KFF, advised Medicaid recipients to make sure their contact information is up to date on their accounts and check their mail frequently for any notices of changes to their Medicaid eligibility.

  “There is likely to be people who fall through the cracks,” Rudowitz told The Associated Press.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 22:45

• Taibbi: Summaries Of All 'Twitter Files' To Date
  Taibbi: Summaries Of All ‘Twitter Files’ To Date

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  It’s January 4th, 2023, which means Twitter Files stories have been coming out for over a month. Because these are weedsy tales, and may be hard to follow if you haven’t from the beginning, I’ve written up capsule summaries of each of the threads by all of the Twitter Files reporters, and added links to the threads and accounts of each. At the end, in response to some readers (especially foreign ones) who’ve found some of the alphabet-soup government agency names confusing, I’ve included a brief glossary of terms to help as well.

  

  In order, the Twitter Files threads:

  1. Twitter Files Part 1: December 2, 2022, by @mtaibbi

     TWITTER AND THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY

     Recounting the internal drama at Twitter surrounding the decision to block access to a New York Post exposé on Hunter Biden in October, 2020.

     Key revelations: Twitter blocked the story on the basis of its “hacked materials” policy, but executives internally knew the decision was problematic. “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?” is how comms official Brandon Borrman put it. Also: when a Twitter contractor polls members of Congress about the decision, they hear Democratic members want more moderation, not less, and “the First Amendment isn’t absolute.”

     1a. Twitter Files Supplemental, December 6, 2022, by @mtaibbi

     THE “EXITING” OF TWITTER DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL JIM BAKER

     A second round of Twitter Files releases was delayed, as new addition Bari Weiss discovers former FBI General Counsel and Twitter Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker was reviewing the first batches of Twitter Files documents, whose delivery to reporters had slowed.

  2. Twitter Files Part 2, by @BariWeiss, December 8, 2022

     TWITTER’S SECRET BLACKLISTS

     Bari Weiss gives a long-awaited answer to the question, “Was Twitter shadow-banning people?” It did, only the company calls it “visibility filtering.” Twitter also had a separate, higher council called SIP-PES that decided cases for high-visibility, controversial accounts.

     Key revelations: Twitter had a huge toolbox for controlling the visibility of any user, including a “Search Blacklist” (for Dan Bongino), a “Trends Blacklist” for Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and a “Do Not Amplify” setting for conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Weiss quotes a Twitter employee: “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool.” With help from @abigailshrier, @shellenbergermd, @nelliebowles, and @isaacgrafstein.

  3. Twitter Files, Part 3, by @mtaibbi, December 9, 2022

     THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, October 2020 – January 6th, 2021

     First in a three-part series looking at how Twitter came to the decision to suspend Donald Trump. The idea behind the series is to show how all of Twitter’s “visibility filtering” tools were on display and deployed after January 6th, 2021. Key Revelations: Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth not only met regularly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, but with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Also, Twitter was aggressively applying “visibility filtering” tools to Trump well before the election.

  4. Twitter Files Part 4, by @ShellenbergerMD, December 10, 2022

     THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, January 7th, 2021

     This thread by Michael Shellenberger looks at the key day after the J6 riots and before Trump would ultimately be banned from Twitter on January 8th, showing how Twitter internally reconfigured its rules to make a Trump ban fit their policies.

     Key revelations: at least one Twitter employee worried about a “slippery slope” in which “an online platform CEO with a global presence… can gatekeep speech for the entire world,” only to be shot down. Also, chief censor Roth argues for a ban on congressman Matt Gaetz even though it “doesn’t quite fit anywhere (duh),” and Twitter changed its “public interest policy” to clear a path for Trump’s removal.

  5. Twitter Files Part 5, by @BariWeiss, December 11, 2022

     THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, January 8th, 2021

     As angry as many inside Twitter were with Donald Trump after the January 6th Capitol riots, staffers struggled to suspend his account, saying things like, “I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement.” As documented by Weiss, they found a way to pull the trigger anyway.

     Key revelations: there were dissenters in the company (“Maybe because I am from China,” said one employee, “I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation”), but are overruled by senior executives like Vijaya Gadde and Roth, who noted many on Twitter’s staff were citing the “Banality of Evil,” and comparing those who favored sticking to a strict legalistic interpretation of Twitter’s rules — i.e. keep Trump, who had “no violation” — to “Nazis following orders.”

  6. Twitter Files Part 6, by @mtaibbi, December 16, 2022

     TWITTER, THE FBI SUBSIDIARY

     Twitter’s contact with the FBI was “constant and pervasive,” as FBI personnel, mainly in the San Francisco field office, regularly sent lists of “reports” to Twitter, often about Americans with low follower counts making joke tweets. Tweeters on both the left and the right were affected.

     Key revelations: A senior Twitter executive reports, “FBI was adamant no impediments to sharing” classified information exist. Twitter also agreed to “bounce” content on the recommendations of a wide array of governmental and quasi-governmental actors, from the FBI to the Homeland Security agency CISA to Stanford’s Election Integrity Project to state governments. The company one day received so many moderation requests from the FBI, an executive congratulated staffers at the end for completing the “monumental undertaking.”

  7. Twitter Files Part 7, by @ShellenbergerMD, December 19, 2022

     THE FBI AND HUNTER BIDEN’S LAPTOP

     The Twitter Files story increases its focus on the company’s relationship to federal law enforcement and intelligence, and shows intense communication between the FBI and Twitter just before the release of the Post’s Hunter Biden story.

     Key Revelations: San Francisco agent Elvis Chan “sends 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story. Also, Baker in an email explains Twitter was compensated for “processing requests” by the FBI, saying “I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!”

  

  8. Twitter Files Part 8, by @lhfang, December 20, 2022

     HOW TWITTER QUIETLY AIDED THE PENTAGON’S COVERT ONLINE PSYOP CAMPAIGN

     Lee Fang takes a fascinating detour, looking at how Twitter for years approved and supported Pentagon-backed covert operations. Noting the company explicitly testified to Congress that it didn’t allow such behavior, the platform nonetheless was a clear partner in state-backed programs involving fake accounts.

     Key revelations: after the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) sent over a list of 52 Arab-language accounts “we use to amplify certain messages,” Twitter agreed to “whitelist” them. Ultimately the program would be outed in the Washington Post in 2022 — two years after Twitter and other platforms stopped assisting — but contrary to what came out in those reports, Twitter knew about and/or assisted in these programs for at least three years, from 2017-2020.

     Lee wrote a companion piece for the Intercept here:

  9. Twitter Files Part 9, by @mtaibbi, December 24th, 2022

     TWITTER AND “OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES”

     The Christmas Eve thread (I should have waited a few days to publish!) further details how the channels of communication between the federal government and Twitter operated, and reveals that Twitter directly or indirectly received lists of flagged content from “Other Government Agencies,” i.e. the CIA.

     Key revelations: CIA officials attended at least one conference with Twitter in the summer of 2020, and companies like Twitter and Facebook received “OGA briefings,” at their regular “industry” meetings held in conjunction with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The FBI and the “Foreign Influence Task Force” met regularly “not just with Twitter, but with Yahoo!, Twitch, Cloudfare, LinkedIn, even Wikimedia.”

  10. Twitter Files Part 10, by @DavidZweig, December 28, 2022

      HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE

      David Zweig drills down into how Twitter throttled down information about COVID that was true but perhaps inconvenient for public officials, “discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed.”

      Key Revelations: Zweig found memos from Twitter personnel who’d liaised with Biden administration officials who were “very angry” that Twitter had not deplatformed more accounts. White House officials for instance wanted attention on reporter Alex Berenson. Zweig also found “countless” instances of Twitter banning or labeling “misleading” accounts that were true or merely controversial. A Rhode Island physician named Andrew Bostom, for instance, was suspended for, among other things, referring to the results of a peer-reviewed study on mRNA vaccines.

  11. and

  12. Twitter Files Parts 11 and 12, by @mtaibbi, January 3, 2023

      HOW TWITTER LET THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IN

      and

      TWITTER AND THE FBI “BELLY BUTTON”

      These two threads focus respectively on the second half of 2017, and a period stretching roughly from summer of 2020 through the present. The first describes how Twitter fell under pressure from Congress and the media to produce “material” showing a conspiracy of Russian accounts on their platform, and the second shows how Twitter tried to resist fulfilling moderation requests for the State Department, but ultimately agreed to let State and other agencies send requests through the FBI, which agent Chan calls “the belly button of the USG.” Revelations: at the close of 2017, Twitter makes a key internal decision. Outwardly, the company would claim independence and promise that content would only be removed at “our sole discretion.” The internal guidance says, in writing, that Twitter will remove accounts “identified by the U.S. intelligence community” as “identified by the U.S.. intelligence community as a state-sponsored entity conducting cyber-operations.”

      The second thread shows how Twitter took in requests from everyone — Treasury, HHS, NSA, FBI, DHS, etc. — and also received personal requests from politicians like Democratic congressman Adam Schiff, who asked to have journalist Paul Sperry suspended.

  GLOSSARY OF “TWITTER FILES” TERMS

  1. Government Agencies and NGOs

     CISA: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, an agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

     CENTCOM: Central Command of the Armed Forces

     ODNI: Office of the Director of National Intelligence

     FITF: Foreign Influence Task Force, a cyber-regulatory agency comprised of members of the FBI, DHS, and ODNI

     “OGA”: Other Government Agency, colloquially — CIA

     GEC: Global Engagement Center, an analytical division of the U.S. State Department

     USIC: United States intelligence community

     HSIN: Homeland Security Information Network, a portal through which states and other official bodies can send “flagged” accounts

     EIP: Election Integrity Project, a cyber-laboratory based at Stanford University that sends many reports to Twitter

     DFR: Digital Forensic Research lab, an outlet that performs a similar function to the EIP, only is funded by the Atlantic Council

     IRA: Internet Research Agency, the infamous Russian “troll farm” headed by “Putin’s chef,” Yevgheny Prigozhin

      

  2. Twitter or Industry-specific terms

     PII: Can have two meanings. “Personally identifiable information” is self-explanatory, while a “Public Interest Interstitial” is a warning placed over a tweet, so that it cannot be seen. Twitter personnel even use “interstitial” as a verb, as in, “Can we interstitial that?”

     JIRA: Twitter’s internal ticketing system, through which complaints rise and are decided

     PV2: The system used at Twitter to view the profile of any user, to check easily if it has flags like “Trends Blacklist”

     SIP-PES Site Integrity Policy — Policy Escalation Support. SIP-PES is like Twitter’s version of a moderation Supreme Court, dealing with the most high-profile, controversial rulings

     SI: Site integrity. Key term that you’ll see repeately in Twitter email traffic, especially with “escalations,” i.e. tweets or content that have been reported for moderation review

     CHA: Coordinated Harmful Activity

     SRT: Strategic Response Team

     GET: Global Escalation Team

     VF: Visibility Filtering

     GUANO: Tool in Twitter’s internal system that keeps a chronological record of all actions taken on an account

     VIT: Very Important Tweeter. Really.

     GoV: Glorificaiton of Violence

     BOT: In the moderation content, an individualized heuristic attached to an account that moderates certain behavior automatically

     BME: Bulk Media Exploitation

     EP Abuse: Episodic abuse

     PCF: Parity, commentary and fan accounts. “PCF” sometimes appears as a reason an account has escaped an automated moderation process, under a limited exception

     FLC: Forced Login Challenge. Also called a “phone challenge,” it’s a way Twitter attempts to verify if an account is real or automated. “Phone challenges” are seen repeatedly in discussions about verification of suspected “Russia-linked” accounts

     IO: Information Operations, as in The GEC’s mandate for offensive IO to promote American interests.

  This page will be kept open and updated as needed. If you have questions about terms, please send them to taibbi@substack.com

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 22:25

• FBI Agent Who Destroyed Evidence To Indict GOP Sen. May Get Wrist-Slap
  FBI Agent Who Destroyed Evidence To Indict GOP Sen. May Get Wrist-Slap

  Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA (emphasis ours),

  With his sentencing scheduled for Thursday, disgraced FBI agent Robert Cessario seeks probation for illegally destroying evidence related to the prosecution of a former Republican Arkansas state senator—but critics say prison time is necessary to fight corruption in the federal justice system.

  

  Cessario’s crime stems from the 2018 trial of former Arkansas state senator Jon Woods, a Republican, who was convicted of mail fraud and wire fraud charges and sentenced to roughly 18 years imprisonment. Woods was accused of participating in a scheme in which he accepted kickbacks in exchange for steering state grants to a small college in the state.

  During discovering proceedings in the Woods trial, prosecutors ordered Cessario to turn over his laptop for a forensic examination. However, the former FBI agent lied to prosecutors, telling them he previously erased the laptop’s hard drive. Then, prior to delivering the laptop for examination, he paid professionals to erase the laptop’s hard drive.

  Cessario was terminated from the FBI for his crime, and he pleaded guilty in August to destroying evidence related to the case against Woods.

  Nevertheless, the Eighth District Court of Appeals upheld Woods’s conviction, ruling that the “evidence of the conspiracy [against Woods] was overwhelming,” despite the FBI’s conduct.

  Cessario faces up to 20 years in prison. Last month, his attorney argued for one year of probation in lieu of a prison sentence in a brief to U.S. District Judge P. K. Holmes III.

  In his brief, Cessario’s attorney cited the case of former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was sentenced to one year probation for altering evidence in the Russiagate investigation.

  He also cited the case of former FBI agent William Tisaby, who received a suspended sentence of one year probation after pleading guilty earlier this year to tampering with evidence in the investigation of former Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens.

  “Both the Clinesmith and the Tisaby cases involve conduct that is not only substantially similar with the conduct underlying this charge against Robert Cessario, but the conduct of each of these two defendants appears to be almost exactly in line with the conduct of the defendant Cessario,” Cessario’s attorney wrote in the Dec. 12 sentencing brief.

  The U.S. government responded to Cessario’s brief three days later, agreeing that probation is an appropriate sentence for the former FBI agent.

  “The government has no evidence suggesting that the defendant had any reason for wiping the computer other than his expressed one, which was to remove sensitive personal and family information on the computer,” prosecutors wrote in their Dec. 15 brief. “As such, the government concludes that a sentence of probation will accomplish the sentencing factors.”

  However, conservative activists are calling for Cessario to be incarcerated for his crime. Those activists, including Connie Davies and Patsy Wootton, held a rally Tuesday in Arkansas to demand justice against Cessario.

  “If he gets away with this, what message are we sending to other FBI agents? What message are we sending to the American people who are held to a higher standard?” Davies told Headline USA in an interview following the rally. “If there’s no consequence for this kind of action, we’re in trouble.”

  Davies said the data Cessario erased from his laptop could have included exonerating evidence for Woods. She noted that even the Washington DC-based National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers – not known for taking up conservative causes – has criticized Cessario’s conduct in the Woods case as a gross violation of due process.

  Davies said she finds it plausible that Woods was targeted by the FBI over his outspoken support of then-candidate Donald Trump. Woods was the only Arkansas elected official to support Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries.

  Woods, who is serving his sentence at a minimum-security federal correctional institution in Texas, said his ordeal is part of God’s plan.

  “I did get steamrolled, but I prayed about it and I was overcome with peace to fight … When I began to stand up for myself, the agent on my case started to act strange and then broke the law,” Woods said in a statement provided by Davies. “The agent will be sentenced Jan. 5. I do not know God’s plan, but I do know I am where He wants me for the time being until something changes.”

  The FBI’s sordid history of tampering with and destroying evidence dates back decades, as chronicled by authors John Kelly and Phillip Wearne in their book, “Tainting Evidence : Behind the Scandals at the FBI Crime Lab.”  This book features interviews and records from former FBI crime-lab scientist Fred Whitehurst, who came out as a whistleblower in the 1990s about the bureau’s mishandling of evidence.

  Whitehurst revealed that the FBI mishandled evidence in prominent investigations into the Unabomber, O.J. Simpson, and the Oklahoma City bombing cases. The Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General found some of Whitehurst’s key allegations to be substantiated in an April 1997 report.

  Follow Ken Silva on Twitter.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 22:05

• "The Leech Class": Pulling America Back From The Precipice
  “The Leech Class”: Pulling America Back From The Precipice

  Authored by Matthew Brouillette via RealClear Wire,

  It’s not often than a CEO of a large, publicly traded company speaks bluntly in public about politics and political power. So, both “surprising” and “refreshing” describe energy executive Nick Deiuliis’s new book, Precipice: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy America (Republic Book Publishers).

  

  Deiuliis, a chemical engineer and attorney by training, is director and chief executive officer of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania-based CNX Resources Corporation, one of the largest natural gas exploration, development, and production companies.

  In addition to penning Precipice, Deiuliis is a prolific writer on topics ranging from the American Civil War to professional sports to the Federal Reserve to music. When he’s not writing, he hosts “The Far Middle,” a weekly podcast that tackles topics including energy, business, politics, culture, sports, and more.

  In short, Deiuliis does not fit the stereotype of the CEO of a publicly traded company. 

  As an energy leader, Deiuliis is an unapologetic advocate for his industry, and he makes a strong case that abundant and affordable energy is indispensable for developing and prosperous civilizations.

  But his book’s subtitle – “The Left’s Campaign to Destroy America” – best captures Precipice’s focus, which extends far beyond the energy industry. Deiuliis identifies four categories of members of modern society: “Creators,” “Enablers,” “Servers,” and “Leeches.”

  Creators generate the wealth that leads to the civilization’s success. These include the scientists, surgeons, engineers, techies, manufacturers, constructors, and members of the building trades, who provide the foundation for any modern society.  

  Enablers support the Creators. They are the accountants, nurses, data clerks, financiers, bus drivers, and clerical workers. Their professions increase Creators’ efficiency.

  Servers make up the largest societal member group and include those who improve the quality of life for individuals and increase efficiency for everyone – from the waitress in a restaurant to the mechanic who fixes your car to the landscaper who mows your lawn. Servers do the jobs you might be able to do yourself but are willing to pay someone else to do in order to free yourself up for other things.

  Finally, Leeches, as their name suggests, live off the productivity of a host – with the hosts in this case being the members of the other three groups.

  These four groups are not exactly the lens through which most Americans observe their society, but perhaps they should be. Deiuliis offers a unique and invaluable framework for understanding the basis of economic activity in America today.

  Not surprisingly, while Deiuliis celebrates the first three member groups, he has disdain for the fourth category, the Leech. While the first three groups “built and fuel a culture of making” and make the world go round, the Leech “stands in stark contrast to and in direct conflict” with the first three and undermines the American Dream.

  The Leech class is deeply embedded across multiple industries – members of the plaintiffs’ bar, who use the law against social flourishing; public sector unions (particularly teachers’ unions) that use tax dollars to thwart the public interest; members of the media, who act as a public relations arm for government, and members of academia, who formulate many of the premises on which leech-ism depends. But Deiuliis argues that the most troubling leeches are found in government bureaucracies. While he recognizes the need for rules and regulations, he argues that the government Leech has gone far beyond simply serving and protecting the public; he has crossed the line into making the lives of everyone more difficult.

  The Leech class, Deiuliis writes, is destroying America—strategically.  

  Deiuliis also makes the case that our modern economy rests on four pillars: energy, finance, healthcare, and technology. Leeches target these pillars with the primary objective of controlling them, a process Deiuliis goes into great detail to explain. Creators, Enablers, and Servers suffer the negative consequences of these attacks.

  Precipice is admittedly a depressing reality check on the state of America – but it is much needed. As President Ronald Reagan once said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

  Creators, Enablers, and Servers have made America the freest, most prosperous nation in history. The Leeches threaten that freedom and prosperity. Deiuliis’s conclusion is prescient: “We know who the enemy is; let us engage in public discourse so that good prevails over evil.” Indeed, if we don’t, America will soon go over the precipice – and into the history books, joining many other once-great civilizations.

  Precipice is an eye-opening read for business leaders, policymakers, and anyone who cherishes the liberties that define America.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 21:45

• Police Failures In Philadelphia Have Made Private Policing More Attractive
  Police Failures In Philadelphia Have Made Private Policing More Attractive

  Authored by Tate Fegley via The Mises Institute,

  While “private policing” is in many people’s minds a feature of dystopian science fiction or the fantasies of libertarian economists, the reality is that private security is far more common than most think. Indeed, as Georgetown professor John Hasnas points out, it is all around us. Unfortunately, the impetus for much of the growth in the private security industry has been the inadequacies of state-provided protection.

  

  An example of this phenomenon is JNS Protection Services, which recently garnered attention in the Philadelphia Inquirer. JNS provides a variety of security services in Georgia and Pennsylvania, including North Philadelphia, where Temple University is located.

  Temple Students living off campus fear for their safety. This is understandable, considering the amount of crime North Philadelphia is experiencing. On November 28, 2021, Temple senior Samuel Collington was fatally shot in a parking lot near campus during what appears to have been an attempted robbery. Less than two weeks earlier, on November 16, high school senior Ahmir Jones was also killed during a robbery attempt just blocks from Temple. In 2021, Philadelphia as a whole surpassed its murder record; the previous peak of over five hundred murders annually was during the crack cocaine epidemic of the early 1990s.

  After a broad-daylight armed robbery took place outside one student’s residence, his mother decided to hire JNS to patrol his neighborhood. Although JNS was initially hired to patrol the area three days per week, the plan came to the attention of a Facebook group of Temple parents, and they contributed funds to expand the service to five days per week.

  An opinion column detailing the events included a former Philadelphia police officer’s views on parents’ move to hire private security:

  “They’re just a town watch,” pointed out David Fisher, a retired Philadelphia police officer and president of the National Black Police Association, Greater Philadelphia chapter.

  “They are more eyes and ears on the streets that they’re patrolling. It’s good. But will it be effective? I’m not sure.”

  While we would not expect Fisher to apologize on behalf the Philadelphia Police Department for failing to maintain public safety to such an extent that the parents of students at a premier research university feel the need to hire private security, his condescending attitude is notable for two reasons.

  • The first is that it provides further evidence suggesting that, despite the rhetoric and billions spent on community-oriented policing (COP), a significant contingent of police officers never bought into it and its emphasis on police-community partnerships. Rather, COP became popular among police departments mainly because of the gibs being handed out by the Department of Justice. Instead of being a vital component in the production of public safety, nonpolice are “just a town watch” who are, at best, “more eyes and ears on the streets” that can be useful to the real police.

  • The second reason is that while Fisher expressed concerns over whether private security will be effective, the Philadelphia Police Department is able to escape such scrutiny despite the record number of murders and students being killed by armed robbers. In contrast to JNS Protection Services, the city police do not have to demonstrate their effectiveness to Philadelphians in order to get paid. Local (as well as US) taxpayers will continue to fund them regardless.

  Perhaps parents will find that JNS’s services are ineffective or unsatisfactory. Perhaps a competitor will provide a better service at a lower price. But just as school choice creates financial incentives for public schools that give parents more control, security providers are more responsive when parents have police choice.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 21:25

• Macron Pledges 'First Western Tanks' To Ukraine While US Mulls Bradley Fighting Vehicles
  Macron Pledges ‘First Western Tanks’ To Ukraine While US Mulls Bradley Fighting Vehicles

  French President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday announced he intends to send ‘light tanks’ to Ukraine, which will make France the first to supply Western-manufactured tanks to the conflict, after some like Poland earlier transferred Soviet tanks. 

  While NATO allies have gradually increased the sophistication of weaponry shipped to Kiev, including longer range missiles and more recently Patriot systems approved by the US, they have stopped short of sending either tanks or fighter jets, largely on fears of Moscow expanding the war in response.

  “The president wanted to increase… aid” to Ukraine “by accepting to deliver AMX-10 RC light tanks” – a Macron aide told reporters following the French leader holding a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

  

  The AFP has described the French-made AMX-10 RC as an older light model tanks which the French infantry used in the 1980s, but has since been phased out. It is six-wheeled and not on tracks, thus it’s sometimes called a “wheeled tank” – but has a powerful 105 mm gun on a turret. 

  Among other medium and heavy equipment, France and other countries have already delivered armored personnel carriers to Ukraine, so this appears the next step up, perhaps paving the way to heavier more conventional tanks to match Russia’s significant tank forces.

  Previously, Poland and the Czech Republic have sent Soviet-era tanks to Ukraine, even as Western Europe and the US were reluctant. 

  As for the United States, the Biden administration is mulling sending Bradley Fighting Vehicles to Ukrainian forces, with the president responding “yes” to a journalist’s question Wednesday when asked about prior reporting… 

  Scoop: Biden admin is discussing sending Bradley Fighting Vehicles to Ukraine, sources tell me and @AlbertoNardelli. “Bradleys would provide a major increase in ground combat capability because it is, in effect, a light tank,” one analyst says.https://t.co/nYg4pRBPPR pic.twitter.com/DAmqxKmMhM

  — Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) December 29, 2022

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

  Bloomberg was the first to report last week that “The US government is considering sending Bradley Fighting Vehicles to Ukraine as part of a further package of military support, according to people familiar with the matter.”

  “A final decision hasn’t yet been made, one of the people said,” the report said. “When the vehicles would be operational is also unclear, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue.” Biden on Wednesday officially confirmed the deliberations are underway.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 21:05

• Kevin McCarthy And The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day
  Kevin McCarthy And The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

  Update (2100ET): Kevin McCarthy has now suffered defeat six times in his bid to become House Speaker.

  

  His allies are spending Wednesday night trying to appeal to at least 20 holdouts who have blocked his bid for a second day.

  This still likely won’t get him to 218, per several GOP sources. But it will close the gap

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 5, 2023

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

  After taking a several-hour break on Wednesday to stall any further votes, the House quickly voted to adjourn until Noon on Thursday – with all Democrats and four Republicans voting against the pause.

  The motion to adjourn was made by GOP Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, while the four GOP lawmakers who opposed adjournment were Reps. Andy Biggs, Lauren Bobert, Matt Gaetz and Rep.-elect Eli Crane.

  

  When the House meets again on Thursday it will hold its seventh round of votes for speaker.

  Of note, the House cannot conduct any other business until a speaker is elected – including swearing in new members.

  On the holdout side, Rep. Chip Roy thinks he can get 10 anti-McCarthy reps to change their tune if ongoing negotiations pan out, according to CNN, citing GOP sources familiar with the internal discussions. Additional detractors may be willing to vote ‘present,’ reducing the number of votes McCarthy needs to succeed. 

  According to the report, the talks between McCarthy allies and holdouts have been the ‘most productive and serious ones to date.’

  *  *  *

  Update (1640ET): The House has adjourned until 8 p.m. ET Wednesday after failing to receive a majority of the vote for a sixth time.

  Rep. Victoria Spartz of Indiana once again voted present, making the threshold for McCarthy to win 217.

  The final tally – which was unchanged from the previous two votes, was:

  • 212 for Jeffries
  • 201 for McCarthy
  • 20 for Donalds
  • 1 present vote

  Update (1620ET): Kevin McCarthy appears set to lose yet another round of voting for House Speaker.

  That said, in a potentially positive development for McCarthy, Rep. Chip Roy said there have been ‘productive’ negotiations over the past two hours, according to CNN, who added that he expects to be part of Wednesday evening negotiations.

  

  Roy added that he is not a ‘hard no’ on McCarthy, and that the GOP conference is “trying to repair that damage today, and progress has been made.”

  CNN is also reporting that Republicans are considering appointing four members each from the pro/anti McCarthy camps to negotiate a path forward.

  One Democratic lawmaker also tells CNN they overheard Rep. Jim Jordan tell members huddled on the House floor that McCarthy wants each side to appoint four members to negotiate after this sixth round of voting for House speaker.

  The huddle came after McCarthy lost a fifth bid to secure the speakership, as a group of 20 Republicans remain opposed to the California Republican for the top position. –CNN

  An earlier version of this report briefly included an statement wrongly attributed to Former President Trump indicating he had withdrawn support for McCarthy. That has been removed and the post updated.

  *  *  *

  Update (1441ET): And just like that, McCarthy loses a the fifth round for House Speaker. The vote was identical to the fourth round.

  Looks like McCarthy lost the fifth round of voting. Stay strong to the Republicans preventing him from becoming house speaker. pic.twitter.com/GDGztkY0jG

  — Sean D Knight (@SeanDKnight) January 4, 2023

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

  According to CNN‘s Manu Raju, Rep. Byron Donalds says he’s spoken with McCarthy and plans to speak with him again today.

  He declined to comment when asked if McCarthy should drop out.

  House Republicans are at a contentious stalemate over who will serve as the next speaker amid what appears to be hardened opposition to McCarthy from a group of 20 conservatives who voted for Donalds in today’s first vote.

  He told CNN that the chief demand is to allow just one member to call for a vote seeking a speaker’s ouster.

  That is down from the five-member threshold that McCarthy has proposed, which is lower than conference rules that sets it at half the conference. -CNN

  Rep Byron Donalds told reporters that he has spoken to Kevin McCarthy and plans to again today. He declined to comment when asked if McCarthy should drop out.
   
  Asked him what he wants: He said his chief demand is to allow just 1 member to call for a vote seeking speaker’s ouster pic.twitter.com/kmwl2pgT38

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 4, 2023

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

  Earlier in the day, GOP Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado says he’s had a “number of conversations” with McCarthy – and told him that he needs to cut a deal with the opposing GOP members or step aside.

  “I said to Kevin at some point, you know, you’ve got to make sure you gotta either cut a deal or you’ve got to give Steve [Scalise] a chance or others a chance to see if they can put it together. My feeling is Kevin gets more votes than anybody else,” Buck told reporters outside the House chamber.

  “There are a few of those 20 that just aren’t going to vote for Kevin McCarthy but would vote for somebody else. There are some of the others … who want changes in the rules and there are some others who care about policy. I think if Steve meets those three needs, he will be able to move forward and take the speakership,” he then told CNN‘s Dana Bash, adding that “today the conference as a whole needs to make a decision” as the House is in a “state of disarray and chaos.“

  *  *  *

  Update (1415ET): And once again, McCarthy lacks the votes in the fifth round.

  *  *  *

  Update (1320ET): McCarthy has officially lost again after a fourth round of voting for Speaker – garnering just 201 votes out of the 218 required. For reference, he received 203 votes in the first round.

  Interestingly, Rep. Victoria Spartz of Indiana, who previously voted for McCarthy, voted ‘present’ in the fourth round.

  Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN) votes “Present” #118thCongress pic.twitter.com/FBmkIYazfU

  — CSPAN (@cspan) January 4, 2023

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

  Democrats voted unanimously (and symbolically) for Rep. Hakeem Jeffries.

  

  According to Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, McCarthy is ‘losing it.’

  McCarthy is losing it.

  He texted one of my colleagues who didn’t vote for him:

  “I am ready to fund an endless war”

  I’m assuming this is in *addition* to Ukraine.

  — Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) January 4, 2023

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

  And now, for the fifth round…

  *  *  *

  Update (1130ET): Kevin McCarthy and his allies are actively discussing adjourning the House until Thursday, but might not even have the votes to pull that off, CNN reports, citing multiple sources.

  

  McCarthy and crew are worried that they could lose more votes if they go to a fourth ballot, which would completely undermine their claims of regaining momentum. At present, they lack the votes to move forward.

  In order to adjourn the House, however, they need 218 votes – which they don’t have.

  Their hope is that furious negotiations that have happened since yesterday evening through this morning have peeled away some of the no-votes and given McCarthy forward momentum ahead of a critical fourth ballot. But, he is still unlikely to get 218 votes on that ballot to win the speakership. 

  Here’s why a vote to adjourn might fail: Voting to adjourn would require 218 votes, and Democratic sources say they would actively whip against a motion to adjourn. Plus some Republicans will likely vote against it as well. -CNN

  If they can’t adjourn, the vote goes to a fourth ballot.

  

  Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), meanwhile, called Trump’s endorsement of McCarthy “Sad!” in a Wednesday statement to Fox News, adding “This changes neither my view of McCarthy, nor Trump, nor my vote.”

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

  Oh – and the Democrats are about to pour salt in McCarthy’s wound if he tries to adjourn.

  House Dems officially whipping NO if Republicans request motion to adjourn.

  Motion expected to fail and we will resume votes for speaker. We are onto ballot #4 pic.twitter.com/1l9YUlbisf

  — Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) January 4, 2023

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

  After yesterday’s chaos at the House, which saw support for Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) increasingly wane throughout three failed votes for Speaker, the House begins Wednesday in a state of crisis.

  

  Roughly 10% of the Republican conference has voted against McCarthy, leaving him 16 votes shy of a win.

  As such, no Speaker means no committees, and no rules. As Punchbowl News notes, “There are members-elect, but the chaos Tuesday prevented any lawmakers from being officially sworn in. Nothing resembling this has occurred in more than a century.”

  Indeed, McCarthy appears to be on the ropes – with 20 GOP lawmakers sitting staunchly opposed to the California lawmaker, led by Reps. Matt Gaetz (FL), Chip Roy (TX) and Scott Perry (PA).

  

  On Tuesday night, Roy appeared on Fox News‘ “Ingraham Angle’ where he accused McCarthy of rejecting a list of conservative demands regarding committee assignments.

  “[McCarthy] turns around and he lies about us. Then he has [Alabama Rep.] Mike Rogers stand up and talk about kicking us off committees. He just burned himself. He just solidified 15 or 20 [members] who were against him,” he said.

  .@chiproytx: “When the leadership actually votes with the…Democrats to steamroll Republicans, which is the past history of our Republican leadership, then MAYBE we should do something different.” pic.twitter.com/5Sy63o9FH9

  — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) January 4, 2023

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

  As Axios‘ Alexi McCammond points out, the ‘nightmare’ scenario Nancy Pelosi faced from ‘The Squad’ in 2019 has become McCarthy’s reality.

  Indeed, McCarthy is scrambling – having dispatched top emissaries late Tuesday to begin negotiating with the group of 20 dissenters. Key allies include Reps. Patrick McHenry (NC), French Hill (AR), Garret Graves (LA.), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and Guy Reschenthaler (PA), who McCarthy hopes can convince his detractors to flip.

  More via Punchbowl News;

  These McCarthy allies were also instructed to share the conservatives’ demands with the entire conference. McHenry, a top leadership lieutenant during the Trump presidency, told us this about his task:

  “Everyone needs to be on the same page about what the needs are for rules and structural changes so we can have Speaker McCarthy elected [Wednesday].”

  Elect a speaker today? We’re not so sure that will happen.

  McHenry is one of the smartest inside players in the House and a potential speaker should McCarthy falter. He and the rest of the McCarthy emissaries are working to socialize exactly what the conservatives want so everyone can “come to terms with getting the 20 [no votes] on board.”

  There is a lot of horse-trading going on right now. Or, as McHenry put it:

  “In a legislative institution, all the gifts of the institution are available when you have a moment like this… It can look as shambolic as you want it to look for as long as possible, but it still gets resolved.”

  One of the keys here is that it’s not only McCarthy and his top aides involved in the talks now – it’s a wider swath of members with different skills and different relationships. The conservatives have a lot of scar tissue with McCarthy. Widening the circle could help with reaching an accord.

  Meanwhile, former President Trump (whose conduct on January 6 McCarthy called “atrocious and totally wrong,” and that he was “inciting people”) gave McCarthy an ALL CAPS ENDORSEMENT, posting to Truth Social;

  

  “Some really good conversations took place last night,” adding “and it’s now time for all of our GREAT Republican House Members to VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL, TAKE THE VICTORY, & WATCH CRAZY NANCY PELOSI FLY BACK HOME TO A VERY BROKEN CALIFORNIA.”

  

  “Kevin McCarthy will do a good job, and maybe even a GREAT JOB – JUST WATCH!” Trump continued, apparently forgiving Kevin for joking in 2016 that Putin was ‘paying Trump.’

  Will Trump’s endorsement speak to Biggs, Gaetz or Chip Roy?

  Not likely.

  “If you want to drain the swamp, you cannot put the biggest alligator in charge of the exercise,” Gaetz said on Tuesday.

  Trump’s biggest weakness was who he picked for key positions during his Presidency.

  — Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) January 4, 2023

  If you want absolutely nothing to change in Washington and nothing to get done, McCarthy’s your man @GOP

  — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) January 4, 2023

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

  *  *  *

  Update (1415ET): And once again, McCarthy lacks the votes in the fifth round.

  *  *  *

  Update (1320ET): McCarthy has officially lost again after a fourth round of voting for Speaker – garnering just 201 votes out of the 218 required. For reference, he received 203 votes in the first round.

  Interestingly, Rep. Victoria Spartz of Indiana, who previously voted for McCarthy, voted ‘present’ in the fourth round.

  Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN) votes “Present” #118thCongress pic.twitter.com/FBmkIYazfU

  — CSPAN (@cspan) January 4, 2023

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

  Democrats voted unanimously (and symbolically) for Rep. Hakeem Jeffries.

  

  According to Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, McCarthy is ‘losing it.’

  McCarthy is losing it.

  He texted one of my colleagues who didn’t vote for him:

  “I am ready to fund an endless war”

  I’m assuming this is in *addition* to Ukraine.

  — Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) January 4, 2023

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

  And now, for the fifth round…

  *  *  *

  Update (1130ET): Kevin McCarthy and his allies are actively discussing adjourning the House until Thursday, but might not even have the votes to pull that off, CNN reports, citing multiple sources.

  

  McCarthy and crew are worried that they could lose more votes if they go to a fourth ballot, which would completely undermine their claims of regaining momentum. At present, they lack the votes to move forward.

  In order to adjourn the House, however, they need 218 votes – which they don’t have.

  Their hope is that furious negotiations that have happened since yesterday evening through this morning have peeled away some of the no-votes and given McCarthy forward momentum ahead of a critical fourth ballot. But, he is still unlikely to get 218 votes on that ballot to win the speakership. 

  Here’s why a vote to adjourn might fail: Voting to adjourn would require 218 votes, and Democratic sources say they would actively whip against a motion to adjourn. Plus some Republicans will likely vote against it as well. -CNN

  If they can’t adjourn, the vote goes to a fourth ballot.

  

  Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), meanwhile, called Trump’s endorsement of McCarthy “Sad!” in a Wednesday statement to Fox News, adding “This changes neither my view of McCarthy, nor Trump, nor my vote.”

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

  Oh – and the Democrats are about to pour salt in McCarthy’s wound if he tries to adjourn.

  House Dems officially whipping NO if Republicans request motion to adjourn.

  Motion expected to fail and we will resume votes for speaker. We are onto ballot #4 pic.twitter.com/1l9YUlbisf

  — Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) January 4, 2023

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

  After yesterday’s chaos at the House, which saw support for Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) increasingly wane throughout three failed votes for Speaker, the House begins Wednesday in a state of crisis.

  

  Roughly 10% of the Republican conference has voted against McCarthy, leaving him 16 votes shy of a win.

  As such, no Speaker means no committees, and no rules. As Punchbowl News notes, “There are members-elect, but the chaos Tuesday prevented any lawmakers from being officially sworn in. Nothing resembling this has occurred in more than a century.”

  Indeed, McCarthy appears to be on the ropes – with 20 GOP lawmakers sitting staunchly opposed to the California lawmaker, led by Reps. Matt Gaetz (FL), Chip Roy (TX) and Scott Perry (PA).

  

  On Tuesday night, Roy appeared on Fox News‘ “Ingraham Angle’ where he accused McCarthy of rejecting a list of conservative demands regarding committee assignments.

  “[McCarthy] turns around and he lies about us. Then he has [Alabama Rep.] Mike Rogers stand up and talk about kicking us off committees. He just burned himself. He just solidified 15 or 20 [members] who were against him,” he said.

  .@chiproytx: “When the leadership actually votes with the…Democrats to steamroll Republicans, which is the past history of our Republican leadership, then MAYBE we should do something different.” pic.twitter.com/5Sy63o9FH9

  — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) January 4, 2023

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

  As Axios‘ Alexi McCammond points out, the ‘nightmare’ scenario Nancy Pelosi faced from ‘The Squad’ in 2019 has become McCarthy’s reality.

  Indeed, McCarthy is scrambling – having dispatched top emissaries late Tuesday to begin negotiating with the group of 20 dissenters. Key allies include Reps. Patrick McHenry (NC), French Hill (AR), Garret Graves (LA.), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and Guy Reschenthaler (PA), who McCarthy hopes can convince his detractors to flip.

  More via Punchbowl News;

  These McCarthy allies were also instructed to share the conservatives’ demands with the entire conference. McHenry, a top leadership lieutenant during the Trump presidency, told us this about his task:

  “Everyone needs to be on the same page about what the needs are for rules and structural changes so we can have Speaker McCarthy elected [Wednesday].”

  Elect a speaker today? We’re not so sure that will happen.

  McHenry is one of the smartest inside players in the House and a potential speaker should McCarthy falter. He and the rest of the McCarthy emissaries are working to socialize exactly what the conservatives want so everyone can “come to terms with getting the 20 [no votes] on board.”

  There is a lot of horse-trading going on right now. Or, as McHenry put it:

  “In a legislative institution, all the gifts of the institution are available when you have a moment like this… It can look as shambolic as you want it to look for as long as possible, but it still gets resolved.”

  One of the keys here is that it’s not only McCarthy and his top aides involved in the talks now – it’s a wider swath of members with different skills and different relationships. The conservatives have a lot of scar tissue with McCarthy. Widening the circle could help with reaching an accord.

  Meanwhile, former President Trump (whose conduct on January 6 McCarthy called “atrocious and totally wrong,” and that he was “inciting people”) gave McCarthy an ALL CAPS ENDORSEMENT, posting to Truth Social;

  

  “Some really good conversations took place last night,” adding “and it’s now time for all of our GREAT Republican House Members to VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL, TAKE THE VICTORY, & WATCH CRAZY NANCY PELOSI FLY BACK HOME TO A VERY BROKEN CALIFORNIA.”

  

  “Kevin McCarthy will do a good job, and maybe even a GREAT JOB – JUST WATCH!” Trump continued, apparently forgiving Kevin for joking in 2016 that Putin was ‘paying Trump.’

  Will Trump’s endorsement speak to Biggs, Gaetz or Chip Roy?

  Not likely.

  “If you want to drain the swamp, you cannot put the biggest alligator in charge of the exercise,” Gaetz said on Tuesday.

  Trump’s biggest weakness was who he picked for key positions during his Presidency.

  — Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) January 4, 2023

  If you want absolutely nothing to change in Washington and nothing to get done, McCarthy’s your man @GOP

  — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) January 4, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 20:52

• How Easy Is It To Become Middle Class?
  How Easy Is It To Become Middle Class?

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  If we want social / economic renewal, we have to make it easy to climb the ladder to middle class security for anyone willing to adopt the values and habits of thrift, prudence, negotiation, and hard work.

  

  Let’s stipulate that the rise of the middle class is the core driver of expansion, innovation and democracy and the decay of the middle class is the core source of economic / political / social disorder and decline.

  The pathway to middle class security has profound social, political and economic consequences. As people acquire means, they can afford more education, and they have a stake in the system that needs to be defended / advocated. This advocacy nurtures a diversity of views, democratic / legal institutions and a free press.

  As the book The Inheritance of Rome detailed, the egalitarian aspects of Roman rule continued to influence everyday life for hundreds of years.

  It took centuries for feudalism to eradicate these holdovers from Roman rule (for example, peasant ownership of land).

  The rise of ths middle class broke the stranglehold of feudalism by encouraging free movement of labor and capital, and strengthening weak central governments to the point that feudal fiefdoms answered to the central government again, as in the Roman and Carolingian eras.

  The key factor that determines the rise of a middle class is the relative ease of laborers becoming middle class. In the classical Roman era, freed slaves often ended up doing very well for themselves and becoming middle class, as the class boundaries were porous enough to enable craftworkers and small merchants to improve their lot in life.

  This boils down to this question: are thrift, prudence, negotiation, and hard work enough to transform a family from penury to middle class?

  If the answer is “yes,” then the ladder to middle class security is open to anyone who adopts these values / habits.

  If the answer is “no,” then the ladder to middle class security is not open to everyone, and the economy stagnates.

  Broadly speaking, virtually anyone who rigorously adopted thrift, prudence, negotiation, and hard work in the fifty years from 1946 to 1995 could (once they married and gained a two-income household) eventually afford a family and a stake in the system–a house and/or small business, a pension, etc.

  Once financialization and globalization rose to dominance and distorted the economy with increasing wealth and income inequality (“winner take most”), this was no longer the case.

  Workers of average skill, motivation and wages who adopt thrift, prudence, negotiation, and hard work can no longer afford a family or a stake in the system–at least in high-cost, enormously unequal locales.

  This is true not just of the U.S. but globally.

  This reality has fueled two trends of decay: 1) a dependence on speculation as the only means to “get ahead” and 2) “laying flat” / “let it rot”–giving up on marrying, having a family and acquiring a stake in the system.

  Once these aspirations are only available to those with the right connections or extraordinary drive / talent, society and the economy decay and collapse under the weight of inequality–an inequality defended by those who made it to the top and want to preserve the status quo as it is.

  This is the driver of decay and collapse: once the elites devote themselves to suppressing adaptations and defending extremes of wealth-income-power inequality that benefit them, the system loses the adaptability that arises from a broad-based middle class.

  The top 10% want the status quo to continue as is, even as the bottom 90% fall behind. When enough of the bottom 90% decide to “let it rot,” the entire structure collapses under its own weight.

  

  If we want social / economic renewal, we have to make it easy to climb the ladder to middle class security for anyone willing to adopt the values and habits of thrift, prudence, negotiation, and hard work. The dominance of a class of self-interested insiders and rentiers precludes this, as this class will expend the last of its resources defending the corrupting inequality that has enriched them so gloriously.

  *  *  *

  This essay was drawn from a weekly Musings Report sent exclusively to subscribers and patrons at the $5/month ($50/year) and higher level. Thank you, patrons and subscribers, for supporting my work and free website.

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century. Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 20:45

• Air Marshals Angry At Biden Admin For 'Menial' Border Tasks While New AQ Threat Emerges
  Air Marshals Angry At Biden Admin For ‘Menial’ Border Tasks While New AQ Threat Emerges

  Judicial Watch says it has obtained a copy of a new intelligence alert first circulated among federal government agencies in December which points to a fresh al-Qaeda threat against the nation. The warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics,” with DHS sources saying the alert was widely circulated on Dec. 31st. 

  The threat alert comes amid reported ongoing tensions among federal air marshals, who have expressed frustration over being sent by DHS for duties to assist US Customs and Border Protection on the ground along the southern border for what they complain are menial tasks, which until recently were supposed to be merely brief voluntary stints. 

  

  The Federal Air Marshal Service is responsible for protecting the flying public by providing armed protection on some commercial flights, in order halt hijackings or other 9/11-style terrorist events, and other threats which could endanger the lives of passengers.

  In wake of the heightened al-Qaeda threat alert, a prominent industry union, the Air Marshal National Council (AMNC), is lashing out – with AMNC Executive Director Sonya Labosco saying the following in a new Fox interview: 

  “It looks absolutely insane,” Labosco told co-host Todd Piro. “We don’t understand why these decisions are being made. The intel is clear. Al Qaeda is watching for our weak areas. Our aviation is a high-risk area. We’re not protecting our aviation domain, and we’re going to the border. It is absolutely madness.”

  The controversy has gone public in the last few months, forcing DHS top officials to address the air marshals’ growing complaints. 

  In early December, an independent journal, Homeland Security Today, summarized the conflict between the marshals and DHS leadership under the Biden administration: 

  Beginning last month, federal air marshals have been assigned to 21-day deployments at the southern border that were previously voluntary assignments. The Transportation Security Administration told the Washington Examiner that claims the air marshals were doing menial tasks on the border are “entirely inaccurate and does not reflect the critical and professional law enforcement role these officers perform.”

  The TSA defended itself further in saying, “Federal Air Marshals are performing law enforcement support to the mission at the southwest border,” according to an official statement. “The TSA Federal Air Marshal Service is a highly valued member of the DHS law enforcement team and has an ever-expanding role within DHS, working closely with other U.S. and international law enforcement agencies to safeguard the nation’s transportation systems,” it said.

  A new threat to America has emerged in an “intelligence alert” obtained by Judicial Watch, which describes a plan to use airplanes to attack, using “new techniques and tactics.” #AlQaeda #September11 #BidenAdministration https://t.co/PQZgUYXnpp

  — The Foreign Desk (@ForeignDeskNews) January 4, 2023

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

  Furthermore union officials sought to intervene and have begun a media pressure campaign, with Judicial Watch explaining the following in its summary of the standoff: 

  Days later the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. In a formal complaint to the DHS Inspector General, the group also accused the Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority. Sending air marshals to El Paso, Texas, San Diego, California, Laredo, Texas, McAllen, Texas, Tucson, Arizona and Yuma, Arizona to transport illegal immigrants and conduct welfare checks has no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security, the complaint states.

  “The statute does not give the Administrator any authority to deploy TSA or FAM employees to the southern border to perform non transportation security related matters,” the complaint to the DHS IG says. “Further, under section (g) the statute describes what the Administrators authority is if an emergency, as defined by the Secretary of Homeland Security, is declared.” The act makes clear that the legislative intent is to only allow TSA to exercise authority and deploy its assets for transportation security, the report to the DHS watchdog confirms.

  In the meantime, the aforementioned union representative LaBosco has highlighted that the air marshals’ work at the border goes beyond what one might think of as menial security tasks. Instead, she describes that air marshals who should be protecting passenger jets in the skies are at places like camps with illegal aliens making sandwiches and running simple errands… “They are making sandwiches for them and driving them around like Uber or picking up supplies.”

  And separately other union representative said of the TSA and DHS, “Either they don’t care about aviation security, or they really think it is secure.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 20:25

• Ninth Circuit Rules That Middle School Teacher's MAGA Hat Was Protected Speech
  Ninth Circuit Rules That Middle School Teacher’s MAGA Hat Was Protected Speech

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  There is a major ruling out of the United States States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in favor of a middle school science teacher, Eric Dodge, who was barred from wearing a “Make America Great Again” baseball cap and later berated by the principal, Caroline Garrett, as a “racist” and a “homophobe.”

  

  The unanimous court ruled that the hat was protected speech under the First Amendment.

  District Court judge James L. Robart ruled against Dodge and dismissed the case in its entirety.  (Robart is the judge who was publicly denounced by former President Trump).  Robart dismissed the case on the grounds of qualified immunity or a failure to substantiate claims.

  The Ninth Circuit reversed Robart, but it did uphold the dismissal of the case against two defendants, the Evergreen Public Schools district and the district’s Chief Human Resources Officer Jenae Gomes.

  Eric Dodge had only recently been assigned to the school after he recovered from a stroke. He is a 17-year veteran of the Evergreen district. He told Garrett that he wore the hat because he had sensitive spots on his scalp that had to be protected from the sun. He also said that he agreed with the message of the hat. Garrett said that the hat represented hate and prejudice to many others.

  Garrett’s view of the MAGA hat as a symbol of hate has been fueled in the media by various leaders, particularly President Joe Biden who was denounced for his attacks on “MAGA Republicans” in his Philadelphia speech. We have also seen students and others attacked for wearing the hats. At Fordham University, a coffee shop banned the wearing of the hats.

  Dodge wore the bright-red “MAGA” to a cultural sensitivity training. He actually did not wear the hat in the training session with around 60 people but put it  on the table or next to him. Nevertheless, some attendees complained that they felt “intimidated” and “threatened” by Dodge’s decision to have the hat with him.

  The choice of headwear did not go over well with Garrett in particular:

  “The first day, Principal Garrett, who was Dodge’s supervisor, told him that he needed to use “better judgment” and not have his MAGA hat at Wy’east. The second day, she called him a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, and a liar, and swore at him for having his MAGA hat with him again. By itself, such criticism or “bad-mouthing” does not constitute an adverse employment action sufficient for a First Amendment retaliation claim. … Principal Garrett also has First Amendment rights after all. See id. (“It would be the height of irony, indeed, if mere speech, in response to speech, could constitute a First Amendment violation.”). But Principal Garrett went beyond criticizing Dodge’s political views. She suggested that disciplinary action could occur if she saw Dodge with his hat again by referencing the need for union representation: “The next time I see you with that hat, you need to have your union rep. Bring your rep because I’ll have my own.” It is hardly controversial that threatening a subordinate’s employment if they do not stop engaging in protected speech is reasonably likely to deter that person from speaking. … Principal Garrett claims that she was “[s]imply advising Mr. Dodge of his right to have a representative at any future conversations about the hat,” which is his right under his collective bargaining agreement. This characterization undersells the import and implications that a reasonable employee would attribute to such a statement.”

  The Ninth Circuit ruled that the school district failed to show evidence of a “tangible disruption” to school operations that would outweigh the teacher’s First Amendment rights.

  Notably, there was “no general prohibition on political speech” when Garrett told Dodge he could not bring his MAGA hat to school. His counsel noted that Garrett allowed a Black Lives Matter poster to hang in the library and had a Bernie Sanders bumper sticker on her car.

  The Ninth Circuit correctly ruled in favor of Dodge. It found:

  “Dodge’s speech was his display of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign slogan on a red hat. The content of this speech is quintessentially a matter of public concern. The messages of candidates for public office are not only newsworthy; they inherently relate to the ‘political, social, or other concern to the community.” Lane, 573 U.S. at 241 … Indeed, Principal Garrett and others viewed Dodge’s hat as a comment on issues such as immigration, racism, and bigotry, which are all matters of public concern. … And regardless of Dodge’s intent, the MAGA hat has an obvious political nature.”

  We have previously discussed court rulings against employees who insisted on wearing political hats or symbols at work.  The Ninth Circuit distinguished this case where a teacher was not in class or interacting with students:

  “Here, Dodge had no official duty to wear the MAGA hat, and it was not required to perform his job. Nor did he wear the hat in school with students. That distinguishes this case from other cases involving speech in schools where the speech was reasonably viewed by students and parents as officially promoted by the school. … Where Dodge was not taking ‘advantage of his position to press his particular views upon the impressionable and ‘captive’ minds before him,’ Poway Unified Sch. Dist., 658 F.3d at 968, but rather was displaying a message on a personal item while attending a teacher-only training, we have little trouble concluding that he was engaging in expression as a private citizen, not a public employee.

  Because the undisputed facts demonstrate that Dodge’s MAGA hat conveyed a message of public concern and he was acting as a private citizen in expressing that message, we conclude that Dodge was engaged in speech protected by the First Amendment.”

  The Ninth Circuit was clearly correct in finding the hat to be protected speech. What is concerning is the lack of any discipline for Garrett or others who sought to prevent opposing political views from being expressed by teachers. The denial of free speech should be treated as seriously as other abuses. There should be consequences for administrators who discriminate on the basis on race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or political viewpoints. This was a denial of First Amendment rights that should warrant some adverse action for those responsible in the school district.

  While Garrett chastised Dodge to use “better judgment” in the future, the question is whether she or other administrators will do so in light of this ruling. They showed terrible judgment in attacking Dodge over his political views. Others showed equally bad judgment in litigating this case rather than settling the matter with Dodge.

  This ruling will certainly create clear guidelines for the future, but the case also shows the sense of license of many teachers in curtailing the rights of others with opposing political views. That sense of license will continue despite this ruling if there are no consequences for denying free speech rights.

  Here is the opinion: Dodge v. Evergreen District

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 20:05

• Two Charged In Christmas Day Attacks On Washington Power Grid
  Two Charged In Christmas Day Attacks On Washington Power Grid

  Two men have been hit with federal charges of conspiracy to damage energy facilities, over a Christmas Day attack on four electrical substations in Washington state. That charge carries a punishment of up to 20 years in prison. 

  Matthew Greenwood, 32, and Jeremy Crahan, 40, were arrested on Saturday and charged with breaking into the substations near Tacoma and tampering with power switches in a move that disconnected some 15,000 people from their electrical supply while inflicting $3 million in damage that may take up to 36 months to repair.  

  

  This doesn’t appear to have been an attack with political motivations. Authorities say Greenwood confessed that the scheme was aimed at facilitating their burglary of a business. Having knocked out the power, the duo allegedly traveled to the place of business, drilled out a lock and emptied the cash register.  

  Greenwood was also charged with illegally possessing a short-barreled shotgun and short-barreled rifle.  The shotgun sounds like an oldie: It’s a Sears, Roebuck and Company shotgun with no serial number, according to the charging document. Serial numbers have been broadly required to be placed on firearms since 1968. The rifle is a Remington and appeared to have been equipped with a home-made silencer that leaned heavy on duct tape. 

  

  The two alleged criminals, both Puyallup residents, were tracked down using cell phone tower data, and matching their pickup truck to security camera video. The targeted substations are dozens of miles apart, and more than 12 hours passed between the first and last attack. Greenwood said he used bolt cutters provided by Crahan. 

  “We have seen attacks such as these increase in Western Washington and throughout the country and must treat each incident seriously,” said US Attorney Nick Brown in a statement. “The outages on Christmas left thousands in the dark and cold and put some who need power for medical devices at extreme risk.”

  Meanwhile, investigators have yet to make any arrests in a more destructive attack on the power grid in Moore County, North Carolina on Dec. 3. In that incident, two substations came under gunfire, causing a loss of power to more than 35,000 customers during a week when temperatures dipped to 30 degrees.  A $75,000 reward has been offered.

  Following that attack, there was widespread speculation that the perpetrators intended intended to cut power to a controversial drag show that was scheduled to start in the sleepy town of Southern Pines about the same time as the attack.   

  A nationwide increase in attacks on power facilities prompted the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last month to call for an evaluation of the physical security of America’s electric grid.  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 19:45

• Is There A Way To Stop Inflation Without Crushing The Economy And Killing The Dollar?
  Is There A Way To Stop Inflation Without Crushing The Economy And Killing The Dollar?

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  One of the most dishonest games being played in economics today is the attempt by various groups (political and financial) to deflect blame for the rise of inflation. The Biden White House and Democrats desperately want to blame Russia and the war in Ukraine, even though inflation was spiking long before the war ever started. The Federal Reserve pretended for years that inflation was not a threat at all despite numerous alternative economists warning what would happen. Now they blame supply chain disruptions instead of their own monetary policies. The GOP wants to blame Biden alone for the crisis while ignoring the dominant role of the Fed in the economy (and their unilateral power) over the course of multiple presidencies.

  

  In the alternative sphere there are some people that try to deny the fact that there is more than one type of inflation. They want to claim it’s all about money creation, but this is simply not true. There is inflation in money supply, but there is also price inflation caused by numerous factors including bottlenecks in production, bottlenecks in resources, bottlenecks in shipping, bottlenecks in energy, etc. Anyone that denies this fact is blinded by bias or just doesn’t understand how inflation really works.

  Overall, it’s fair according to the evidence to put MOST of the blame on the central banks and their 14 year program of bailouts and QE policies. If you have read my previous articles on the Fed’s involvement you know that my position has remained the same for years – I predicted a stagflationary crisis based on the position that that the Fed was deliberately creating a monetary disaster to make way for a new digital currency system tied to a global framework, and this is exactly what has happened so far.

  That said, too much money chasing too few goods is not the only problem we face as a nation. There is also the issue of global interdependency and our reliance on other countries, some of them hostile, for production and resources. With supply chain disruptions an ever present danger, it’s not enough to focus on money velocity and the central bank alone – We won’t be solving the crisis that way.

  Not to mention, the more the federal reserve raises interest rates the more it costs to support US government debt, which is already well beyond US GDP. If doubts rise over the US being unable to pay for its treasury debts, then foreign creditors may dump their T-bond and dollar holding entirely. This could destroy the buying power of the dollar.

  In the liberty movement there is always debate about solutions. We all seem to agree on the core problems but can’t ever seem to agree on what to do about them.

  There are those that suggest there’s nothing that can be done economically except prepare and wait for collapse so we can rebuild once the dust has settled. I find myself in this camp more often than not. Then there are those that believe a political approach is possible. After nearly half the states in the US blocked the covid mandates and lockdowns, I am starting to think solutions at the state level might be viable. Then there are those that want to build an alternative system, a parallel economy that competes with the mainstream economy.

  This is something I have discussed for a long time – It’s the reason I started Alt-Market 12 years ago. It’s the ideal solution because it is proactive. Instead of waiting around for other people to fix the crisis for us, regular people simply establish their own trade and production systems based on necessities, separating from the dying economy so that when it collapses they are mostly unaffected.

  This, however, is a short term solution in that large scale domestic production is eventually needed to return a country and economy to greater prosperity. Growing gardens, making trade items and forming local barter markets is only a way to weather the storm; it is not a long term path to fiscal health. What we need is locally based large scale production of necessities as well as our own domestic resource discovery.

  In order to fight back against monetary decline the US needs to produce a majority of its own goods again. If the problem is too much money chasing too few goods, then we can make our own goods here at home instead of relying on countries like China and the unstable global supply chain.

  But what if there is an answer beyond domestic production alone? What if we built an economy which focuses on QUALITY? It’s a notion that might have been suggested by others, but it is certainly not being promoted by any economist within the mainstream or any political representative.

  The Quality Economy As A Means To Fight Inflation?

  Consider this for a moment: What if home based producers were given incentives by states (such as a jubilee on taxes) to manufacture high quality long lasting goods? There are multiple reasons why this model is not being used, all of them faulty.

  Carbon control initiatives in the west are actually forcing companies to produce lower quality goods with substandard designs in the name of “saving the environment.” But, if products are low quality and are breaking sooner because of carbon control standards, then people have to go out and buy replacement goods sooner. More retail demand means more manufacturing which means more “carbon pollution” over time. The carbon emissions narrative is complete nonsense and there’s no proof whatsoever that man-made carbon causes climate change, but even by the logic of the carbon lobby quality production makes more sense for the environment. At the very least it means less waste.

  Remember when a washing machine used to last for many years? Remember when a lawnmower or a chainsaw was made from quality metal parts instead of being loaded with plastic parts? Remember how grandma had the same working vacuum for decades? Quality used to be a thing, but the idea has been erased from modern economic theory.

  Today, it’s all about quantity, because quantity makes a bigger profit (as long as prices remain low and people have the money to buy multiples of an item). If items break constantly it means they need to be replaced constantly, which means companies make more money. In fact, there are many corporations that deliberately design products to break quickly so that consumers must buy another. This method does not work in an inflationary environment; it actually adds to the problem by forcing more money velocity and reducing the number of functional goods in the system.

  Let’s say that instead we had numerous manufacturers that operate within the US and they are offered a tax jubilee for as long as they are willing to produce high quality long lasting models of their products. With the tax incentives, they could market such goods at a lower price in order to compete with poor quality goods from places like China. Now, you have given the public access to items that they only need to replace every 5 years, or 10 years, instead of every 12 months.

  But what about food, which is a major part of the inflation problem? Well, the federal government actually pays farmers to grow LESS food in order to keep prices higher on commodities markets. Why not simply stop doing that? Or, again, states could offer tax incentives to farmers that produce with the effort to drive down prices, and state governments could offer to buy excess long term foods like wheat as a form of strategic reserve. America used to do this; why don’t we do it anymore?

  And how about housing? Simple – Ban foreign purchases of property and only allow American citizens to buy American land. American citizens have a right to private property under the constitution. Foreign investors and governments do not have that right.

  The goal of each of these policies would be to free up supply without killing the buying power of the dollar and without deliberately crushing credit markets and triggering mass job losses.

  In this environment money velocity slows down and there are more goods on the market because they last longer. Savings go up because people don’t need to spend as often. Prices in general start to go down. Inflation is subdued and eventually defeated, because what is money other than a means to provide necessities and amenities? If those goods last longer then money becomes less relevant to the health of the economy.

  What about deflation?  Would high quality production lead to far less sales and a big drop in jobs?  In America’s current 70% service-based economy, yes, for a time.  But, this is going to happen soon anyway as the Fed hikes rates and stifles access to credit.  With my plan, service jobs would be exchanged over time for better paying manufacturing and engineering jobs. 

  To be sure, there is the argument that quality goods and more savings could lead to decadent spending. In other words, there is the theory that the more money people have the more they will spend on frivolity and this might keep inflation alive. The problem is we have not lived in an economy based on quality for several decades, so it’s hard to say how people will react. If people have long lasting items and are secure in their basic necessities, then what is compelling them to spend with wild abandon? Not much.

  The establishment would like to keep the public dependent on the system by reducing our buying power and controlling access to goods. I suspect that they will one day offer the same kind of solution – A return to quality. But only at the price of subservience. The World Economic Forum’s “Shared Economy” concept which they clearly plan to introduce after there is a major financial collapse would require quality based production, other wise it would fail miserably. If everyone in the world is going to be sharing everything and private property is outlawed, then the goods that are shared would have to be designed to last.

  My suggestion is that we circumvent the establishment entirely and create our own economic model, still based in private property but also adapted to quality production. And, we manufacture all our goods locally within our own states and our own country. I believe this would end inflation, not just today, but for all time.

  Will the establishment allow such a system to thrive? They would certainly try to stop it from happening using any means they have available. Decentralization and abundance are the enemies of authoritarianism.  My point is, there is indeed a solution. We don’t need Fed intervention. We don’t need sky high interest rates. We don’t need stimulus. We don’t need government oppression or foreign interventions. We don’t need globalist centralization or a Great Reset. We don’t need any of it.

  They will try to convince you that we do.

  Regardless of what happens the public must be made aware that there is a better way.

  *  *  *

  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
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 19:25

• Hiring Is Finally Getting Easier For Small Businesses
  Hiring Is Finally Getting Easier For Small Businesses

  The residual hiring drought that occurred as a result of the government’s genius plan to literally pay people to stay home and do nothing during the pandemic looks to finally be passing, according to small business owners.

  Several small business owners were profiled by the Wall Street Journal this week and described a once-difficult hiring climate (where, you guessed it, no one wanted to come back to work) as easing. 

  “Raising pay, adding apprenticeship programs and rewriting job ads,” are three things that employers are doing to help maintain the interest. 

  Chief Executive Officer of UnaliWear, Inc., Jean Anne Booth told the WSJ about the hiring climate over the last year: “They would ghost us. They would accept the job, show up one week, and never show up again.” This fall they increased the starting pay they were offering and say that now, “for the first time in a while”, they are “fully staffed”. 

  Surveys show that the easing appears to be consistent across industries:

  Nearly 25% of the more than 650 entrepreneurs in the December survey said it was easier to fill job openings now than at the start of 2022—an increase from 18% in November. Meanwhile, 20% said it was harder to fill open positions, down from 25% in November. The survey is conducted for the Journal by Vistage Worldwide Inc., a business-coaching and peer-advisory firm. 

  Dale Lemmons, owner of Signature Transport Inc. and Interstate Wood Products Inc., told The Journal: “We have seen it be a little easier, mostly because some of our competitors are slowing down. It’s not quite the hot job market it was.”

  

  His company has boosted pay for entry level drivers by 20% and by 40% for drivers with at least 3 years of experience. The pay hikes have helped entice talent and retain drivers: he has seen about 25 of his workers go through a paid apprenticeship program and 7 additional employees are in training.

  Chip Ridge, president of Millennial Title in Louisville, Ky., is also optimistic, telling The Journal: “There’s a lot of pretty high-level talent in our industry that’s being displaced as part of this shift in the economy. There’s potentially an opportunity for us to acquire some really experienced talent that in a normalized market we would never have the opportunity to get.”

  “There were definitely more candidates, but we’re still not seeing the right candidates,” said another small business owner in East Brunswick, New Jersey. 

  One industry that has definitely seen hiring get easier has been restaurants and bars, which we wrote about just days ago after the WSJ profiled that industry specifically. Restaurants and bars have “nearly doubled” their employee counts from the pandemic lows in April 2020, the note said. The industry added 62,000 jobs over the past month alone.

  However, one must also keep in mind that, as we have been saying for months, these are usually the first stops for people working 9 to 5 salaried jobs who have been laid off due to the Fed’s cohesive and calculated plans to strategically napalm the U.S. economy in order to get inflation lower.

  Nevertheless, many recent hires are “returning to the restaurant industry after forsaking it earlier in the pandemic’ the report says. It’s amazing what happens when your newfangled crypto trading empire, established some time between 2020 and 2022, goes bust when its top two positions – dogecoin and Tesla call options – turn out to be worthless. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 19:05

• Zero COVID Ends But Zero Sense Continues
  Zero COVID Ends But Zero Sense Continues

  Authored by Debbie Lerman via The Brownstone Institute,

  China decided to finally drop its disastrous draconian zero-Covid policies. In response, major Western news outlets have revealed how completely and absolutely nonsensical their coverage of the pandemic in China has been from the very beginning.

  

  A front-page article in The New York Times from December 30, 2022, is a perfect example. The title: “How Bad is China’s Covid Outbreak? It’s a Scientific Guessing Game” seemingly makes sense. As the subhead explains, there is an “absence of credible information from the Chinese government,” so it’s difficult to figure out what’s actually going on.

  The rest of the article belies the notion that anything resembling sense has informed the reporters and editors at this once venerable newspaper of record.

  Let’s look at the claims in the article, starting with the first paragraph:

  As Covid barrels through China, scientists around the world are searching for clues about an outbreak with sprawling consequences – for the health of hundreds of millions of Chinese people, the global economy and the future of the pandemic.

  Here are the unproven – and, according to the headline and subhead of this article unprovable, – assumptions underlying these claims:

  1) Covid is barreling through China. Says who? If there is no reliable data coming out of the country, how do we know there’s any barreling going on? The word “barrels” is linked to a New York Times article about the confusion and chaos following the end of zero Covid policies. No proof of barreling.

  2) The unproven outbreak has sprawling consequences – why? The rest of the world has gone back more or less to normal, post-pandemic functioning, and China is attempting to do the same. Even if there are hundreds of millions of Covid cases in China, we know that the overall Covid mortality rate is extremely low in all except the elderly and infirm, and as Western media (including the NYT) reported ad nauseum in 2020, China built lots of extra capacity, so no reason to imagine its hospitals will be overrun.

  Next paragraph:

  But in the absence of credible information from the Chinese government, it is a big scientific guessing game to determine the size and severity of the surge in the world’s most populous country.

  The overarching assumption in this paragraph, and in the entire article, is that there is a fundamental “absence of credible information from the Chinese government.” Again, this assumption makes sense, given what we know about the Chinese government’s manipulation of information to serve its various agendas. It means that whatever China’s leaders say about the pandemic in their country is not credible.

  Yet just a few paragraphs down, the article makes these astonishing claims:

  Until this month, the world seemed to have a reasonably clear understanding of what was happening with the virus in China. The ruling Communist Party proudly published low daily case numbers and deaths as a testament to its stringent ‘zero Covid’ policy. A countrywide system of lockdowns, quarantines and mass testing largely kept the virus at bay.

  But in early December, the government abruptly abandoned ‘zero Covid,’ leaving the scientific community largely in the dark.

  Wait, what?

  When they were pursuing the clearly unattainable, unscientific and incredibly destructive zero Covid policies, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was completely credible, and all the data they published was 100 percent reliable? For example, this data, as presented in Michael Senger’s excellent article on this subject:

  

  In case there’s any doubt: This graph, based on the data reported by the CCP, shows no Covid deaths in China for two years, starting in March 2020. It means that, while the entire world was affected by an extremely contagious respiratory virus that caused millions of deaths, one country of 1.4 billion people managed to avoid it completely. That is the data that The New York Times and the scientific community deemed credible.

  Then, suddenly, when the CCP decided to stop with the terrible, misguided, and destructive policies, their reported data is not credible and scientists are “in the dark” about what’s happening in China?

  The absurdity of these claims is so glaring, it should discredit anything anyone has to say about the data from China now, if they do not acknowledge that it was equally incredible from the very beginning.

  One cannot help but wonder: where are the fact checkers when such levels of misinformation and blatant fear-mongering are published on the front page of The New York Times?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 18:45

• Baltic Index Crashes Most On Record As Recession Alarm Flashes
  Baltic Index Crashes Most On Record As Recession Alarm Flashes

  The Baltic Exchange’s dry bulk sea freight index crashed on Tuesday in the worst decline on record, sinking on prospects of a global recession. 

  Commodity Corner | Baltic Dry Index sees its biggest one-day decline since 1984. @Manisha3005 explains why pic.twitter.com/HcHFcGOsTT

  — CNBC-TV18 (@CNBCTV18News) January 4, 2023

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

  Baltic Dry Good Index is a measure of global shipping and economic health. The overall index, which tracks rates for capesize, panamax, and supramax shipping vessels carrying dry bulk commodities, plunged 17.5% to $1,250, the most significant daily decline since 1984. 

  

  The drop comes days after International Monetary Fund Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva warned on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ in an interview aired on Sunday that a third of the global economy will be in recession this year. 

  Meanwhile, JPMorgan Global Composite PMI shows worldwide economic business conditions slid into contraction territory last August. 

  

  Lumber, copper, and crude are three industrial commodities that send warning signals about impending global economic turmoil. All three are well off their highs. Looking at broad commodity indexes via Bloomberg, the peak in ag, energy, and industrial metals appeared to be last summer. 

  

  With a gloomy economic outlook and flashing alarms from the world of shipping and commodities, recession risks are elevated this year as central bankers aggressively hike into a downturn. What could possibly go wrong?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 18:25

• Health Care Workers Cry Foul On FDA Claiming It Didn’t Prohibit Ivermectin For COVID-19
  Health Care Workers Cry Foul On FDA Claiming It Didn’t Prohibit Ivermectin For COVID-19

  Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Dr. Yusuf Saleeby has practiced medicine for more than 30 years. He serves patients in South Carolina and until recently had never faced an investigation from his state medical board.

  

  But after Saleeby started prescribing ivermectin to his patients, he was reported to the board, which opened an investigation, despite the state’s attorney general’s promise that his office wouldn’t prosecute doctors who prescribed off-label medications.

  Jennifer Wright, a nurse practitioner and clinical director who practices in Florida, but can prescribe across state lines, told The Epoch Times she received a letter from the Office of the Attorney General of New York ordering her not to prescribe ivermectin.

  “You know, basically threatened me. If I don’t stop prescribing, then they’re going to fine me,” Wright said about the letter, which threatened legal action with fines of up to $5,000 per violation.

  The letter stated that the Food and Drug Administration only authorized ivermectin for use in humans when treating “parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea.”

  The citation in the letter appears to be from an FDA advisory issued in March 2021 titled “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”

  That advisory and other anti-ivermectin messaging from the FDA are now the subject of a lawsuit brought by three doctors against the agency. The doctors argue that the FDA illegally interfered with their ability to treat patients. The suit was dismissed but an appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs.

  During a hearing in 2022, attorneys defending the government argued that the agency’s missives were just a recommendation.

  “They did not say it’s prohibited or it’s unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe ivermectin,” Isaac Belfer, one of the lawyers for the government, said during a Nov. 1, 2022, hearing in federal court in Texas.

  The government’s arguments differ greatly from the reality many doctors faced for prescribing ivermectin. Some lost their jobs, others were investigated by state medical boards, and many received threats from the New York attorney general because they were prescribing across state lines.

  Matthew Dark, a spokesperson for Roots Medical and Colorado Healthcare Providers for Freedom, which has more than 275 physicians in the group, stated that several doctors in Colorado are facing investigations by the state medical board.

  When asked about the FDA’s new claim, Dark stated: “They knew it was safe for humans, and they made that very accusatory thing if you were a doctor prescribing this, you were an idiot. You were practicing like a hillbilly. So that message was loud and clear.”

  Dark referred to Twitter posts from the FDA, one of which said: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

  “Pharmacies were responding to the practice and providers trying to write [ivermectin] the same way the FDA was behaving,” Dark said.

  Wright concurred, and pointing to her letter from the New York attorney general, said, “It clearly states in this letter that according to the FDA, you must cease and desist in prescribing ivermectin to New York State residents.”

  

  Dr. Miguel Antonatos, a board-certified internal medicine physician who practices out of Illinois, but can prescribe to other states, told The Epoch Times via email that he, too, received a letter from the New York attorney general.

  Nicole Sirotek is a registered nurse and founder of American Frontline Nurses, a patient advocacy network that boasts 22,000 nurses. She told The Epoch Times that her nurses often work with doctors in hospital settings.

  At the height of the pandemic, Sirotek said patients would reach out to her advocacy network and beg for ivermectin, either for themselves or their loved ones dying in the hospital.

  She stated that in five separate instances, doctors were fired or forced to resign for prescribing ivermectin as a home medication for nurses to administer in hospitals.

  “That happened five times, and each physician was fired. That’s five physicians in five different states and five different hospital systems.”

  Julie McCabe, a registered nurse and director of advocacy services for American Frontline Nurses, told The Epoch Times that the above doctors include Dr. Edith Behr in Pennsylvania, Dr. John Witcher in Mississippi, Dr. Mary Bowden in Texas, Dr. Robert Karas in Arkansas, and Dr. Paul Marik in Virginia. Bowden and Marik are two of the three doctors suing the FDA over its stance on ivermectin.

  Bowden told The Epoch Times that Houston Methodist Hospital suspended her for merely writing on Twitter about ivermectin, and she had to overcome “numerous obstacles” when prescribing it to patients.

  “The FDA was the key creator of these hurdles when it launched a social media campaign stating that ivermectin is dangerous and only for horses. When faced with a lawsuit, the FDA now claims it was merely making suggestions—suggestions that have threatened my ability to practice medicine and more importantly, interfered with life-saving early treatment of COVID patients,” Bowden said.

  Sirotek said members of the group Team Halo targeted her because of her stance on ivermectin. The group describes itself as “volunteer scientists and healthcare professionals from around the world, working to end this pandemic by contributing our time to address concerns and public health misinformation.”

  Members of the group filed several complaints to Nevada’s state medical board, which Sirotek said costs her $5,000 per complaint to fight.

  With tears streaming from her eyes, Sirotek said she’d also received death threats, pictures of her house, and threats to murder her children. Sirotek provided copies of these threats to The Epoch Times. Team Halo didn’t respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

  

  Pushback Begins

  In the spring of 2020, with COVID-19 spreading like wildfire through the population, finding a viable treatment was paramount in many doctors’ minds. And as no drug was approved to treat the novel virus, they turned to off-label use, a standard medical practice even in non-pandemic times.

  In March 2020, a group of leading critical care specialists joined forces and formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Their mission was to examine different therapies and drugs and recommend possible COVID-19 treatments based on best medical practices and emerging data.

  Almost immediately, ivermectin was put forward as a possible treatment. First approved for human use in 1987 and dispensed billions of times since then, ivermectin is traditionally prescribed to treat parasites. But it’s safe and was already known to have an effect on viruses.

  “This is a medication that is safer than Tylenol, safer than stuff we sell over the counter,” Wright said.

  Saleeby agreed.

  “[Ivermectin is] probably one of the most prescribed drugs. It’s given out like candy in Sub-Saharan Africa and Amazon basin or anywhere around water. … It’s doled out to children and pregnant women. … As far as safety, it’s probably safer than baby aspirin. It’s probably the safest drug on the planet, to be honest.

  “I was using [ivermectin] sporadically in some of my Lyme patients. It’s effective against Lyme. We knew it had effectivity against viruses and other pathogens like Borrelia and Babesia.”

  

  Sirotek told The Epoch Times that, especially as the Delta strain increased hospitalizations and deaths in the United States, she and several nurses questioned why some countries seemingly remained unaffected. The answer, she believes, was widespread ivermectin use.

  At first, prescribing ivermectin and obtaining it from a regular pharmacy wasn’t an issue, Wright said. More importantly, it worked.

  “We started using it very early on, and I could prescribe it to the pharmacy. I would prescribe it according to the FLCCC recommendations because they were the ones doing the research. I was just validating that, you know, this has some real stuff behind it.”

  When the pandemic began, ivermectin as an effective treatment was primarily a theory. But as health care workers reported that it worked, more and more studies were conducted to back up those early successes.

  There have been 189 ivermectin COVID-19 studies, according to the aggregate site C19ivm.org. Of those studies, 139 have been peer-reviewed, and 93 compare treatment and control groups.

  In the 93 studies, which had more than 133,838 patients in 27 countries, there were “statistically significant improvements are seen for mortality, ventilation, ICU admission, hospitalization, recovery, cases, and viral clearance,” a real-time meta-analysis states.

  Simply put, as health care workers saw firsthand that ivermectin worked in their practices, studies were simultaneously confirming the medicine’s effectiveness.

  Dr. Peter Raisanen, a naturopathic medical doctor in Arizona, said that once he started his patients on ivermectin, they typically started feeling better within a few days.

  “It seemed like it was within three to four days, like they [started feeling] better,” Raisanen told The Epoch Times.

  Raisanen said he treated about 200 patients with ivermectin, and none died. Almost all stayed out of the hospital. That’s an experience several doctors attested to witnessing.

  “We’ve probably collectively [at Roots Medical], treated 1,000 people with early COVID,” Dark said.

  He said that when a patient was treated early on in their illness, there was a clear improvement—often within hours.

  “It’s within two hours of that first dose that people start feeling noticeably better. And within two days, most symptoms are gone. Again, this is with starting early treatment, say days one to three, one to four, of infection or symptoms,” Dark said.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/04/2023 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• We've Reached Peak Zelensky. Now What?
  We’ve Reached Peak Zelensky. Now What?

  Authored by Robert Freeman via Common Dreams,

  When the president of the poorest, most corrupt nation in Europe is feted with multiple standing ovations by the combined Houses of Congress, and his name invoked in the same breath as Winston Churchill, you know we’ve reached Peak Zelensky.

  It’s a farcical, almost psychotic over-promotion, probably surpassed only by the media’s shameful, hyperbolic railroading of the country into war with Iraq, in 2003. Paraphrasing Gertrude from Hamlet, “Methinks the media doth hype too much.”

  

  Let’s remember that before ascending to his country’s presidency, Volodymyr Zelensky’s greatest claim to fame was that he could play the piano with his penis. I’m not joking. And he ran on a platform to unite his country for peace, and for making amends with Russia. Again, I’m not joking.

  Now, he’s Europe’s George Washington, FDR, and Douglas MacArthur all rolled into one and before whom the mighty and powerful genuflect. Please. The only place to go from here is down. And, that is surely coming. Soon.

  Consider some inconvenient facts that the fawning media, which is essentially the public relations arm of the weapons industry, doesn’t want you to know.

  The European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, recently let slip that the Ukrainian army has lost more than 100,000 troops in the eight months since the beginning of the war. Over the nine-year span of the Vietnam War, the U.S. with a population six times that of Ukraine, lost a total of 58,220 men.

  In other words, on a per day, per capita basis, Ukraine is losing soldiers at a rate 141 TIMES that of U.S. losses in Vietnam. The U.S. lost the public on Vietnam when middle class white boys began coming home in body bags. Does anybody with half a brain believe such losses in Ukraine are sustainable? Does anybody have another plan to avert such slaughter?

  Von der Leyen is among the shrewdest public figures in the world. What she is doing is laying the predicate for Western withdrawal from Ukraine and ending the War. If you look at the facts on the ground, not the boosterish propaganda ladled out by the media, you can understand why.

  In a matter of weeks, Russia, with its hypersonic missiles, destroyed half of Ukraine’s electrical power infrastructure. This, as winter is coming on. It can just as easily take out the other half, effectively bombing Ukraine back into the Stone Age. Is that what anybody wants?

  The startling, indeed, terrifying part of this is that neither Ukraine nor the West have any defense against these hypersonic missiles. They travel so fast, and on variable trajectories, they cannot be shot down, even by the most advanced Western systems. They represent one of the greatest asymmetries in deliverable destructive power in the history of warfare, probably dwarfed only by the U.S.’s possession of atomic bombs at the end of World War II.

  This week, Ursula von der Leyen, an EU official, released and deleted a video where she said that Ukraine had lost 100,000 troops, unconfirmed data that Ukraine claims is classified.

  She later re-released a video with the casualty estimate edited out.pic.twitter.com/daAfRPRIQs

  — MintPress News (@MintPressNews) December 1, 2022

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

  Again, there is no effective defense against them. The Russians have them. The Ukrainians don’t. Game over. Can you understand why leaders in the West are beginning to wake up?

  On the conventional front, the Ukrainians are having trouble securing even conventional weapons to defend themselves. U.S. arms suppliers are working around the clock to replace their own stocks and the stocks that European countries have given to Ukraine. But the backlog is running into years. A recent headline from The Wall Street Journal stated, “Europe is Rushing Arms to Ukraine but Running Out of Ammo.”

  Finally, the U.S. has committed $112 billion to Ukraine. That includes $45 billion just slipped into the omnibus funding bill against the likelihood that a Republican-controlled House will cut such funding, almost certainly substantially.

  That’s more than $10 billion per month since the war started in February. And that doesn’t even count the subsidies, both material and financial, from the EU which amount to billions of dollars more per month.

  Without such subsidies, Zelensky would not have lasted a month in the war. How many hours do you think he is going to last once that flow dries up? And it surely is.

  The Europeans are coming to realize that their continent is being de-industrialized, literally moved backwards an entire epoch in economic terms, because of their willingness to serve as the doormat for the U.S.’ imperial war against Russia. Not even they, with their supine fealty to U.S. domination, are willing to commit collective economic suicide on behalf of the U.S.

  France’s Macron and Germany’s Scholz are suggesting that accommodations to Russian interests must be devised in order to bring about a peaceful settlement of the war.

  Macron suggested in a television address to his nation that an antagonized Russia is not in the security interests of Europe. “We need to prepare what we are ready to do…to give guarantees to Russia the day it returns to the negotiating table.”

  Scholz was even more specific. In an article in Foreign Affairs he declared, “We have to go back to the agreements which we had in the last decades and which were the basis for peace and security order in Europe.”

  This is a direct repudiation of the U.S.’s maximalist position before the start of the War, that Russia’s security needs were of no interest to a marauding NATO.

  Even U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is now mooting the idea that territorial concessions must be on the table. In a Wall Street Journal article, Blinken stated that, “Our focus is…to take back territory that’s been seized from [Ukraine] since February 24th.”

  Notice, that this is a significant climb down from the U.S.’ earlier position that all Russian gains since 2014, including Crimea, must be reversed before negotiations could begin. And this is just Blinken’s opening hand. More concessions are sure to follow as Russian gains become greater and their likelihood of being reversed, lesser.

  Put these four things together: staggering, unsustainable losses of soldiers; terrifying, indefensible asymmetries of destructive power; inability to supply oneself with even conventional defensive weapons; and categorically reduced support from your most important backers.

  Does that sound like the formula for winning a war? It is not. It’s the formula for losing the war, which is why von der Leyen, Macron, Scholz, and Blinken are now laying pipe for getting out. The tide is going out under Zelensky. He will soon be remembered as a Trivial Pursuits question, or an answer on Jeopardy: “The only modern head of state known to be able to play the piano with his penis.” Ding. “Contestant #3?” “Who is Volodymyr Zelensky?”

  A peace will soon be declared. Russia will keep the Donbas and Crimea in recognition of the facts on the ground. Both sides will be better off for this. The Donbas is ethnically, linguistically, religiously, and culturally Russian, which is why it voted overwhelmingly for assimilation into Russia. Besides, if Kiev loved them so much, it wouldn’t have murdered 14,000 of them over the past eight years and resumed massive shelling in early February of this year, before the Russian invasion.

  Ukraine will foreswear any future affiliation with NATO. This is Putin’s highest priority and what he asked for–and was denied–in his request to the U.S. and NATO last December, before the invasion was launched. If Russia begins its much-feared winter offensive, as many expect, Ukrainian generals will dispatch Zelensky in a coup rather than send their few remaining soldiers to certain annihilation.

  U.S. grain and pharma conglomerates will buy up Ukrainian farmland—some of the best in the world—for pennies on the dollar. This is the standard MO of U.S. multinational vultures coming in after the kill to pick apart the carcasses. U.S. weapons makers will look for and help provoke the next feeding frenzy, much as they materialized Ukraine barely a year after the humiliating U.S. defeat in Afghanistan derailed their last gravy train.

  Russia and China, driven together by U.S. bullying, will continue to constellate the nations of the Global South into an anti-Western bloc committed to collaborative, mutually profitable, peaceful development. The U.S. and its closest allies will cower behind the walls they’ve constructed of the ever-shrinking share of the global economy that they can manage to hold as their own.

  Ukraine will prove a turning point in the dismantling of U.S. hegemony over global affairs that it has enjoyed—and, let’s be honest, often abused–since 1945. The U.S. public is not psychically prepared for such a come down. But that is the cost of living in the fantasy world that the media lavishes up to keep that self-same public ignorant, fearful, confused, entertained, and distracted.

  Finally, the neo-cons who have led the U.S. into the serial debacles of Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Ukraine, costing the country tens of trillions of dollars and even greater amounts of destroyed reputational capital, will claim their customary immunity from any accountability for their savage failures and cheerily move on to their next calamity. We need to be on the lookout for their next gambit to pillage the treasury and advance their own private interests above those of the nation. It will surely come.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 23:40

• These Are The Longest-Lasting Cars (In Miles)
  These Are The Longest-Lasting Cars (In Miles)

  When properly maintained, well-built cars can last an impressive amount of miles.

  Consider this 2006 Honda Civic, which hit one million miles on its original engine and transmission. Amusingly, the car’s odometer maxes out at 999,999 miles.

  While that case may be an extreme outlier, most modern cars are expected to last 200,000 miles before experiencing some significant failure. That’s roughly double the lifespan of cars from the 1960s and 1970s, which typically lasted about 100,000 miles.

  In this infographic, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Ls and Athul Alexander used data from iSeeCars to determine which cars are the most likely to reach⁠— or even surpass⁠—the 200,000 mile benchmark.

  

  Study Methodology & Data

  To come up with their rankings, iSeeCars analyzed over 2 million used cars between January and October 2022. The rankings are based on the mileage that the top 1% of cars within each model obtained. Models with less than 10 years of production, such as the Tesla Model 3, were excluded.

  The following tables show an expanded list of the longest lasting cars, by model category. Our infographic only includes the top five from each.

  Sedans & Hatchbacks

  The only non-Japanese model in the top 10 is the Chevrolet Impala, which is one of the most commonly found rental cars in the U.S.

  

   

  Another interesting takeaway is that Lexus is the only luxury brand in this list. This is likely due to the fact that Lexus and Toyota often share drivetrain components.

   

  SUVs

  iSeeCars has a larger top 20 list for the SUV category.

  

   

  This is a more diverse list, with American and Japanese models seemingly on par. The GM family of SUVs (Tahoe, Suburban, Yukon, and Yukon XL) are narrowly edged out by Toyota’s full size options (Sequoia and Land Cruiser).

   

  The Land Cruiser was discontinued in the U.S. for 2021, but it remains a very popular model in Middle Eastern countries like Bahrain, Qatar, and the UAE.

  Pickup Trucks

  Once again, Japanese manufacturers hold the top spots. According to Toyota, the Tundra is the only full-size pickup that is currently being built in Texas.

  

   

  Despite their marginally higher potential lifespans, sales of Japanese trucks come nowhere close to their American counterparts.

   

  

  Electric Cars

  The last category is EVs, which due to the 10 years of production requirement, only includes the Tesla Model S (133,998 miles) and Nissan LEAF (98,081).

  These figures are much lower than the gasoline cars discussed above, but it’s not exactly a fair comparison. We probably won’t be able to judge the long-term reliability of EVs until they’ve been around for at least another decade.

  In addition to needing more time, another reason is scale—the Model S and LEAF have been sold in relatively limited numbers. The Tesla Model 3, which is the first EV to sell over one million units, will likely become the first reliable benchmark.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 23:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: The Baleful Cargo Of Woke Diversity Worship
  Victor Davis Hanson: The Baleful Cargo Of Woke Diversity Worship

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

  Just as uniformity can result in both stability and stagnation, so too can diversity sometimes ensure either dynamism or bedlam…

  

  What do all our notable fabricators – George Santos, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Barack Obama – have in common? 

  Well, quite like the Ward ChurchilIs or Rachel Dolezals of the world, one way or another, they lied about their identities. Or they sought fraudulent ways of suggesting their ancestries were marginalized. Or they had claims on being victims on the theory their constructed personas brought career advantages. 

  George Santos claimed, apparently in search of a victimized status, that he was an “American Jew” and a “Latino Jew,” and a descendent of Holocaust survivors. 

  Joe Biden lied that he went to “shul” as well as that he grew up in a veritable Puerto Rican household and just happened to attend a black college as well as being an honorary Greek.

  Elizabeth Warren ended up a laughingstock for claiming her high cheekbones were proof of her Native-American ancestry—a lie she rode all the way to being the “first” Native-American professor on the Harvard Law school faculty. 

  Somehow the half-white, prep-schooled Barry Soetoro, who had taken his Indonesian stepfather’s last name, rebooted in the university back to Barack Obama. The latter oddly did not catch his literary agent “misidentifying” him in a book promo as being born in Africa. And only as president, did we learn his “autobiographical” memoir was mostly a concoction.

  This fixation with constructing identities is one of the great pathologies of our woke era.

  When we obsess in neo-Confederate style on race, ethnicity, or religion as the defining element of who we are, and we do this to leverage political advantage, then we set off a chain-reaction of Yugoslavian- or Lebanese-style tribalism. Like nuclear proliferation, once one group goes tribal, then all others will strain to find their own deterrent tribal identity.

  A Society of Lies

  There are warning signs all around us of our fate to come if we do not stop this nihilism: Latino members of the Los Angeles City Council caught on a hot mic of matter-of-fact venting tribalist hatred and mocking of non-Latino tribes—blacks, gays, indigenous people, and whites. Or the Jussie Smollett farce, both the lies he concocted to promote his victimhood, and the lies the Chicago prosecutor office initially promulgated to ensure initial preferential treatment for Smollett based on his race. Read the comments posted below news stories of rampant swarming smash-and-grab, knockout game, or carjacking crimes—and be warned of the venomous and tribalist backlash to venomous tribalism.

  In a world in which there are too many oppressed for the static number of oppressors, then it is perfectly logical that an Elizabeth Warren on the one hand would fabricate an advantageous identity for careerist opportunity, and a Jussie Smollett on the other hand would invent mythical white MAGA demons to ensure he was victimized and deserving of careerist reparations for his suffering.

  Yet the tribal problem is not just an epidemic of false identities and fraudulent victims. Entire areas of social and political reality are now set off and exempt from rational discussion. We are currently witnessing an upsurge in black-male crime, often descending into disproportionate hate crimes perpetrated against Asians and Jews. Yet any discussion of this violence is taboo, lest one is deemed racist or illiberal.

  Questioning the morality of allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports and to destroy decades of striving for equal female athletics likewise is put off-limits. 

  So are discussions about the epidemic of illegitimacy and the negative effects of fatherless families contributing to problems in some minority communities.

  Even the national challenge of epidemic obesity is racialized, as if worries about unhealthy weight of all Americans derive somehow from mythical white “body shaming.”

  So are inquiries about how the states in tough economic times are to house, feed, care, educate, and instruct 5 million entrants across the southern border, arriving en masse and illegally, all without simple background checks, knowledge of English or a high-school diploma, and in non-diverse fashion. If the first thing an immigrant does is to break U.S. law by illegally crossing the border, and the second thing is illegally residing in the United States, then it is only logical that he concludes further illegal activity will be similarly exempt. Illegal immigration is not a noble endeavor but a crime against its host.

  In sum, woke tribalism inevitably turns us into fabricators and society itself becomes a liar. 

  Against Meritocracy

  The old 1970s cynical canard that racial quotas would not extend to pilot training or neurosurgery is no longer true. Some of the major airlines have announced mandatory non-white acceptance quotas for pilot training, and not predicated on competitive résumés or standardized test scores. Many universities and professional schools are considering adopting pass/fail grading on the theory that affirmative action admissions must become synonymous with guaranteed graduation.

  Yet what is the alternative once one travels this pathway? Suppose the idea of quota-based admissions is declared valid and salutary. In that case, grading must likewise be recalibrated along this long chain of anti-meritocracy to continue ensuring equality of results.

  Licensing boards are next. If one is admitted to universities on diversity, equity, and inclusion concerns rather than demonstrable achievement as quantifiably determined by competitive grades and test scores and other definable exceptional achievements, and one is further graduated on the assurance that grades either will not be issued or will be inflated, then the logical next step is that licensing exam standards in law or medicine must likewise be relaxed so as not to interrupt the ever-lengthening wokeist chain. 

  In other words, soon where one went to medical school, or what one did in medical school, or where one did his residency, or his certification by a medical board of examiners will become rather irrelevant. The point is not to recruit applicants with the most competitive records and to ensure that they all are subject to the same standard of rigorous instruction and assessment to ensure the public can have confidence in the medical profession, but to make sure that profession measures up to some artificial notions about diversity, equity, and inclusion. The relationship between these metrics and health is beside the point.

  We forget that what once separated the Western world from the rest was not race, climate, or natural bounty, but its gradual creation of meritocracies replacing the pre-civilizational rule of the clan, the tribe, or the race. The old inherited and stubborn obstacles remained: aristocratic privilege, class chauvinism, and plutocratic clout that warred with qualifications. They were the ancient impediments to merit whose power in the West slowly was also dethroned. 

  How ironic in their places, the reactionary Western world has simply created new exemptions and privileges, calibrated on premodern criteria such as race and sex that will set off chain tribal reactions as we degenerate into Hobbesian factionalism.

  Anytime perceived merit, or something close to merit, was not the standard, a society either imploded or became impoverished and calcified. The racial, one-drop categories of the Old South or the Third Reich, or the colorized spectrum of the old apartheid South Africa, or the racial chauvinism of the new tribal South Africa, or the commissar system of the Soviet Union, or the religious intolerance of fundamentalist Islam, or the familial gangs and clannish tyranny of prewar Sicily ensured that all were dysfunctional societies, and often much worse than that. Opportunity was instead guaranteed, and excellence defined, by something other than demonstrable talent and achievement. 

  There will be no exceptions granted to the United States from these rules of history. There are many talented black women in the corporate world, private sector, and elsewhere who would have made excellent vice presidents given their race was incidental and an afterthought to their achievement and talent.  

  The Best We’ve Got?

  But Kamala Harris is not among them. She was selected by Biden’s braggadocio not because of any past stellar record as a Bay Area prosecutor, an accomplished senator, an effective orator, or a superb presidential candidate, but because a frightened Joe Biden amid the George Floyd riots announced in advance that he would preselect his running mate exclusively on the basis of race and sex, sort of in the fashion of the white male-dominated world of the past. 

  Ditto Pete Buttigieg, who, in his dismal record as a rather inconsequential small city mayor and failed presidential candidate, had never evidenced aptitude for transportation issues—other than occasionally and ostentatiously riding a bike. He was never expected to seriously address problems like spiraling auto fuel prices, the bottlenecks at our harbors, the wild-west train robbing at the port of Los Angeles, the Southwest Airlines implosion, or our clogged freeways. Instead, he was appointed Transportation Secretary because of the diversity of his sexual orientation and his woke rhetoric that almost immediately surfaced in wildly out-of-pocket lectures about “racist” freeways. 

  Similarly, upon appointment as press secretary, we were immediately told Karine Jean-Pierre was the nation’s first black, gay press secretary rather than being asked to recognize any prior achievement that earned her such a coveted spot. Few said her appointment reflected a successful record as chief of staff for Kamala Harris’ not-one-delegate presidential campaign, or national megaphone for an ossified Moveon.org, or her stellar work as an MSNBC pundit. 

  What will a university like Stanford do when it admits much of its 2026 class largely on the basis of tribal considerations? It does not release who of the admitted opted not to take the now-optional SAT. It seems proud, in fact, that it has rejected in the past 70 percent of those applicants with perfect SAT scores. So why would one believe that Stanford truly deplores its past Jewish exclusionary quotas, when it easily trumps them in the present—and uses the same argument of diversity to excuse prejudice and disqualifying those who, by its own former standards, had earned admission? 

  Diversity is neither a strength nor a weakness. Diversity of thought can be helpful, or become chaotic as orthodoxy. Hitler’s 3.7 million soldiers who charged into Russia were especially diverse, but that fact did not make the invaders less murderous.

  A multi-religious India is certainly diverse, but is not always calm or humane. Yugoslavia was diverse, and so is current-day Lebanon. Was either country a kinder, gentler, or more successful society than decidedly nondiverse Japan or Poland?

  Just as uniformity can result in both stability and stagnation, so too can diversity sometimes ensure either dynamism or bedlam. In all these cases, the emphasis on tribalism is the critical determinative. If a 95 percent Asian or white country defines itself in blood-and-soil terms as did Japan of the 1930s and early 1940s and Germany between 1933 and 1945, then it becomes toxic, unlike a more natural assumption that race is incidental, not essential, even in a racially uniform society.

  The same is true of diversity. Accentuate it; sharpen differences; treat individuals as part of tribal collectives—and a descent into violence and anarchy is assured. But consider tribal differences superficial, and human commonality more important than racial difference, then diversity can be enriching through voluntary contributions to the whole in terms of varieties of food, music, art, fashion, and literature. But again, envision diversity as iron-clad calibrations of identity in which the individual cedes to the collective tribe, then a tribally regressive America will be no different from the world elsewhere and our fate is assured.

  So, we are headed, dangerously so, into an historically ugly, hateful, and volatile place—all the more so because we lie that it is utopian when it is pre-civilizational and reactionary.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 23:00

• California Bill To Punish Doctors For 'False' Covid-19 Information Goes Into Effect
  California Bill To Punish Doctors For ‘False’ Covid-19 Information Goes Into Effect

  A bill which allows the state of California to punish doctors over ‘false information about Covid-19 vaccinations and treatments’ went into effect on January 1st.

  

  Under the new law (AB 2098) which took effect Jan.1, the state’s Medical Board would categorize dispensing information – such as the effectiveness of Ivermectin, or the Covid-19 vaccine’s rapidly waning efficacy, as unprofessional conduct.

  A few days ago, Gavin Newsom signed Bill AB2098 into California law. That means doctors can lose their medical licenses for disagreeing with whatever the state determines as a consensus opinion on a particular topic. pic.twitter.com/2XHWWX4Msa

  — Josh Stylman (@jstylman) October 4, 2022

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

  The law was challenged in court by two California doctors, who said that it would restrict their free speech in violation of the first amendment, and that it was “vague” under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

  However on December 28th, Biden Nominee Judge Fred Slaughter refused to halt the law, ruling that the law trumps free speech claims, and that it falls “within the longstanding tradition of regulations on the practice of medical treatments.”

  Another lawsuit, brought by Physicians for Informed Consent, was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of California in early December. The plaintiffs, physician LeTrinh Hoang and Children’s Health Defense, are being represented by Rick Jaffe, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Mary Holland, and argues that the state of California has weaponized the vague phrase “misinformation,” and thereby has illegally targeted physicians who disagree with the government’s public stance on Covid-19.

  CA’s horrific☠️doctor-censorship bill #AB2098 is now law and goes into effect on Jan 1, 2023…even though it is unconstitutional to ban speech.👩‍⚖️Want to help? Retweet and support #PICphysicians at https://t.co/FAQPheFy9q. Our lawsuit📄to block this will be heard on 1/17/2023. pic.twitter.com/XDZhzFQRb4

  — Physicians for Informed Consent (@picphysicians) December 31, 2022

  There are many potentially disastrous consequences of AB2098. https://t.co/jfxhs2hTeM

  — Corbin Sabol (@corbinsabol) January 3, 2023

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

  Expert cardiologist and PIC member Sanjay Verma, M.D., has been tracking and cataloging CDC errors in real time. For the case, he has provided what he calls “a detailed declaration exposing the government’s scientific errors and the constitutional dangers of censoring dissent”:

  “To demonstrate these points of vagueness and the general unsuitability of using ‘contemporary scientific consensus’ as a disciplinary criterion, I have prepared a detailed overview of public health response to the pandemic broken down into categories such as Masks and Vaccines (transmission, safety, efficacy of natural immunity). I have also included evidence of what [I testify] would be considered misinformation promulgated by the CDC as well as its withholding of information which led to the then ‘contemporary scientific consensus’ eventually being proven wrong.” –KRON4

  AB-2098, the “physician misinformation bill” goes into effect as law in California.
  Physicians can no longer communicate nuanced risk about mRNA COVID vaccines to their patients without potentially having their licenses revoked.https://t.co/VHbHlKpgar pic.twitter.com/hlMxYJth2H

  — Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2023) January 2, 2023

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

  Vaccine so bad the state of California will revoke medical licenses from any doctor speaking out about side effects and what they’ve witnessed first hand. This isn’t science and doesn’t follow the Hippocratic Oath. $pfe #pfizer https://t.co/KksrLzgOY2

  — Family First 2023 Swan (@TheWuhanClan) January 3, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 22:40

• Niall Ferguson: "Kissinger Is Right To Worry" About Possibility Of World War 3
  Niall Ferguson: “Kissinger Is Right To Worry” About Possibility Of World War 3

  Authored by Niall Ferguson, op-ed via Bloomberg.com,

  2022 was the year in which war made a comeback. But Cold War II could become World War III in 2023… with China as the arsenal of autocracy.

  

  War is hell on earth – and if you doubt it, visit Ukraine or watch Edward Berger’s All Quiet on the Western Front, Netflix’s gut-wrenching new adaptation of Erich Maria Remarque’s classic antiwar novel of 1929.

  Even a small war is hellish for those caught up in it, of course. But a world war is the worst thing we humans have ever done to one another. In a memorable essay published last month, Henry Kissinger reflected on “How to Avoid Another World War.” In 1914, “The nations of Europe, insufficiently familiar with how technology had enhanced their respective military forces, proceeded to inflict unprecedented devastation on one another.” Then, after two years of industrialized slaughter, “the principal combatants in the West (Britain, France and Germany) began to explore prospects for ending the carnage.” Even with US intermediation, the effort failed.

  Kissinger posed an important question: “Does the world today find itself at a comparable turning point [like the opportunity for peace in 1916] in Ukraine as winter imposes a pause on large-scale military operations there?” This time last year, I predicted that Russia would invade Ukraine. The question one year later is whether there is a way to end this war, or whether it is destined to grow into something much larger.

  As Kissinger rightly points out, two nuclear-armed powers are currently contesting the fate of Ukraine. One side, Russia, is directly engaged in conventional warfare. However, the US and its allies are fighting indirectly by providing Ukraine with what Alex Karp, chief executive of Palantir Technologies Inc., calls “the power of advanced algorithmic warfare systems.” These are now so potent, he recently told the Washington Post’s David Ignatius, that they “equate to having tactical nuclear weapons against an adversary with only conventional ones.” Take a moment to ponder the implications of that.

  War is back. Could world war also make a comeback? If so, it will affect all of our lives. In the second interwar era (1991-2019), we lost sight of the role of war in the global economy. Because the wars of that time were small (Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq), we forgot that war is history’s favorite driver of inflation, debt defaults — even famines. That is because large-scale war is simultaneously destructive of productive capacity, disruptive of trade, and destabilizing of fiscal and monetary policies.

  But war is as much about the mobilization of real resources as it is about finance and money: Every great power needs to be able to feed its population and power its industry. In times of high interdependence (globalization), a great power needs to retain the option to revert to self-sufficiency in time of war. And self-sufficiency makes things more expensive than relying on free trade and comparative advantage.

  Throughout history, the principal source of power is technological superiority in armaments, including intelligence and communications. A critical question is therefore: What are the key inputs without which a state-of-the-art military is unattainable?

  In 1914, they were coal, iron and the manufacturing capacity to mass-produce artillery and shells, as well as steamships. In 1939, they were oil, steel, aluminum and the manufacturing capacity to mass-produce artillery, ships, submarines, planes and tanks. After 1945 it was all of the above, plus the scientific and technical capacity to produce nuclear weapons.

  Today, the vital inputs are the capacity to mass-produce high-performance semiconductors, satellites, and the algorithmic warfare systems that depend on them.

  What were the principal lessons of the 20th-century world wars? First, the American combination of technological and financial leadership, plus abundant natural resources, was impossible to beat. Secondly, however, the dominant Anglophone empires were poor at deterrence. The UK failed twice to dissuade Germany and its allies from gambling on world war. This was mainly because Liberal and Conservative governments alike were unwilling to ask voters for peacetime sacrifices, and they failed at statecraft. The result was two very expensive conflicts that cost much more in life and treasure than effective deterrence would have — and left the UK exhausted and unable to sustain its empire.

  The US has been the dominant Anglophone empire since the Suez Crisis of 1956. With the threat of nuclear Armageddon, the US successfully deterred the Soviet Union from advancing its Marxist-Leninist empire in Europe much beyond the rivers Elbe and Danube. But America was relatively unsuccessful at preventing the spread of communism by Soviet-backed organizations and regimes in what was then known as the Third World.

  The US is still bad at deterrence. Last year, it failed to deter President Vladimir Putin from invading Ukraine, mainly because it had low confidence in the Ukrainian defense forces it had trained and the Kyiv government that controlled them. The latest objective of American deterrence is Taiwan, a functionally autonomous democracy that China claims as its own. 

  In October, President Joe Biden’s administration belatedly published its National Security Strategy. Such documents are always the work of a committee, but internal dissonance shouldn’t be this obvious. “The post-Cold War era is definitively over,” the authors declare, “and a competition is underway between the major powers to shape what comes next.” However, “we do not seek conflict or a new Cold War.” For the major powers have “shared challenges” such as climate change and Covid and other pandemic diseases.

  On the other hand, “Russia poses an immediate threat to the free and open international system, recklessly flouting the basic laws of the international order today, as its brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has shown.” China, meanwhile, is “the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to advance that objective.”

  So what will the US do to check these rivals? The answer sounds remarkably similar to what it did in Cold War I:

  • “We will assemble the strongest possible coalitions to advance and defend a world that is free, open, prosperous and secure.”

  • “We will prioritize maintaining an enduring competitive edge over the PRC while constraining a still profoundly dangerous Russia.”

  • “We must ensure strategic competitors cannot exploit foundational American and allied technologies, know-how, or data to undermine American and allied security.”

  In other words: form and maintain alliances and try to prevent the other side from catching up technologically. This is a cold war strategy in all but name.

  US support for Ukraine since the Feb. 24 invasion has undoubtedly succeeded in weakening Putin’s regime. The Russian military has suffered disastrous losses of trained manpower and equipment. The Russian economy may not have contracted by as much as Washington hoped (a mere 3.4% last year, according to the International Monetary Fund), but Russian imports have crashed due to Western export controls. As Russia’s stock of imported component parts and machinery runs down, Russian industry will face deep disruptions, including in the defense and energy sectors.

  Last year, Russia cut off gas exports to Europe that it cannot reroute, as there are no alternative pipelines. Putin thought the gas weapon would allow him to divide the West. So far, it has not worked. Russia also tried choking Black Sea grain exports. But that lever had little strategic value as the biggest losers of the blockade were poor African and Middle Eastern countries.

  The net result of Putin’s war thus far has been to reduce Russia to something like an economic appendage of China, its biggest trading partner. And Western sanctions mean that what Russia exports to China is sold at a discount.

  There are two obvious problems with US strategy, however. The first is that if algorithmic weapons systems are the equivalent of tactical nuclear weapons, Putin may eventually be driven to using the latter, as he clearly lacks the former. The second is that the Biden administration appears to have delegated to Kyiv the timing of any peace negotiations — and the preconditions the Ukrainians demand are manifestly unacceptable in Moscow.

  The war therefore seems destined, like the Korean War in Cold War I, to drag on until a stalemate is reached, Putin dies and an armistice is agreed that draws a new border between Ukraine and Russia. The problem with protracted wars is that the US and European publics tend to get sick of them well before the enemy does.

  China is a much tougher nut to crack than Russia. Whereas a proxy war is driving Russia’s economy and military back into the 1990s, the preferred approach to China is to stunt its technological growth, particularly with respect to — in the words of National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan — “computing-related technologies, including microelectronics, quantum information systems and artificial intelligence” and “biotechnologies and biomanufacturing.”

  “On export controls,” Sullivan went on, “we have to revisit the longstanding premise of maintaining ‘relative’ advantages over competitors in certain key technologies.  We previously maintained a ‘sliding scale’ approach that said we need to stay only a couple of generations ahead. That is not the strategic environment we are in today.  Given the foundational nature of certain technologies, such as advanced logic and memory chips, we must maintain as large of a lead as possible.”

  Sanctions on Russia, argued Sullivan, had “demonstrated that technology export controls can be more than just a preventative tool.” They can be “a new strategic asset in the US and allied toolkit.” Meanwhile, the US is going to ramp up its investment in home-produced semiconductors and related hardware.

  The experience of Cold War I confirms that such methods can work. Export controls were part of the reason the Soviet economy could not keep pace with the US in information technology. The question is whether this approach can work against China, which is as much the workshop of the world today as America was in the 20th century, with a far broader and deeper industrial economy than the Soviet Union ever achieved.

  Readers of the science-fiction novel The Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin will recall that the aliens from the planet Trisolaris use intergalactic surveillance to halt technological advance on Earth while their invasion force makes its way through deep space. Can arresting China’s development really be how the US prevails in Cold War II?

  True, recent Commerce Department restrictions — on the transfer of advanced graphics processing units to China, the use of American chips and expertise in Chinese supercomputers, and the export to China of chipmaking technology — pose major problems for Beijing. They essentially cut the People’s Republic off from all high-end semiconductor chips, including those made in Taiwan and Korea, as well as all chip experts who are “US persons,” which includes green-card holders as well as citizens.

  It’s also true that there are no quick fixes for Chinese President Xi Jinping. Most of China’s fabrication capacity is at low-tech nodes (larger in size than 16 nanometers). He cannot conjure up overnight a mainland clone of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.,  which leads the world in the sophistication of its chips. Nor can Xi expect that TSMC would conduct business as usual if China launched a successful invasion of Taiwan. The company’s chip fabs would almost certainly be destroyed in a war. Even if they survived, they could not function without TSMC personnel, who might flee, and equipment from the US, Japan and Europe, which would cease to be available.

  Yet China has other cards it can play. It is dominant in the processing of minerals that are vital to the modern economy, including copper, nickel, cobalt and lithium. In particular, China controls over 70% of rare earth production both in terms of extraction and processing. These are 17 minerals used to make components in devices such as smartphones, electric vehicles, solar panels and semiconductors. An embargo on their export to the US might not be a lethal blow, but it would force the US and its allies to develop other sources in a hurry.

  America’s Achilles heel is often seen as its unsustainable fiscal path. At some point in the coming decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office, interest payments on the federal debt are likely to exceed defense spending. Meanwhile, it is not immediately obvious who buys all the additional Treasuries issued each year if the Federal Reserve is engaged in quantitative tightening.

  Might this give China an opportunity to exert financial pressure on the US? In July, it held $970 billion worth of Treasuries, making it the second-largest foreign holder of US debt. As has often been pointed out, if China chose to dump its Treasuries, it would drive up US bond yields and bring down the dollar, though not without causing considerable pain to itself.

  Yet the bigger American vulnerability may be in the realm of resources rather than finance. The US long ago ceased to be a manufacturing economy. It has become a great importer from the rest of the world. As Matthew Suarez, a lieutenant in the US Marine Corps, points out in an insightful essay at American Purpose, that makes the nation heavily reliant on the world’s merchant marine. “Setting aside the movement of oil and bulk commodities,” Suarez writes, “most internationally traded goods travel in one of six million containers transported in approximately 61,000 ships. This flow of goods depends on an equally robust parallel flow of digital information.”

  The growing dominance of China in both these areas should not be underestimated. Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative has created infrastructure that reduces Chinese reliance on seaborne trade. Meanwhile, Shanghai Westwell Lab Information Technology Co. is rapidly becoming the leading vendor of the most advanced port-operating systems.

  The war in Ukraine has provided a reminder that the disruption of trade is a vital weapon of war. It has also reminded us that a great power must be in a position to mass-produce modern weaponry, with or without access to imports. Both sides in the war have consumed staggering quantities of shells and missiles as well as armored vehicles and drones. The big question raised by any Chinese-American conflict is how long the US could sustain it.

  As my Hoover Institution colleague Jackie Schneider has pointed out, just “four months of support to Ukraine … depleted much of the stockpile of such weapons, including a third of the US Javelin arsenal and a quarter of US Stingers.” According to the Royal United Services Institute, the artillery ammunition that the US currently produces in a year would have sufficed for only 10 days to two weeks of combat in Ukraine in the early phase of the war.

  A February 2022 Department of Defense report on industrial capacity warned that the US companies producing tactical missiles, fixed-wing aircraft and satellites had reduced their output by more than half.

  As I have pointed out elsewhere, the US today is in some ways in the situation of the British Empire in the 1930s. If it repeats the mistakes successive UK governments made in that decade, a fiscally overstretched America will fail to deter a nascent Axis-like combination of Russia, Iran and China from risking simultaneous conflict in three theaters: Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the Far East. The difference is that there will be no sympathetic industrial power to serve as the “arsenal of democracy” — a phrase used by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a radio broadcast on Dec. 29, 1940. This time it is the autocracies that have the arsenal.

  The Biden administration must be exceedingly careful not to pursue economic warfare against China so aggressively that Beijing finds itself in the position of Japan in 1941, with no better option than to strike early and hope for military success. This would be very dangerous indeed, as China’s position today is much stronger than Japan’s was then.

  Kissinger is right to worry about the perils of a world war. The first and second world wars were each preceded by smaller conflicts: the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia (1936), the Spanish Civil War (1936-39), the Sino-Japanese War (1937).

  The Russian invasion of Ukraine may seem to be going well for the West right now.

  But in a worst-case scenario, it could be a similar harbinger of a much wider war.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 22:20

• 'Pineapple Express' And Bomb Cyclone To Wallop California
  ‘Pineapple Express’ And Bomb Cyclone To Wallop California

  A moisture conveyor belt of atmospheric rivers has unleashed near-record rainfall across the West Coast. Another, perhaps, more powerful atmospheric river and bomb cyclone are set to target California on Wednesday and Thursday, continuing ten days of heavy rains and snow for higher altitudes. 

  

  The National Weather Service office in the Bay Area warned about the imminent storm, calling it a “truly … brutal system … that needs to be taken seriously.”

  “To put it simply, this will likely be one of the most impactful systems on a widespread scale that this meteorologist has seen in a long while,” an NWS meteorologist in San Francisco, adding, “the impacts will include widespread flooding, roads washing out, hillside collapsing, trees down (potentially full groves), widespread power outages, immediate disruption to commerce and the worst of all, likely loss of human life.”

  The developing atmospheric river formed near Hawaii and, by Wednesday morning, will spread tropical moisture into California by a low-pressure system. This weather phenomenon is known as the “Pineapple Express.” 

  “Basically, an (atmospheric river) is a river in the sky of water vapor, and when it hits the mountains, (the moisture) is forced up over the mountains. 

   “That upward motion causes clouds and precipitation to form, and the faster the flow of air and water vapor is hitting the mountains, the faster the rain is falling, so you get more and more rain with the stronger ARs hitting the mountains,” Marty Ralph, Director of the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes, told FOX Weather. 

  The heaviest rainbands are forecasted over parts of California Wednesday afternoon and evening into Thursday morning. NWS has already posted flood alerts across the Golden State. 

  

  Another 2-3 inches could be expected across the San Francisco area. Even the Los Angeles metro area could see 1-3 inches. 

  

  Over the last ten days, a parade of atmospheric rivers has been dumping near record amounts of rain and snow across California. Again, this weather phenomenon is called the Pineapple Express. 

  

  High wind watches are in effect from the Bay Area to Sacramento. 

  

  There is concern a bomb cyclone could form.

  

  Here’s the latest rain forecast. 

  

  Even though California is experiencing one of the worst droughts on record, the barrage of atmospheric rivers could alleviate some of the drought stress. 

  

  The Washington Post explained that unusual weather usually occurs “during La Nina winters like the present, weather systems bombard the Pacific Northwest, including Washington and Oregon.” 

  And while climate alarmists blame every change in the Earth’s weather on man-made greenhouse gases … we must point out that even the  UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said, “El Nino and La Nina are naturally occurring climate patterns and humans have no direct ability to influence their onset, intensity or duration.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 22:00

• US Border Crisis Is A National Security Crisis: Former ICE Chief Tom Homan
  US Border Crisis Is A National Security Crisis: Former ICE Chief Tom Homan

  Authored by Adam Michael Molon via The Epoch Times,

  Tom Homan, former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has criticized what he described as lax border security policies under the Biden administration, arguing that the surge in illegal immigration “is on purpose.”

  

  Homan, who served as head of ICE from 2017 to 2018, described the border crisis as one that amounted to public safety, public health, and national security crises.

  “What’s behind the scenes?” Homan told The Epoch Times in an interview.

  “People are going to say, ‘Okay, illegal aliens are crossing the border. They say they’re going to send them to see the judge.’ There’s more to this. What’s the ugly underbelly of this?”

  An October op-ed co-authored by Homan and Mark Morgan, who served as acting commissioner of US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from 2019 to 2021 noted, “In just 18 months, Customs and Border Protection has recorded more than 4 million apprehensions— more than the previous four fiscal years combined. The encounters since last October have totaled more than 2.7 million, plus nearly 600,000 known got-aways and likely hundreds of thousands who entered completely undetected.”

  “They’ve arrested 114 known and suspected terrorists who tried to get into the country since Joe Biden’s been in the White House … Border Patrol’s arrested people from 161 countries, [and] some of those countries sponsor terrorism,” Homan told The Epoch Times.

  “Since Joe Biden’s taken office, there’s a recorded over 1 million got-aways based on camera traffic, drone traffic, sensor traffic. Recorded got-aways. So, if they arrest 114, how many of that 1 million came from a country that sponsors terrorism and is coming to do us harm?”

  He added, “Sadly, I think it’s going to take a national security incident to wake them up.”

  

  Tom Homan, former acting ICE director, at a press conference in Anzalduas Park in Mission, Texas, on March 30. 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  ‘On Purpose’

  Homan believes that the border crisis “is on purpose,” and has been caused by policies formulated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and the Biden administration.

  “[Secretary Mayorkas] has the same data I have,” said Homan, who previously served as the head of ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations during the Obama administration, before being named head of ICE by then-President Donald Trump.

  “When [Mayorkas] was a deputy secretary [at DHS] in 2014, 2015 under Obama, he was deputy secretary under [then-DHS secretary] Jeh Johnson. When we had a thousand entrants a day, Jeh Johnson called us all and said, ‘What the hell’s going on? This is a bad day.’ A thousand.

  “Now they’ve got seven, eight thousand and [Mayorkas is] saying the border’s secure.”

  “How did we stop it in 2014, 2015? We built detention facilities. We held [illegal aliens] long enough to see a judge. 90 percent lost, we put them on an airplane and sent them home, boarding them as well,” Homan added.

  “[Mayorkas] was the deputy secretary back then, he knew what we did. Now he’s the secretary. What is he doing now? He’s not using detention facilities, he’s shutting them down. They’re releasing [illegal aliens]. Many of them are released without even a court date, so they’re not seeing a judge … He’s doing the complete opposite of what worked in 2014, 2015.”

  “This isn’t mismanagement, this isn’t incompetence. This is on purpose,” Homan alleged.

  DHS, ICE, and the White House did not return requests for comment.

  For his part, Mayorkas has maintained that the border is secure and defended the department’s record amid the record illegal border crossings.

  “The immigration system, our laws, have not been reformed for more than 40 years. The problem from administration to administration, regardless of party, is the fact that we are fundamentally working within a broken immigration system, and that is the foundational challenge, with respect to the border,” the secretary said in early December.

  Mayorkas said DHS was working to improve the efficiency of processing illegal aliens.

  “We are devoting tremendous resources to address the border in a way that achieves its security and upholds its values,” Mayorkas said. “We are modernizing our systems at the border to expedite processing, bringing greater efficiency to it. We are intensely focused on this mission set, just as we are intensely focused on the mission sets that we confront as a department from top to bottom.”

  

  A U.S. Border Patrol agent instructs immigrants who had crossed the Rio Grande into El Paso, Texas, as seen from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, on Dec. 19, 2022. (John Moore/Getty Images)

  ‘Political Power’

  A native of West Carthage, New York, Homan served as a police officer in his hometown and became a border patrol agent in 1984 before rising to become head of ICE three decades later.

  “I was the first ICE director who actually came up through the ranks,” said Homan, who is a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, and authored the book “Defend the Border and Save Lives: Solving Our Most Important Humanitarian and Security Crisis.” “So when I commanded ICE, I didn’t ask any of the 20,000 men and women who worked for me to do anything that I didn’t do myself as an agent.”

  As head of ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, Homan received the 2015 Presidential Rank Award for Distinguished Service, the country’s highest civil service award. In June 2018, the month that he retired from ICE, Homan received the Distinguished Service Medal from then-President Trump, and in January 2021 was awarded the National Security Medal by Trump in the Oval Office “for distinguished achievement in the field of national security through exceptionally meritorious service.”

  Homan pointed to expectations that illegal aliens will one day vote for Democrats as a factor driving accommodative immigration enforcement policies under the Biden administration, saying, “it’s all about future political power.”

  “They truly believe [illegal aliens] are future Democratic voters, number one, and number two, they certainly perceive a future political benefit. Because remember, President Biden also overturned Trump’s census rule,” Homan said.

  “Now illegal aliens will be counted in the census. So look, already five million have crossed the border [during the Biden administration] … many will flock to sanctuary cities that are protected, which are going be counted in that jurisdiction, which will result in more seats for the Dems.”

  On his first day in office, President Joe Biden issued an executive order revoking a 2020 memorandum issued by President Trump that would have excluded illegal aliens from states’ apportionment bases for congressional representation following the 2020 Census.

  Homan said that  “millions of Americans … don’t even realize there’s a crisis on the border,” and pointed to a need for citizens to become better informed and educated on this issue.

  “I’ll say it a thousand times, regardless of what your opinion is on illegal immigration, when you create a crisis this big, you create a public safety crisis, a public health crisis, and a national security crisis,” he said.

  “You can’t turn a blind eye to it.”

  

  U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas answers a reporter’s question during a news conference with Mexican counterparts at the State Department in Washington on Oct. 13, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

  Releasing Illegal Aliens

  Homan criticized the administration’s “alternatives to detention” (ATD) program, colloquially known as “catch and release,” under which the majority of illegal aliens are released into the country while they await their court dates.

  “Not only are they letting [illegal aliens] in, they’re setting them up so they’ll never be removed because they’re not in custody,” Homan said.

  There are currently about 378,000 illegal aliens under the ATD program, according to ICE’s latest statistics. Most of them, about 290,000, are monitored by ICE through an app known as SmartLINK. Nearly 70,000 are not monitored by any technology, while 16,000 are monitored through telephone calls, and nearly 7,000 are monitored by GPS.

  ICE says that ATD “effectively increases court appearance rates, [and] compliance with release conditions.” Mayorkas has characterized such policies as part of an effort by the administration to ensure the more humane processing of illegal aliens.

  A 2022 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office annalyzing the ATD program from 2015 to 2020, found that about a quarter of the illegal aliens placed in the program absconded, or fled the address at which they were staying “and could not be located,” including 33 percent in fiscal year 2020, which stretched across the Trump and Biden administrations.

  Homan said that while large numbers of illegal aliens are being released into the United States, “there’s thousands of beds right now in ICE’s inventory” available for use in the detention of illegal aliens “that are empty, already paid for.”

  According to a 2020 DHS Enforcement Lifecycle Report (pdf), illegal aliens encountered in 2014 to 2019 who were held in DHS custody for the entire time until court proceedings were repatriated 98 percent of the time. Only 0.5 percent received court orders allowing them to stay in the United States. One percent of those continuously detained illegal aliens received removal orders from the court that were not executed by ICE.

  The report noted that in contrast, illegal aliens who were never detained were repatriated 30 percent of the time. Meanwhile, 15 percent received court orders allowing them to stay, while 55 percent of the cases were unresolved at the time of the report’s publication.

  “The detention pattern yielding the greatest share of unresolved cases were encounters initially placed in detention but then released prior to a final enforcement outcome,” the report added.

  “These ‘partially detained’ encounters resulted in repatriations just 3 percent of the time and relief just 12 percent of the time, with 85 percent still unresolved, including 18 percent with unexecuted removal orders.”

  “They know this,” Homan said. “They know most [illegal aliens] will lose their case, because based on the immigration court data, and they know based on the Homeland Security Lifecycle Report, if [illegal aliens are] not detained, they won’t be removed at all … That’s why they’re releasing them.”

  He added, “No one’s talking about this…if the American people knew … I think a lot of people sit at home and say, ‘Well, if [illegal aliens] lose their case they’ll be ordered removed and ICE will be able to remove them.’ No they can’t. Because they won’t find them.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 21:40

• South Korea Says Talks On Nuclear-Sharing With US Underway
  South Korea Says Talks On Nuclear-Sharing With US Underway

  Suddenly US involvement on the Korean peninsula is about to potentially ratchet into uncharted territory, as South Korea confirmed on Tuesday it is in talks with Washington to provide a nuclear deterrent presence at a moment Pyongyang is threatening its own nuclear arsenal expansion.

  “South Korea confirmed Tuesday that Seoul and Washington are discussing its involvement in U.S. nuclear weapons management in the face of intensifying North Korean nuclear threats, after President Joe Biden denied that the allies were discussing joint nuclear exercises,” The Associated Press reports.

  Despite President Joe Biden answering “no” to a reporter’s question after being asked if joint nuclear exercises are on the horizon with Seoul, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s top adviser for press affairs, Kim Eun-hye, explained that the two countries “are discussing an intel-sharing, a joint planning and subsequent joint execution plans over the management of US nuclear assets in response to North Korea’s nuclear (threats).”

  

  President Yoon himself had affirmed something similar in an interview published Monday in a local newspaper. While South Korea has no nuclear weapons of its own, the idea could possibly be for some kind of nuclear sharing arrangement similar to NATO’s inter-alliance sharing agreement. As it stands, the US provides Korea with a “nuclear umbrella” – though this remains too ambiguous for South Korea’s leaders, apparently.

  Here’s how the AP paraphrased President Yoon’s Monday statements:

  In the Chosun Ilbo interview, Yoon said that while the U.S. nuclear weapons belong to the U.S., planning, intel-sharing and exercises involving them must be jointly conducted with South Korea. He said he finds it difficult to assure his people of a security guarantee with the current levels of U.S. security commitment.

  The report indicates that talks on this sensitive topic, given that mere headlines of nuclear-sharing talks could trigger threat escalation out of Pyongyang, could be taking place via unofficial channels.

  All of this comes in response to a New Year directive given by the north’s Kim Jong-Un, ordering his forces to embark on an ‘exponential’ expansion of nuclear forces. 

  Kim recently said: “They are now keen on isolating and stifling (North Korea), unprecedented in human history,” according to the official Korean Central News Agency. “The prevailing situation calls for making redoubled efforts to overwhelmingly beef up the military muscle.”

  In an interview Monday, South Korea’s president said the US+South Korea were in talks on a plan that would effectively amount to nuke-sharing.

  Asked just now on the WH lawn about the talks mentioned in the report, Biden indicated they weren’t happening.https://t.co/oWNcFaFUGs

  — William Gallo (@GalloVOA) January 2, 2023

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

  Kim then at a meeting of top ministers called for “an exponential increase of the country’s nuclear arsenal” – and specifically involving the mass production battlefield tactical nuclear weapons with an eye toward South Korea.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 21:20

• As China Retreats From COVID Lunacy, Lunacy Returns To The US
  As China Retreats From COVID Lunacy, Lunacy Returns To The US

  Authored by John Tamny via RealClearMarkets.com,

  China allegedly faces dark days ahead. Why, you may ask? Because of freedom from coronavirus mandates.  

  Who fears too much freedom in China? American reporters and corona-experts.

  Supposedly it will lead to death.

  You see, the view stateside among experts like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is that while China employed “extreme measures” before finally letting up, these measures limited hospitalizations and deaths related to the virus.

  

  Can the experts truly be serious?

  To answer this question it’s useful to return to March of 2020 when locking Americans into their homes was justified for the latter allegedly protecting us from sickness that would overwhelm hospitals, and worse, death. Even libertarians bought into what was absurd, and plainly inimical to our health. The libertarian nailbiters who fell for the crushing of freedom know who they are, while the experts were plain wrong with their insults of the American people.

  Regarding the experts, their thorough insult was in assuming that free people would act irresponsibly and engage in activity that would sicken them and kill them. Shame on them.

  As for way too many libertarians, missed by the situationally freedom loving was the simple, but crucial truth that force is superfluous when a virus billed to be serious threatens. Really, who needs to be forced inside and away from people if the act of being out and about might result in sickness or death? Which is why the more threatening the virus, the more crucial is the freedom libertarians normally fight for. Better yet, free people produce information. By doing as they wish, we find out from the freedom what activities threaten and what don’t. In hiding behind “there’s no libertarian answer to pandemics,” libertarians chose a horrid taking that blinded the population to the virus answer.

  Bringing it all back to China, Emanuel worries about the country’s “Let-It-Rip Covid Reopening.” He starts with the laughable assertion that “China put the world in peril with its coverup and slow response to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 three years ago.” Yes, somehow Chinese leadership in the age of smartphones, internet, sophisticated intelligence services, and even more sophisticated equity markets was going to hide a rapidly spreading virus from the rest of the world. Goodness, the Soviets couldn’t even hide Chernobyl in 1986, but the Chinese had the ability to hide a virus that was spreading faster than the flu? No, not remotely serious.

  Importantly, Emanuel unwittingly happens upon the shallow nature of his argument in total with his acknowledgement of China’s “slow response to the emergence” of the virus. Which is the point, or should be. Perhaps unknowingly, China already employed a “Let-It-Rip Covid” strategy back in 2019 and early 2020. Did people die en masse amid all this freedom? Of course not. To the latter, some will respond that the Chinese covered up mass death, but what politicians might try to hide markets expose. Never forget that the U.S.’s largest, most valuable companies had and have enormous exposure to the Chinese market. As I point out in my 2021 book about the lockdown tragedy, When Politicians Panicked, if the virus had been a major killer (or even hospital-izer) of the Chinese people, this would have quickly revealed itself through a collapse of U.S. equity shares to reflect a shrinking market in China, and a soon-to-be-shrunk market stateside. Instead, and as a very-much-in-the-news virus spread, U.S. equities reached all-time highs.  

  All of which brings us to the present. Emanuel and the lockdown crowd he caucuses with lament that the return of freedom to the Chinese people “could have been done responsibly.” Too much freedom too fast according to Emanuel et al. He writes that rather than gradually giving it back with experts like him fully in charge, “China ended zero Covid in the most dangerous way possible – precipitously.”

  Basically, Emanuel is reviving the insulting arguments used by experts and politicians back in March of 2020 in the U.S. The Chinese people, like the American people before them, cannot be trusted with freedom. Emanuel contends that freedom in China “could overwhelm hospitals and could cause a million deaths.”

  The above could be true, but it’s near certainly not true given the human instinct to avoid sickness and death. Translated for those who need it, free people will protect themselves much more effectively than governments. Someone should inform Dr. Emanuel of this simple truth, along with an even bigger truth about government power and its much more correct correlation with death.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 21:00

• Strikes Inside Russia Will Go "Deeper & Deeper": Ukraine Intelligence Chief
  Strikes Inside Russia Will Go “Deeper & Deeper”: Ukraine Intelligence Chief

  Coming off of the Sunday attack on a barracks in Makiivka in Russian-controlled Donetsk, which marked what could be the biggest Russian troop loss of the war in a single attack to date, Ukraine is now vowing to strike “deeper and deeper” inside Russian territory.

  The alarming words were issued from the head of Ukrainian military intelligence, Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, during a new interview with Australia’s ABC…

  Ukrainian Head of Military Intelligence Kyrylo Budanov in an interview with @ABC, said that there will be more strikes on Russian territory and they will be “deeper and deeper”.

  Video: ABC News pic.twitter.com/l0vaMVHrbW

  — NEXTA (@nexta_tv) January 2, 2023

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

  As the clip from the interview published Monday shows, the military intelligence chief was reluctant to directly confirm whether or not Ukraine recently struck a Russian airbase.

  The ABC reporter wanted answers specifically in relation to the series of deadly drone attacks Engels military airfield in the Saratov region. In December, there were reports that the base was hit three times, the most recent instance of which came last week, and killed three Russian military technicians. 

  The Ukrainian government has yet to officially own up to these attacks, which Russia says were launched by Ukraine’s forces. But according to Gen. Budanov’s words republished in the UK Telegraph: 

  Responding to whether Ukraine was responsible for one of these attacks on an airbase, Kyrylo Budanov said he was “very glad” about it, but maintained Kyiv’s stance of official deniability. 

  In an interview with Australia’s ABC, Mr Budanov predicted these attacks will go “deeper and deeper”, along with further attacks on Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.

  Last week three Russian troops died in a drone attack on a Russia’s Engels airfield, which houses Tu-95 and Tu-160 nuclear-capable strategic bombers. 

  Crucially, the Engels base is over 600km inside Russia from the Ukrainian border, suggesting that Ukraine’s UAV capabilities are growing. Russia’s military has meanwhile said it is deploying greater anti-air protections around Russian bases and cities. 

  

  As for Washington, it has maintained an official stance of not wanting its Ukrainian partners to conduct attacks inside Russian territory, fearing uncontrollable escalation, but there are indicators that behind the scenes US intelligence could be positively encouraging it – or at least turning a blind eye.

  And yet with Sunday’s devastating attack on the Russian barracks in Donetsk, Ukrainian media and officials have boasted that it was done with US-supplied HIMARS missiles. This of course means from the Kremlin’s perspective, Washington’s involvement in the conflict is growing more direct by the day.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 20:40

• "Take Them To The Slaughterhouse": Trustee Calls For "Culling" DEI Critics
  “Take Them To The Slaughterhouse”: Trustee Calls For “Culling” DEI Critics

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  John Corkins, vice president of the Board of Trustees of the Kern Community College District Board, has a simple solution for those faculty who question diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs: take them to the slaughterhouse. Corkins has since apologized but the Board conspicuously failed to address other glaring problems with his extreme rhetoric.At the meeting, Corkins responded to students and faculty complaining about a racially hostile environment. Faculty opposed to DEI policies were referenced as part of this threat.

  

  Corkins declared that there are “abusive” faculty that “we have to continue to cull.”

  He added:

  “Got them in my livestock operation and that’s why we put a rope on some of them and take them to the slaughterhouse. That’s a fact of life with human nature and so forth, I don’t know how to say it any clearer.”

  Corkins has since apologized and insisted

  “My intent was to emphasize that the individuals who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting have my full support…several African-American faculty, students and statewide representatives … bravely shared their feelings of fear based on the actions of a small group of faculty members and their feelings of disappointment in the district for allowing these actions to continue.”

  Notably, however, the video of the Dec. 13 meeting does not give details on the specific racial incidents. There is reference to an ongoing investigation. However, there are references to faculty who have opposed DEI measures.

  That would likely include a  group called the Renegade Institute for Liberty with history Professors Matthew Garrett and Erin Miller, who teach at Bakersfield College. The group filed a federal lawsuit against the district after they were allegedly threatened with termination for questioning the use of grant money to fund social justice initiatives at their college. They are both tenured.

  The opposition to DEI measures has led some to object that the group makes them feel unsafe on campus. That reportedly included calls to terminate faculty who oppose DEI to create a safer environment.

  While apologizing for calling for the killing of such faculty, Corkins does not address why faculty should be targeted if they oppose DEI measures. The hearing and the statements made against these faculty members creates a chilling environment for academic freedom. The message is clear that these professors are viewed as a dangerous element on campus.

  The Board has an obligation to address this uncertain line. Corkins apologizes for calling for the killing of critics but not why criticism of DEI itself is a matter for action. There may be conduct that is threatening or violent. There is no indication of any criminal complaint, but there is a need to preserve an open and tolerant environment. However, that also includes tolerance for opposing views on issues like DEI.

  There is no major campaign to remove Corkins. I am less inclined for such removal as I am interested in greater clarity on the rights of free speech and academic freedom.  Everyone makes dumb comments in unguarded moments. I accept that Corkins was carried away by the emotion of the moment. Moreover, Corkins was referencing “abusive” faculty and not necessarily putting all DEI critics in that category. That is precisely what should be clarified.

  However, it would likely be a different story if a board member called for the “culling” of DEI supporters or groups on the left. There remains a double standard in how such controversies are handled in academia.

  The support enjoyed by faculty on the far left is in sharp contrast to the treatment given faculty with moderate, conservative or libertarian views. Anyone who raises such dissenting views is immediately set upon by a mob demanding their investigation or termination. This includes blocking academics from speaking on campuses like a recent Classics professor due to their political views. Conservatives and libertarians understand that they have no cushion or protection in any controversy, even if it involves a single, later deleted tweet. At the University of North Carolina (Wilmington) one such campaign led to a professor killing himself a few days before his final day as a professor.

  I have defended faculty who have made similarly disturbing comments on the left, including “detonating white people,” abolish white people, denouncing police, calling for Republicans to suffer,  strangling police officers, celebrating the death of conservatives, calling for the killing of Trump supporters, supporting the murder of conservative protesters and other outrageous statements. I also defended the free speech rights of University of Rhode Island professor Erik Loomis, who defended the murder of a conservative protester and said that he saw “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence. (Loomis was later made Director of Graduate Studies of History at Rhode Island).

  Even when faculty engage in hateful acts on campus, however, there is a notable difference in how universities respond depending on the viewpoint. At the University of California campus, professors actually rallied around a professor who physically assaulted pro-life advocates and tore down their display.

  When these controversies arose, faculty rallied behind the free speech rights of the professors. That support was far more muted or absent when conservative faculty have found themselves at the center of controversies. The recent suspension of Ilya Shapiro is a good example. Other faculty have had to go to court to defend their free speech rights. One professor was suspended for being seen at a controversial protest.

  The message from this hearing could be viewed by some as affirming  that criticism of DEI is now viewed a threatening language. For conservative, libertarian, or contrarian faculty, it is not clear if such views will now be tolerated or viewed as grounds for termination (or a barrier to hiring).

  This comes at a time when many faculties have indeed “culled” their ranks of conservatives. A new survey of 65 departments in various states found that 33 do not have a single registered Republican.

   In a recent column, the editors of the legal site Above the Law mocked those of us who objected to the virtual absence of conservative or libertarian faculty members at law schools. Senior editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” based on the fact that liberal views reflect real law as opposed to junk law.  (Patrice regularly calls those with opposing views “racists,” including Chief Justice John Roberts because of his objection to race-based criteria in admissions as racial discrimination). He explained that hiring a conservative academic was akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism (or that the sun orbits the earth) to teach at a university.

  It is that easy. You simply declare that conservative views shared by a majority of the Supreme Court and roughly half of the population are invalid to be taught.

  It is not limited to faculty. Polls now show that 60 percent of students fear sharing their views in class. Various polls have shown the same fear with some showing an even higher percentage of fearful students. There is a growing orthodoxy taking hold on our campuses with growing intolerance for dissenting faculty and students alike.

  There are faculty who have raised concerns over DEI initiatives, land acknowledgment, and other policies. Even with the apology, the Board has allowed the underlying threat to linger. It should state why the opposition of faculty members, including filing in court, could be deemed as threatening or unacceptable viewpoints.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 20:20

• Sam Bankman-Fried Pleads Not Guilty
  Sam Bankman-Fried Pleads Not Guilty

  Update (1500ET): FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to criminal charges, and is set to face trial in October.

  

  Appearing on Tuesday in US District Court in New York, US District Judge Lewis Kaplan set a trial date of October 2nd for the disgraced crypto king, after US prosecutors said they expect to submit all of their evidence in the case over the next month, Bloomberg reports.

  While the plea was not unexpected, it buys the 30-year-old more time, legal experts say. Bankman-Fried will get a better idea on the evidence prosecutors have against him and plan his next move. The plea puts the case on track for a lengthy trial, which could last at least four weeks.

  Bankman-Fried emerged from a black SUV into a crowd of photographers and TV crews Tuesday, ahead of a 2 pm hearing scheduled in New York. In December, US prosecutors in Manhattan revealed eight criminal counts against him, including wire fraud and campaign finance violations. -Bloomberg

  Prosecutors have accused the 30-year-old of stealing billions of dollars of customer funds from FTX, and defrauding investors and lenders to Alameda Research, his trading arm. He also allegedly made millions of dollars in illegal campaign contributions funded by Alameda.

  SBF has previously said he didn’t ‘intend’ to commit Fraud, but acknowledged making mistakes.

  *  *  *

  FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has asked a judge to conceal the identities of two people who will help secure his bail in addition to his parents’ house in Palo Alto, California, Bloomberg reports.

  

  “If the two remaining sureties are publicly identified, they will likely be subjected to probing media scrutiny, and potentially targeted for harassment, despite having no substantive connection to the case,” wrote SBF’s lawyers in a letter filed on Tuesday seeking redactions of the names of the two individuals who intend to sign as sureties to his bail.

  “Consequently, the privacy and safety of the sureties are “countervailing factors” that significantly outweigh the presumption of public access to the very limited information at issue,” the letter continues.

  Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bail package – granted in his first appearance on US soil since his arrest in the Bahamas, was secured by his parents’ Palo Alto home, which is worth nowhere near that amount. The judge in the case also required that two people of “considerable means,” at least one of whom cannot be a relative, also sign the bond.

  Bankman-Fried was granted a $250 million bail package in December, one of the largest in US history. The personal recognizance bond approved by the judge was secured by the equity in Bankman-Fried’s parents home in Palo Alto, California, which is almost certainly not worth anywhere near that amount. But outsized bonds are more a means of establishing harsh financial consequences for bail-jumping and are often backed by assets worth only around 10% of the stated amount. -Bloomberg

  The two individuals have not yet signed the bond but intend to do so by the Jan. 5 deadline, according to the letter.

  Bankman-Fried is set to appear in a Manhattan federal court on Tuesday to face charges on eight criminal counts ranging from wire fraud to conspiracy to commit money laundering, to conspiracy by misusing customer funds, CNN reports. He is expected to plead not guilty.

  He faces 115 years if convicted on all charges.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 20:08

• Twitter Files: US State Department Panicked Over ZeroHedge Covid-19 Reporting
  Twitter Files: US State Department Panicked Over ZeroHedge Covid-19 Reporting

  Journalist Matt Taibbi gave the public a double-header on Tuesday – first revealing how Twitter was swarmed by the US intelligence community…

  1.THREAD: The Twitter Files
  How Twitter Let the Intelligence Community In

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023

  The drop includes several bombshells about how the US intelligence community, and Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), tried to force-feed the Russian influence narrative down Twitter’s throat despite the fact that Twitter just wasn’t seeing it.

  Anyone shocked that Twitter manufactured a fake Russian disinformation campaign at the request of a United States Senator (Warner) to make it look like foreign actors were still influencing American elections?#TwitterFiles

  — Spitfire (@DogRightGirl) January 3, 2023

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

  And second, a thread on how the intelligence community started going straight to the media with lists of suspect accounts.

  https://t.co/BcFhHCvjAE February, 2020, as COVID broke out, the Global Engagement Center – a fledgling analytic/intelligence arms of the State Department – went to the media with a report called, “Russian Disinformation Apparatus Taking Advantage of Coronavirus Concerns.” pic.twitter.com/KjUeE8vejt

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsIn the early days of the pandemic, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) was flagging accounts suggesting COVID-19 was a bioweapon, blaming the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or “attributing the appearance of the virus to the CIA,” (the latter of which nobody was actually saying… it was speculation over work done at Fort Detrick and the University of North Carolina).

  As Taibbi further notes, the State Department also flagged accounts that retweeted ZeroHedge due to “Sinophobia” and a “flurry of disinformation” that allegedly broke out after our suspension on Twitter.

  5.State also flagged accounts that retweeted news that Twitter banned the popular U.S. ZeroHedge, claiming the episode “led to another flurry of disinformation narratives.” ZH had done reports speculating that the virus had lab origin. pic.twitter.com/JlIobPzAFE

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023

  Which only raises more questions.

  Why was this GEC more concerned about “Sinophobia” (fear of China) than the truth?

  — ICULuci (@icu_luci) January 3, 2023

  But hey, they had a giant problem on their hands, since even those with double-digit IQs could connect the dots between the Obama administration banning Gain-of-Function research to manipulate bat coronaviruses in order to become more transmissible to humans, then Anthony Fauci offshoring it to Wuhan, China via EcoHealth Alliance, which was carried out by a guy who repeatedly bragged about… manipulating bat coronavirus, and then COVID-19 breaks out in the same exact town.

  What are the odds?

  Anthony “the Science” Fauci desperately tried to hide his involvement in Wuhan covid research. Anything that pointed at him, even remotely, was “Russian propaganda” https://t.co/FOPObnvm74

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 3, 2023

  Did we mention we’re really interested in the Twitter ‘Fauci Files’ that are supposedly dropping later this week?

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

  The real source of disinformation turned out to be, what do you know, the government.

  — Dave Benner, Thomas Paine Promoter (@dbenner83) January 3, 2023

  Back to the infiltration of Twitter…

  7.“YOU HAVEN’T MADE A RUSSIA ATTRIBUTION IN SOME TIME” When Clemson’s Media Forensics Hub complained Twitter hadn’t “made a Russia attribution” in some time, Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth said it was “revelatory of their motives.” pic.twitter.com/zByT5aCaBo

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023

  8.“WE’RE HAPPY TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH YOU ON THIS, INSTEAD OF NBC.” Roth tried in vain to convince outsider researchers like the Clemson lab to check with them before pushing stories about foreign interference to media.

  

  9.Twitter was also trying to reduce the number of agencies with access to Roth. “If these folks are like House Homeland Committee and DHS, once we give them a direct contact with Yoel, they will want to come back to him again and again,” said policy director Carlos Monje.

  

  10.When the State Department/GEC – remember this was 2020, during the Trump administration – wanted to publicize a list of 5,500 accounts it claimed would “amplify Chinese propaganda and disinformation” about COVID, Twitter analysts were beside themselves.

  Continue reading here.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 20:00

• Misunderstanding War, Money, And Prosperity
  Misunderstanding War, Money, And Prosperity

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  If the consensus of experts misunderstand money, credit and prosperity, how are we going to advance?

  

  Describing all the ways experts got it wrong is a thriving cottage industry. Expertise is itself contentious, as conventional expertise legitimized by credentials, prestigious institutional positions, scholarship, prizes, etc. can be wielded to promote the interests of the expert or whomever is funding the expert.

  Another segment of experts are self-proclaimed, essentially substituting an air of confidence in their own projections for actual expertise.

  Yet another segment of experts are lightweights with a misleading veneer of legitimacy to cloak their real identity as paid shills for corporations or other self-interested parties. PhD, anyone? Just put that PhD after your name and then pontificate about subjects completely outside your field.

  Then there’s the data, easily manipulated statistically to prove whatever is profitable to interested parties. Ibogaine improves sex, reverses aging and correlates to rising wealth–amazing! Buried on page 19 of the report: Research funded by the Ibogaine Industry. Nicely played, Ibogaine Industry.

  But if we set aside all the expertise delegitimized by self-interest, we’re left with profound misunderstandings of how the world actually works. Consider the big issues of war, money and prosperity.

  Looking back on 2022, it’s impossible to overlook the consensus of experts that expected Russia’s quantitative superiority in tanks, aircraft and personnel to be decisive in its invasion of Ukraine. Nearly a year later, it’s clear the rapid victory the vast majority of military experts anticipated did not play out. The vast majority got it wrong, and not because Russian forces were defeated as much as Russian forces failed to execute the complex coordinated attack as intended.

  The primary misunderstanding here, as in every war, is that difficult-to-measure qualitative factors matter more than raw numbers on a page. Numbers on a page don’t actually fight wars. War is not decided by addition and subtraction: the force with 1,000 tanks doesn’t defeat the force with 800 tanks just because they have 200 more tanks. There is much more going on in war, including training, unit cohesion, leadership, command and control, integrated intelligence, coordination of forces, tactical and strategic superiority and the will of the domestic populace.

  Touting the decisive impact of a new super-weapon is easy to do but misleading, as one new weapon can’t be decisive until long chains of preconditions are in place: personnel have been trained to use the new weapon, including extensive live-fire exercises; the spare parts and maintenance training to support the new weapons are in place and forward-deployed; targeting is integrated with intelligence data, and so on, in a mind-numbingly complex linkage of critical dependency chains: if one link is missing in any chain, the system fails to be decisive.

  Asymmetric warfare has a nice ring, but asymmetry works both ways. Asymmetric warfare calls to mind scrappy rebels beating the conventionally superior forces, and that is one facet of so-called unconventional warfare. (The Hessian mercenaries hired by the British in the Revolutionary War complained bitterly about the cowardly, ill-trained Americans taking potshots from the treeline instead of forming up tidy lines of battle in open fields.)

  Superior capabilities can offer asymmetric advantages, too. Training, unit cohesion, integrated intelligence, creative use of existing weaponry, ad-hoc improvements in armor and tactics–these become decisive despite the intrinsic imprecision of measuring these advantages.

  As for money, isn’t it possible that the vast majority of experts misunderstand money and credit? For example, a great many commentators claim that returning to a gold standard would solve virtually all the problems plaguing the global financial system without considering why the gold standard was abandoned piecemeal in the 20th century. Every policy and system has trade-offs, and the trade-offs change as conditions change.

  The Real Story of America Abandoning the Gold Standard (August 18, 2022)

  The Changing Relationship between Trade and America’s Gold Reserves (2020)

  As for credit, its history stretches back thousands of years. It has its own trade-offs, and the trade-offs change as conditions change.

  Properity is equally misunderstood. We’re assured by veritable armies of experts that prosperity requires constant economic growth–expansion of money, credit, income, wealth, production and consumption. If consumption falters, we’re doomed to impoverishment.

  This is of course completely wrong. Prosperity arises from the distribution of resources becoming more equal (as opposed to more unequal) and the improvement of productivity, i.e. producing more well-being with fewer inputs (resources, capital and labor).

  If the consensus of experts misunderstand money, credit and prosperity, how are we going to advance? First we have to actually understand the systems we want to change. That’s not as easy as establishing a consensus of experts.

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century.  Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 19:40

• Florida Keys Hit With "Mass Migrant Crisis" After Boat Landings Surge From Caribbean
  Florida Keys Hit With “Mass Migrant Crisis” After Boat Landings Surge From Caribbean

  Last month, the Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration from lifting Title 42, a Trump-era public health order that allows the Customs and Border Protection to turn migrants away at the US-Mexico border to prevent the spread of Covid-19. Even with Title 42 in place, the Biden administration has still managed to stoke a massive humanitarian crisis as the flood of migrants continues — and is now spreading to Florida.

  At least 500 migrants believed to be from Cuba, and other Caribbean countries arrived across the Florida Keys over the weekend, in what local officials described as a “mass migration crisis,” according to NYPost. 

  Monroe County Sheriff Rick Ramsay’s office said, “the Sheriff’s Office has been assisting federal law enforcement agents with a spike in Cuban refugee arrivals since Saturday and continuing into Monday morning.” 

  “Refugee arrivals require a lot of resources from the Sheriff’s Office as we help our federal law enforcement partners ensure the migrants are in good health and safe.

  “Residents may see an increased amount of law enforcement and emergency responders throughout the county as we continue to respond to these landings,” Sheriff Rick Ramsay said in a statement posted on Facebook. 

  The sheriff’s office reported more than 160 refugees were on boats that landed in the Middle and Upper Keys. More than 300 migrants landed across Marquesas Keys and at Fort Jefferson in the Dry Tortugas. They also said the latest wave of migrant landings is “aggravating the mass migration crisis in the Keys,” adding this whole mess is the result of a “federal failure” that has sparked yet another “humanitarian crisis.” 

  #Alert:

  During the past 72 hours, #BorderPatrol agents have responded to a high volume of migrant landings in the #FloridaKeys. There is an increased presence of law enforcement & first responders in the area. We appreciate the ongoing support from all of our LE partners. #news pic.twitter.com/Q4wK4YOBO6

  — Chief Patrol Agent Walter N. Slosar (@USBPChiefMIP) January 2, 2023

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

  At least one park in the Keys had to close over the weekend because hundreds of migrants arrived on boats. This was the Dry Tortugas National Park, located west of Key West. 

  “The closure, which is expected to last several days, is necessary for the safety of visitors and staff because of the resources and space needed to attend to the migrants,” the park tweeted Monday. “Concession-operated ferry and sea plane services are temporarily suspended.”

  The closure, which is expected to last several days, is necessary for the safety of visitors and staff because of the resources and space needed to attend to the migrants.

  Concession-operated ferry and sea plane services are temporarily suspended.

  — Dry Tortugas National Park (@DryTortugasNPS) January 1, 2023

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

  Democrats and Republicans have both criticized the Biden administration’s inability to get a handle on the record surges in illegal immigrants at the US-Mexico border, and now it appears the chaos is spreading to Florida in the form of migrant waves on boats.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 19:20

• The Friction Ahead In 2023
  The Friction Ahead In 2023

  Authored by Claudio Grass,

  Division, friction and polarization have been on the rise in the West for at least a decade, but the escalation we saw during the “covid years” was especially worrying. Over the last year, this “worry” has become a truly pressing concern, even a real emergency one might argue, as inflationary pressures and an actual war were added to the mix of political and social tensions.  

  Going into 2023, there are many reasons for responsible investors and for hardworking savers to adopt a cautious, bearish outlook. If anything, it’s hard to tell what to be concerned about the most and what to prepare for first: an escalation to the Ukraine-Russia war? Inflation persisting or even reaching new highs? Fuel and heating costs exploding even further? Growing government overreach and suppression of individual liberties and financial sovereignty? 

  In an effort to answer questions like these, that are keeping countless Americans and Europeans up at night, I turned to Jeff Deist, President of the Mises Institute in Alabama.

  Jeff has been one of the most impressive thinkers and speakers that I have personally encountered, and I’ve always found his clarity of thought particularly enlightening, but also very helpful in this day and age. After all, the ability to plainly and honestly communicate a great idea is just as important as the ability to conceive it – especially when it can be communicated to the public and change some open minds in the process, just like the Mises Institute has been doing for four decades. 

  

  Claudio Grass (CG): After the extreme trespasses, power abuses and irrational policies and U-turns we saw during the pandemic, many citizens hoped that 2022 would prove to be the year of “normalization”. What we got instead was a war, a fuel and food crisis, and a world more divided than any time before in recent memory. What was, in your estimation, the most worrying development we saw in 2022?

  Jeff Deist (JD): 2022 may be remembered as the year we fully understood how elites and the political class never intend to allow a return to “normal.” The covid flu virus created the excuse for lockdowns, controls, and spying; and as Robert Higgs explained, the “Ratchet Effect” means crisis measures don’t go away when the crisis ends. 

  Covid will be the excuse for attempts to impose a whole new battery of state mandates in areas of health (vaccines, masks, testing), business (closures), money (central bank digital currencies, capital controls), and movement (quarantines, travel restrictions). It’s up to us in the fight to restore normalcy and decency; the politicians will always go in the other direction.

  CG: We both warned for a long time that there would be a very high price to pay for the more-than-a-decade-long monetary and fiscal policies of the Fed and most of its peers. Why do you think it took so long for inflation to make the comeback we’re suffering though today? What triggered it and why now?

  JD: The current price inflation engulfing the US and other western nations results more from fiscal stimulus in 2020 and 2021 than monetary policy. In America alone, national politicians pumped more than $6 trillion into the domestic economy in the form of direct payments—subsidies—to state and local governments, preferred industries (insurance, airlines), businesses (payroll “loans”), and individuals in the form of stimulus checks.

  All this new money was created even as Covid lockdowns dramatically reduced the production of goods and services and disrupted global supply chains. So unlike monetary stimulus, where central banks push interest rates down and buy government bonds from commercial banks, the price inflation we are suffering today is directly tied to fiscal stimulus. It’s a simple matter of more money chasing fewer goods and services. Paying people to stay home and not work was a recipe for disaster.

  CG: After numerous unsuccessful attempts to simply deny its existence, central bankers were forced to acknowledge that inflation is indeed a problem, but still, quite unsurprisingly, nobody seems too keen to take any responsibility for it. Together with politicians, they simply blame Putin for it and pretend that the reckless “print, borrow and spend” approach of the past years had nothing to do with it. Given the relatively low levels of financial literacy among the general public, do you think most voters and taxpayers believe this narrative?

  JD: The question is not only whether average people still believe in the technical competence of central bankers to “manage” the economy, but whether they still believe central bankers even intend to help average people. Increasingly the answer to both appears to be “No!” 

  We are fewer than 15 years removed from the last economic crisis of 2008, so the idea that central banks prevent crises and crashes is hardly supported by the evidence. Of course, the poorest people suffer most from inflation, as a larger portion of their income for basics—food, utilities, transport, and rent. So, I do think average people sense something is deeply wrong with the financial and monetary system, even if they don’t understand the underlying technical issues.  

  CG: Apart from the thousands of human lives the Ukraine war has already claimed or uprooted and the inestimable damage to private and public property, there was another causality: Whatever was left of the legal protections for private property or of the free market in Europe vanished seemingly overnight. We saw gas and nuclear power companies nationalized, unprecedented interventionism in the oil and gas market and redistribution policies, fining energy companies for being profitable to pay for “inflation checks” to the public. Do you see a similar trend in the US?

  JD: The US has been more insulated from the energy shocks cause by sanctions against Russia simply because we have vast amounts of domestic oil and natural gas. But we lack sufficient refining capacity to make full use of our oil, due to environmentalist pressure. We also lack sufficient nuclear capacity for a country of 330 million people.

  So yes, I think events in Ukraine will advance the narrative of the “Green New Deal,” which effectively nationalizes energy policy to promote so-called renewable fuels while banning—or regulating into oblivion—fossil fuels. This is all a pipe dream, of course, as coal, oil, and natural gas still account for more than 80% of our energy use. And we are many decades away from having the grid capacity for widespread use of electric vehicles, even if you ignore the terrible issues of lithium mining and battery disposal. 

  Unless we are prepared to suffer a significant loss of material living standards, politicians in the West better stop fantasizing about green energy and start getting serious about the real market for reliable and cheap fossil fuels. Let’s hope and pray this winter does not result in the freezing deaths of people in Ukraine or Europe due to energy shortage.

  CG: Speaking of the US, what’s your assessment of the fiscal and regulatory policies adopted since Joe Biden took office? Do you think there’s anything his administration could have done to avert the current inflationary spiral or was it always going to be inevitable, after so many years in the making?

  JD: Biden certainly is responsible for the increase spending under his administration, which has enormous inflationary consequences. But most of the mischief in our economy was created by fiscal and monetary policies enacted while he was a cronyist US Senator for many decades. In that sense his Senate record is far worse than his presidential record. He is a buffoon, and easily led, which means he is not capable of challenging the “print, borrow, and spend” approach you mentioned. But I hope people understand Biden is a symptom of a much deeper problem, which is a hopelessly corrupt system with all the wrong incentives.

  CG: Focusing on the sociopolitical situation, at least from an outsider perspective, we’re certainly seeing less outrage and controversy reflected in the international press compared to when Trump was in the Oval Office. Does that mean that the “wounds have healed” and that Americans are actually more united today or is the rift still widening, just more quietly?

  JD: From my perspective the rift has widened. Biden’s narrow victory is viewed by the Left as a mandate to punish and vanquish the Deplorables, especially in rural areas. That’s the nature of politics, which is a form of proto-violence. Markets and civil society are win-win institutions, government and politics are zero-sum. So, unless and until we reduce the importance of political outcomes—unless and until we make life less political—we should expect division to grow.

  CG: Both in US and in Europe, there is well-documented and growing mistrust of the media, social- and legacy organizations alike. My own hope had been, especially after the pandemic, that the obscene amount of bias would cause more and more people to do their own research and to “educate themselves”. Have you noticed such a shift in the US, perhaps reflected in a heightened interest in the educational content and programs that the Mises Institute offers?

  JD: Absolutely. The digital age provides us the ability to seek out and find voices of reason and peace amidst the white noise of mainstream media. I hate to think it takes a real calamity to wake people up, but perhaps this is human nature. The more worried people become about the economy and their future, the more they seek out alternative sources of news and information. The Mises Institute works to be an alternative source for economic news and education.

  CG: Another trend we have in common is the “green agenda”. Even as the present crisis made it abundantly clear that the energy transition in Europe was catastrophically premature, bringing about the “cold, dark winter” that millions of citizens are now facing, there is still extreme pressure for more “green” policies, including a war on farmers at a time of unprecedented food price increases. Is that something you expect to see continue in the months and years to come and if so, what’s the impact you expect to see?

  JD: Food and energy crises certainly are possible. In keeping with the “new normal,” elites will use such crises to increase their own power and force us to suffer for problems they caused. We know, because they tell us plainly, their plans to have us stop using fossil fuels, stop traveling so much, stop eating meat, and stop owning homes. They are quite explicit about this. 

  The fastest and most effective way to achieve this is to make houses, gasoline, and meat so expensive only the very rich can afford them. We already see consolidation of home ownership by private equity firms, for example, to create a nation of renters in the US. We see billionaires like Bill Gates investing in fake meat substitutes. We see recipes in gourmet magazines for dishes featuring bugs! 

  None of this is normal or natural, but must be imposed by incentives, either positive or negative. If we hope to maintain any personal or family sovereignty in the coming decades, we have to recognize and resist this new program of imposed austerity.

  CG: What’s your outlook for the US economy in 2023? What are the main threats that worry you the most and what would be your advice for responsible savers that seek to protect all they’ve worked for from their government’s incompetence or intentional abuses?

  JD: Biden and company will face an increasingly tough economy, but given the Democrat’s tepid success in the midterm elections I suspect the administration will simply double down on fake statements about how well the country is doing. Politics is contra-reality, so by definition Biden cannot accept or admit what’s really going on.

  I predict the US Fed will “pivot” in 2023 on interest rate hikes, meaning they will revert to their usual (true) status of worrying more about equity and bond markets than consumers and inflation.  

  Inflation will remain will us, higher than admitted by government statistics, and will become a permanent feature of the 2020s across the West. Government spending and deficits will continue to grow. As a result, it will be a very trying decade for savers! Gold and silver, commodities, and bitcoin are the obvious suggestions for those looking to protect themselves from devaluation, but for a variety of reasons the US dollar will remain strong against other currencies. And of course, the most important thing is to “harden” yourself against uncertainty by improving your skills and practicing self-education.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 19:00

• Incoming Israeli Foreign Minister Shocks By Previewing Pro-Russian Policies
  Incoming Israeli Foreign Minister Shocks By Previewing Pro-Russian Policies

  Israel’s new government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is signaling a huge policy shift regarding both the Ukraine war and Israel’s relations with Russia, even suggesting a more openly ‘pro-Moscow’ stance.

  Israel’s Foreign Minister Eli Cohen in a Monday speech previewing future policy said in the context of the Ukraine conflict, “On the issue of Russia and Ukraine we will do on thing for sure – speak less in public.” Interestingly it comes after months of rising tensions with Kiev, based on Israel’s repeat refusal to provide the Ukrainians with its Iron Dome anti-air defense systems and other weaponry. However, the prior government was much more vocally supportive of Ukraine, in line with key Western allies like the United States and Britain.

  

  Israel has limited itself to supplying humanitarian and other non-lethal aid, causing President Zelensky to recently lash out. In October Zelensky went so far as to chastise Israeli officials for turning “a blind eye to Russian terror”. 

  Zelensky also said at the time, which came in the context of a virtual address before Israeli journalists: “Is it [Israel] with the democratic world, which is fighting side by side against the existential threat to its existence? Or with those who turn a blind eye to Russian terror, even when the cost of continued terror is the complete destruction of global security?”

  Fast-forward to a new hard-right Israeli government having days ago been sworn-in, and it appears that Zelensky’s fiery denunciation and pressure campaign has backfired. 

  But it seems Zelensky saw it coming, given the following comments at the end of November: 

  Israel’s incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “personal relationship” with Russia’s Vladimir Putin could affect the “historical relations” between Israel and Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky told The New York Times’ DealBook Summit on Wednesday.

  “Of course, if [Netanyahu] wants to maintain his personal relations with Putin, he can continue doing what he’s doing,” Zelensky said at the summit, held in New York City.

  “But if he wants to maintain the historical relations between Israel and the Ukrainian people, you have to do everything you can to save as many people as possible.”

  1 \ BREAKING: New Israeli foreign minister Eli Cohen signaled a policy shift on Ukraine in his 1st speech hinting the new government will take a more pro-Russian line. He said he will speak on Tuesday with Russian FM Lavrov – 1st such call since the Russian invasion of Ukraine

  — Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) January 2, 2023

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

  The incoming Israeli FM in the Monday remarks vowed a new “responsible” policy on the war in Ukraine, describing that the foreign ministry “will prepare a detailed presentation to the security cabinet on this issue.” He did say that Israeli humanitarian aid to the war-ravaged country will continue, but clearly this is a sign the door has been shut regarding the prospect of lethal aid in the near future.

  According to Axios Middle East correspondent Barak Ravid, this marks a dramatic shift in Russia-Ukraine policy compared to the last caretaker government which was in place during the initial invasion and throughout the first 10 months of war. Ravid writes: 

  Why it matters: Cohen’s predecessor Yair Lapid led a tough line Russia, condemned it publicly & even said the Russian military committed war crimes. Since the invasion Lapid didn’t speak to Lavrov & after he assumed office as caretaker prime minister he didn’t speak to Putin.

  Russia’s Putin welcomes Netanyahu back to power in Israel https://t.co/7neWZuimVP

  — Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) January 1, 2023

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

  Ravid further noted Cohen is expected to hold a phone call with his Russian counterpart: 

  New Israeli foreign minister Eli Cohen signaled a policy shift on Ukraine in his 1st speech hinting the new government will take a more pro-Russian line. He said he will speak on Tuesday with Russian FM Lavrov – 1st such call since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

  Meanwhile, an awkward standoff could be developing at the UN, given Ukrainian and Israeli officials are seeking to ramp up pressure on each other concerning votes and policy positions before the world body.

  As for Israel wanting to keep up tighter relations with Moscow, one prime factor is that it needs Russia to continue giving a quiet green light to Israeli Air Force strikes inside Syria. Israel says it is acting against Iranian assets inside the country, as well as Hezbollah. Russia has a significant military presence in Syria at the invitation of President Assad, but has not intervened against Israeli aggression in semi-frequently bombing places like Damascus, despite its limited verbal denunciations. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 18:40

• Matt Gaetz Calls McCarthy A "Squatter" For Prematurely Moving Into Speaker's Office
  Matt Gaetz Calls McCarthy A “Squatter” For Prematurely Moving Into Speaker’s Office

  Update (2228ET): In a hilarious cap to today’s chaos surrounding the GOP House Speaker vote, anti-McCarthy Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida wrote to the Architect of the Capitol to ask how long McCarthy – who prematurely moved in to the Speaker’s office – would be able to occupy the room “before he is considered a squatter.”

  Gaetz sent a letter to the Architect of the Capitol questioning why McCarthy is allowed to occupy the Speaker’s office. pic.twitter.com/gOlXOtlHQj

  — Juliegrace Brufke (@juliegraceb) January 4, 2023

  *  *  *

  Update (1836ET): The day ended without the election of a House Speaker, as support for Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) waned throughout the day.

  

  Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), meanwhile, saw his stock rise with each of Tuesday’s three votes.

  As The Epoch Times notes, in the first vote of a tumultuous first day of the 118th Congress, McCarthy, the California Republican who led the party to regain the majority in the November 2022 mid-term election, fell 15 votes short of the 218 he needed to become Speaker of the House.

  McCarthy received 203 votes from Republican colleagues, while 212 Democrats voted for Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who will serve as House Minority Leader in 2023. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz), the leader of the anti-McCarthy members, received 10 votes. A handful of Republicans voted for candidates who were not nominated.

  Second Vote

  Incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) cited Saint Paul’s admonition about “finishing the race” as he nominated House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for Speaker of the House.

  In his floor speech, Jordan said the House must do three basic things in 2023, including getting the U.S. border with Mexico under control and restoring U.S. military strength, stopping profligate spending by Democrats, and conducting a comprehensive oversight effort of President Joe Biden’s administration.

  “We have to do the Oversight and Investigations that needs to be done. This idea that bureaucrats who never put their name on the ballot but think they run the country, who assaulted our constituents’ First Amendment liberties. they need to be held accountable,” Jordan said.

  “That has to happen, we need to do it. We need to do it in a way that’s consistent with the Constitution, but we need to do it vigorously and aggressively. That is part of our duty as members of this body,” Jordan continued.

  Jordan’s nomination of McCarthy followed the California Republican’s failure to marshall a majority of the 434 Members of the Representatives assembled earlier in the day for the first vote on a new Speaker.

  Jeffries was also nominated a second time. Then Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) nominated Jordan, despite the fact the Ohio Republican made clear he continued to support McCarthy. Then the second ballot roll call was called.

  All of the 19 Republicans who opposed McCarthy in the first ballot shifted their votes to Jordan, including Biggs. While McCarthy gained the same 203 votes he received in the first balloting, which again left him short of the needed majority of 218. All 212 Democrats again voted for Jeffries.

  One of those who voted for Jordan was House Freedom Caucus (HFC) Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), who during the second ballot posted on Twitter his determination to fight McCarthy no matter how many ballots are required.

  “I stand firmly committed to changing the status quo no matter how many ballots this takes. If McCarthy had fought nearly as hard to defeat the failed, toxic policies of the Biden Administration as he has for himself, he would be Speaker of the House right now,” Perry wrote.

  Tension is building on the House floor among Republicans. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told Fox News that “If all they want is somebody other than Kevin, let’s be candid. Steve Scalise is supporting Kevin, Jim Jordan is supporting Kevin. As a matter of fact, every member of the leadership team, including every ranking member without becoming a chairman, is supporting Kevin. So we are in a situation in which the 19 have to explain what they want.”

  Democrats were quick to seize on the GOP confusion, with Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) issuing a statement following the first vote observing that “Hunter Thompson was right: ‘When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.’ This is what a Republican majority gets us: chaos.”

  “Democrats are here and ready to do our jobs for the country. Republican disarray is standing in the way.”

  Third Vote

  House Republicans remained deadlocked after voting for the third time Tuesday without giving enough votes to make McCarthy the new Speaker of the House.

  McCarthy lost one vote—Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.)—on the third vote of the day for a total of 202 votes. Democrat Hakeem Jeffries of New York had the highest total with 212, with all of his Democratic colleagues but no Republicans voting for him.

  Incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) drew 20 votes, but his own ballot went to McCarthy for the third time. Jordan received 19 votes on the second ballot.

  The conservative rebels who have held firm against McCarthy and coalesced around Jordan on the third ballot remained steadfastly determined to keep their California colleague from succeeding Democrat Nancy Pelosi, also of California, as the new Speaker.

  In an impassioned speech nominating Jordan on the third ballot, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) put the issue between McCarthy and the dissidents as one of how best to stand up to President Joe Biden and the Senate Democratic majority.

  “How many times have we been down here giving speeches, and there’s not a soul in the chamber? Yet this is what it takes to get 435 People in the chamber and have an actual debate,” Roy told the chamber.

  “The American people are watching, and that’s a good thing. What we’re doing is exercising our rights to vote and have a debate and have a discussion about the future of this country through the decision of choosing a speaker.

  “This is not personal. It’s not. This is about the future of the country. This is about the direction of the country.”

  Republican Infighting

  That vote capped a frenzied two days of back-room bargaining and media posturing by McCarthy and his supporters and a small group of dissident populist conservatives who demanded and got a host of reform concessions, but still voted no on the first ballot.

  The bottom line for the dissidents was they just don’t trust McCarthy to be the agent of change they believe must lead the House in what they are determined to make the last two years of President Joe Biden’s tenure in the White House.

  “I came to a broken and dysfunctional Congress to change it. Advancing the long-standing pecking order one notch has no prospect of doing that. Many don’t want to change it,” Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) posted on Twitter just before the first vote.

  “Kevin McCarthy is not the right candidate to be Speaker. He has perpetuated the Washington status quo that makes this body one of the most unsuccessful and unpopular institutions in the country. This is not about personality or who has ‘earned’ the position, it is about serving the American people. I will not support the status quo,” Bishop continued.

  In the final minutes before the new House assembled for the speaker contest, a clearly exasperated and frustrated McCarthy told reporters: “I have the record for the longest speech ever on the floor. I don’t have a problem getting a record for the most votes for Speaker, too.”

  He was referring to his more than 90-minute December address to the House in opposition to Biden’s $1.8 trillion omnibus spending bill.

  Read the rest here…

  *  *  *

  Update (1455ET): Kevin McCarthy has lost the second tally for Speaker of the House.

  McCarthy Fails Again In Second Ballot pic.twitter.com/ElBa7bLjM6

  — The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) January 3, 2023

  Of note, when this happened in 1923, it went to nine ballots.

  And look who’s gaining steam…

  The 19 who voted for Jordan on second ballot

  Andy Ogles
  Lauren Boebert
  Michael Cloud
  Anna Paulina Luna
  Mary Miller
  Keith Self
  Andy Biggs
  Dan Bishop
  Andrew Clyde
  Phil Crane
  Matt Gaetz
  Bob Good
  Paul Gosar
  Andy Harris
  Josh Brecheen
  Ralph Norman
  Scott Perry
  Matt Rosendale
  Chip Roy

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 3, 2023

  

  #NeverKevin

  Cc: MTG pic.twitter.com/4nyf2M6Sml

  — Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) January 3, 2023

  *  *  *

  Update (1310ET): Not even a quarter of the way through roll call, and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has failed to secure enough votes to become Speaker of the House – which will push the contest into a multiple-ballot vote.

  MCCARTHY NO VOTES:
  Biggs — Biggs
  Bishop — Biggs
  Boebert — Jordan
  Breechen — Banks
  Cloud — Jordan
  Clyde — Biggs
  Crane — Biggs

  — Olivia Beavers (@Olivia_Beavers) January 3, 2023

  BREAKING: Rep. Kevin McCarthy appears to lose first ballot for House speaker.

  Watch live: https://t.co/MPjgQRmzjX pic.twitter.com/wOrUCWbmzc

  — MSNBC (@MSNBC) January 3, 2023

  According to the Washington Post‘s Paul Kane, the last time this happened was 1923.

  We are into uncharted territory: No one in House chamber right now has ever been alive for a multiple-ballot vote for House speaker, let alone seen one in person.
  With 7 votes from Rs for someone other than McCarthy, we are certain to head to a 2nd ballot.
  Last one: 1923.

  — Paul Kane (@pkcapitol) January 3, 2023

  What’s next? As Politico reports:

  After McCarthy fails to get 218 votes on the first ballot, the Freedom Caucus antagonists have signaled that they will start backing another yet-unnamed candidate on the second ballot. The Daily Beast reported Monday night that that person is Ohio Rep. JIM JORDAN, the longtime McCarthy critic-turned-ally.

  The Ohio Republican, however, has no shot at being speaker — something that his adoring conservative colleagues know very well. But, per the Daily Beast story, that’s not the point: They’re hoping to peel off more Republicans to back Jordan, aiming to have McCarthy’s vote count decrease from the first ballot to the second.

  It’s an open question how long today will go until someone nominates a viable candidate for the gavel — someone like STEVE SCALISE (R-La.) or PATRICK McHENRY (R-N.C.). And there’s a fear that if one of these member’s names is called too early in the process, the conference will turn on them.

  Buckle up. It’s going to be a long day. 

  Hakeem Jeffries will likely win the plurality vote, but you need a majority vote to be the speaker. So they will just keep voting until someone gets a majority. In 1855 that took 2 months. #mccarthy #118thCongress #Speaker

  — Ben Sheehan (@ThatBenSheehan) January 3, 2023

  McCarthy’s loss on the first vote is a terrible day for mediocre Americans. Millions of Americans are mediocre, and they deserve representation too.

  — Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) January 3, 2023

  *  *  *

  Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) gave a Tuesday morning speech imploring fellow Republicans to elect him as Speaker of the House, as several notable members of the GOP have openly opposed McCarthy.

  

  According to Axios, McCarthy has given hardliners nearly everything they’ve asked for, however he still hasn’t secured enough votes for the position, meaning that for the first time in 100 years, the House will likely hold multiple ballots for the speaker.

  In his Tuesday speech, McCarthy listed all the concessions he’s made to the right, and pointed out that Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) praised elements of his rules package. Gaetz, notably, has spearheaded the anti-McCarthy movement within the chamber.

  Gaetz, of course, has been rallying support against McCarthy. https://t.co/JcxS2Wx5sU

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 3, 2023

  “I’ve earned this job,” said McCarthy, after running through everything he’s done to become speaker – to which Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) reportedly shook his head, according to Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman.

  “This is bullshit,” said Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) in response to McCarthy’s speech.

  .@mkraju just dropped a “bullshit” on CNN pic.twitter.com/53xj9p4VCE

  — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 3, 2023

  In December, Gaetz said he wouldn’t vote for McCarthy because he’s “just a shill of the establishment.”

  I’m not voting for Kevin McCarthy for Speaker because he’s just a shill of The Establishment.

  The reason most of my Republican colleagues are supporting him is because they benefit from the redistribution of lobbyist & special interest money from McCarthy to their campaigns. pic.twitter.com/bdJmjwy6W7

  — Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) December 27, 2022

  McCarthy also got into an argument with Rep. Perry, who accused McCarthy of having no track record on spending bills.

  Perry & McCarthy got in a heated back and forth, even raising their voices-

  Perry accused McCarthy of not having a track record on spending bills “You have no track record.”

  McCarthy asked Perry what he is still fighting for

  With @mkraju @MZanona

  — Annie Grayer (@AnnieGrayerCNN) January 3, 2023

  McCarthy’s supporters chime in:

  In addition to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), McCarthy has the support of neocon Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), who has called McCarthy’s detractors “enemies” and “narcissists.”

  “They are enemies now. They have made it clear that they prefer a Democrat agenda than a Republican,” Crenshaw told CNN‘s Manu Raju.

  “This handful of members is very clearly looking for notoriety over principle. That’s what it is. And anyone who suggests differently is in some kind of make believe fantasy reality. It’s not, it’s not true,” he continued, adding “They lost those debates.”

  “That should have been the end of it because that’s how a team works, right? But if you’re a narcissist, … then you’ll keep going. And you’ll threaten to tear down the team for the benefit of the Democrats just because of your own sense of self importance.”

  “We will not vote for anyone else but McCarthy,” Crenshaw said. “These people think they’re stubborn, we’re more stubborn.”

  — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 3, 2023

  Another McCarthy supporter, Mike Rogers (R-AL), said the GOP should bar McCarthy dissenters from getting committee slots – an idea Chip Roy didn’t like. 

  CHIP ROY and MCCARTHY just got into it. @chiproytx Roy said he tried to negotiate on rules. McCarthy thanked him for handling it respectfully and said Roy should say yes more.

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) January 3, 2023

  Here’s Roy in December explaining the situation;

  According to Axios, this could become a war of attrition in which “[a] good number of pro-McCarthy House Republicans are hoping some of the holdouts are bluffing and looking for a show — and will ultimately get worn down enough during the process to cave for McCarthy.”

  Do you remember who made a formal nomination speech in support of KEVIN McCARTHY to be SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE on January 3, 2019?

  *****It was your new best friend LIZ CHENEY*****

  And now you know why Kevin McCarthy did not get a criminal referral to DOJ from the @January6thCmte!! pic.twitter.com/vhYmQEoWLV

  — Don Winslow (@donwinslow) January 3, 2023

  The likely candidate to replace McCarthy, in the unlikely event he pulls out, is Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), who said he won’t run against McCarthy but has been quietly preparing for this scenario.

  It doesn’t look like McCarthy is too worried…

  GOP Leader McCarthy has moved into the speakers suite but if he fails to secure 218 he will have to move all his stuff back out ⁦@AllieRaffa⁩ pic.twitter.com/Lb2swMgQ2p

  — Haley Talbot (@haleytalbotnbc) January 2, 2023

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 18:36

• The Bahamas Lawyers Up As The FTX Case Proceeds In US Court And Disagreements Fester
  The Bahamas Lawyers Up As The FTX Case Proceeds In US Court And Disagreements Fester

  By Derek Andersen of Cointelegraph.com

  The Bahamas will have legal representation in the unfolding FTX case. The Caribbean nation chose Brown Rudnick as counsel “in certain matters of engagement related to the collapse of FTX Digital Markets Ltd.,” alongside Bahamian lawyers and other experts, according to a statement released by the law firm. 

  FTX Digital Markets is headquartered in the Bahamas, and the top management of the company lived in that country. Cases against the members of the management team are now being heard in the United States after former CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s extradition from the Bahamas.

  Brown Rudnick has been working for the Bahamas since March 2022 to develop a national policy statement on digital assets. The firm was reengaged by the country after the FTX collapse, and filed a registration statement with the U.S. Department of Justice, as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, late in December, saying:

  “Some of the Registrant’s activities may involve preparation and dissemination of informational materials and otherwise engaging with U.S. government agencies and the U.S. media.”

  Brown Rudnick may also prepare written content for social media on the behalf of the Bahamas, it said.

  You would think that a Government of public relations like this one would at least trust a Bahamian firm to get the job done.

  A local firm leading the charge with international help would have been the better approach. But as usual, Davis listens to the FNM when it’s too late. https://t.co/WxJps0spZ6

  — Michael C. Pintard (@PintardMP) December 30, 2022

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

  The Bahamas has been active in the FTX case from its start and differences with U.S. prosecutors began almost immediately. A competing Chapter 15 bankruptcy claim was filed in a U.S. court by the Bahamas the day after FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

  The Securities Commission of the Bahamas (SCB) ordered all FTX Digital Markets digital assets transferred to a wallet it controlled after the beginning of the bankruptcy cases, leading to criticism from the new FTXmanagement that burgeoned into accusations that the SCB had asked Bankman-Fried to create a new tokenfor it and that it was attempting to favor the country’s citizens in the claims against the company.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/03/2023 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• 19 Senior Experts Of China’s Top Academic Bodies Died In December
  19 Senior Experts Of China’s Top Academic Bodies Died In December

  Authored by Anne Zhang and Lynn Xu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In December, 19 experts of China’s top academies, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and the Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE), died of unspecified “illness,” a statistic that is six times higher than the average number of deaths in the past years.

  

  Official reports avoid mentioning the cause of these deaths, in what appears to be an attempt to cover up deaths  caused by COVID-19.

  But Airfinity, a UK-based Health Data Agency, updated data on Dec. 30, saying that roughly 11,000 people in China are dying every day from COVID, bringing the total number of deaths from the disease to 110,000 in December.

  According to obituaries published by China’s official media, in the 12 days from Dec.15 to Dec.26, 13 members of CAE passed away due to “illness.” They are fiber optic communication expert Zhao Zisen (91), environmental engineering and environmental water quality expert Tang Hongxiao (91), rare earth metal smelting and separation expert Zhang Guocheng (91), laser technology expert Zhao Yijun (92),  inorganic non-metallic materials expert Gu Zhenan (86), civil engineering and structural mechanics expert Long Yuqiu (96), ecologists and foresters Li Wenhua (90), wildlife scientist Ma Jianzhang (86), pediatric surgery specialist Zhang Jinzhe (102), thermal impeller machinery expert Wang Zhongqi (90), architect and professor at Tsinghua University Guan Zhaoye (93), welding specialist for aerospace manufacturing engineering Guan Qiao (87), and petroleum engineering expert Li Qingzhong (92).

  A total of six CAS members passed away on Dec. 6, 23, and 25, including Lu Qiang (86), a Chinese expert in automatic control and dynamics of electrical systems and professor at Tsinghua University; Zhang Youshang (97), a Chinese biochemist and molecular biologist; Jiang Hualiang (57), a former director of the Shanghai Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences; Wu Chengkang (93), a high-temperature gas dynamist; Tong Tanjun (88), a medical scientist; and Huang Kezhi (95), a physicist and a professor at Tsinghua University.

  Most of the deceased were CCP members, and some were from the minority parties, such as the Democratic League and the Jiu San Society, which were recognized as existing because they explicitly supported the CCP and recognized its leadership.

  

  Political Factors Introduced to the Selection of Academicians

  In 2022, at least 53 members of the CAS and CAE passed away according to incomplete statistics.

  CAS and CAE, known as the Two Academies, accumulate scientists and experts that can serve the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and enjoy the privilege of lifetime membership. The selection system for academics inevitably reflects political factors.

  Xie Yong, deputy editor-in-chief of Huanghe magazine in north China’s Shanxi Province, published an article in Modern China Study, an international journal, in 2022 discussing the differences between academician systems under CCP rule and under the Republic of China.

  In 1948, before the CCP took power, the Republic of China’s way to select members of the Academia Sinica, the current national academy, was based on the sole principle of academic achievement.

  Academicians were nominated by major universities, research institutions, professional societies, and respected celebrities of the academic community. Hence, the candidates were all first-class scholars at that time. Even Guo Moruo and Ma Yinchu, who were both pro-Communist in their political stance, were also elected as academicians, Xie said.

  In contrast, CAS selecting methods in 1955, by then controlled by the CCP, included political considerations to the selection criteria. For academicians of Social Sciences, candidates were required to uphold socialism and the Communist Party.

  At that time, all former members of the Academia Sinica who had not left the mainland in 1949, the year the CCP seized power, basically became members of CAS.

  However, Hu Xianfu, a famous biologist at that time, was taken off the list because the CCP authorities thought that his academic views were anti-Soviet.

  Hu then suffered physically and mentally during the Cultural Revolution, and finally passed away in 1968 at the age of 75 in a 10-square-meter (about 108 square feet) room.

  During the Cultural Revolution, many academicians were branded as reactionary academic authorities and were severely criticized and even persecuted to death.

  Other scholars and experts have not escaped various political campaigns and purges by the CCP. After the anti-rightist movement and the Great Leap Forward, 11 academicians were ranked as rightists and stripped of their titles as academic members.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 23:00

• Proper Hydration "Might Slow Down Aging Process In Humans," Study Reveals
  Proper Hydration “Might Slow Down Aging Process In Humans,” Study Reveals

  A peer-reviewed study published by National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers in the eBioMedicine journal on Monday reveals that adequately hydrated individuals could live longer and develop fewer age-related chronic diseases. 

  “The results suggest that proper hydration may slow down aging and prolong a disease-free life,” Natalia Dmitrieva, Ph.D., the study’s lead author and researcher in the Laboratory of Cardiovascular Regenerative Medicine at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), part of NIH, said in a statement. 

  

  Dmitrieva and her team used health data spanning three decades of 11,255 adults and analyzed their serum sodium levels which fluctuate with fluid intake. Consuming more fluid will lower serum sodium levels. They found that adults with higher sodium levels were more prone to develop chronic illnesses and show signs of advanced biological aging than those with lower sodium levels. Adults with higher sodium levels were more susceptible to death at a younger age. 

  Serum sodium levels above 142 mEq/L increased the risk of chronic diseases like heart failure, stroke, atrial fibrillation, peripheral artery disease, chronic lung disease, diabetes, and dementia by up to 64%. But adults with serum sodium levels between 138-140 mEq/L had a much lower risk of such fatal diseases. 

  “People whose serum sodium is 142 mEq/L or higher would benefit from evaluation of their fluid intake,” Dmitrieva said. She added that most people could increase their fluid intake to reduce sodium levels. 

  According to the National Academy of Medicine, men should ingest 125 ounces of water daily, and women consume 91 ounces. 

  Dmitrieva said her findings don’t prove a causal effect, and randomized, controlled clinical trials are needed to understand if proper hydration can promote healthy aging, prevent diseases, and lead to a longer life. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 22:25

• "Should Not Live In Fear" – Chief Justice Roberts Year-End Message Focuses On Judges' Security
  “Should Not Live In Fear” – Chief Justice Roberts Year-End Message Focuses On Judges’ Security

  Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  After a difficult 2022 at the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts said in an annual report that the personal security of judges needs to be a priority.

  “The law requires every judge to swear an oath to perform his or her work without fear or favor, but we must support judges by ensuring their safety,” Roberts wrote (pdf) in the “2022 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary,” which was made public late Dec. 31.

  “A judicial system cannot and should not live in fear,” he added.

  

  In the report, Roberts paid tribute to federal Judge Ronald N. Davies, who in 1957 ruled in favor of black students in Little Rock, Arkansas, who had been barred from attending a local high school despite the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in 1954 striking down school desegregation on constitutional grounds.

  Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, a Democrat, ordered the state’s National Guard to block the students but “when it came time to rule in the school desegregation litigation, Davies did not flinch,” Roberts wrote.

  Angry crowds resisted the desegregation effort and Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower directed the 101st Airborne to make sure the black students could attend the school.

  In his role as Chief Justice of the United States, Roberts, appointed in 2005 by President George W. Bush, both presides over the Supreme Court and oversees the federal judiciary.

  The report does not reference the unprecedented leak in May 2022 of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that legalized abortion nationwide.

  The Supreme Court is said to be investigating the leak, but the identity of the leaker or leakers is still unknown. Various justices have said publicly and repeatedly in recent months that the public would be updated on the progress of the investigation but no updates have been issued.

  The report also does not reference the raucous protests at the homes of the conservative justices in Maryland and Virginia, nor the attacks on justices such as Brett Kavanaugh who was the target of a foiled assassination attempt and of flash-mob harassment in public outings by left-wing activists.

  Roberts defended the right of Americans to disagree with court rulings.

  “Judicial opinions speak for themselves, and there is no obligation in our free country to agree with them. Indeed, we judges frequently dissent—sometimes  strongly—from our colleagues’ opinions, and we explain why in public writings about the cases before us.”

  Roberts said recent security legislation was a step in the right direction.

  Roberts acknowledged that last month Congress passed the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act to help protect judges and their families. The measure was named after the son of federal Judge Esther Salas of New Jersey, who was killed by an assailant when he answered the door to his mother’s home.

  Roberts did not mention that on June 16, 2022, President Joe Biden signed the Supreme Court Police Parity Act into law. The measure gives Supreme Court officials greater authority to protect the court, members of the justices’ immediate families, and other court employees.

  The report also states that caseloads for the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court, fell over the past year.

  In the 12-month period ending Sept. 30, 2022, the number of cases docketed by the Supreme Court dropped by 8 percent compared to the previous 12-month period. Similar declines were seen in federal courts of appeals, district courts, and bankruptcy courts.

  The Epoch Times reached out to the U.S. Department of Justice for comment but did not receive an immediate reply.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 21:50

• Trump Suggests He May Run On Third-Party Ticket In 2024
  Trump Suggests He May Run On Third-Party Ticket In 2024

  Former President Trump has last week hinted that he’ll hand-grenade the 2024 presidential election for Republicans by running as a third-party candidate.

  

  Trump shared an American Greatness article by Dan Gelernter which suggests that establishment Republicans would do everything in their power to prevent Trump from winning again, and that voters like Gelernter would rather vote for Trump on a third-party ticket even if it means losing the election.

  “They’d rather lose an election to the Democrats, their brothers in crime, than win with Trump,” Gelernter wrote of establishment GOP.

  …despite the obvious differences, we’re heading for a 1912-repeat, in which the Republican Party ignores its own voters. The Republican machine has no intention of letting us choose Trump again: He is not a uniparty team player. They’d rather lose an election to the Democrats, their brothers in crime, than win with Trump.

  That leads us to the inevitable question: What should we do when a majority of Republicans want Trump, but the Republican Party says we can’t have him? Do we knuckle under and vote for Ron DeSantis because he would be vastly better than any Democrat?

  I say no, we don’t knuckle under. And I like DeSantis. I’d vote for him after Trump’s second term. But not before. –American Greatness

  “Do I think Trump can win as a third-party candidate? No,” Gelernter added. “Would I vote for him as a third-party candidate? Yes, because I’m not interested in propping up this corrupt gravy-train any longer.”

  In 2021, Trump told RNC Chairwoman Rona McDaniel that he was “done” with the party after receiving virtually no support over his claims that Democrats cheated in the 2020 election.

  “You cannot do that. If you do, we will lose forever,” McDaniel reportedly told Trump regarding a 3rd party run, according to a book by ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl. “Exactly – you will lose forever without me. I don’t care. This is what Republicans deserve for not sticking up for me,” Trump allegedly shot back.

  That said, DeSantis has been shooting up in the polls – and even received his own hit piece in Vanity Fair on Monday.

  

  New Hitler just dropped. https://t.co/byESQjVJp0

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) January 2, 2023

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 21:15

• Congress Should Investigate 'Gain-Of-Function' Research
  Congress Should Investigate ‘Gain-Of-Function’ Research

  Authored by Bill King via RealClear Wire,

  I fear that the investigations Republicans have promised in the House next year will be little more than another round of toxic partisan gamesmanship. But there is one investigation Congress should undertake, and that is into so-called “gain-of-function” research.

  

  Before the pandemic, I suspect that most of you, like me, had never heard of gain-of-function research. What we learned during the pandemic is that scientists around the world routinely tinker with the genome of viruses to see how the induced changes will affect replication of the virus (contagiousness) and the effects it has on its host (lethality). Such research has apparently been going on for decades and is routinely funded by governments, including ours.

  Within weeks of the COVID-19 virus emerging in China near the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), many began to question whether the virus had been created by gain-of-function research and somehow escaped from WIV’s labs. Recently analyzed Chinese documents from early in the pandemic seem to suggest the virus might have come from WIV. To many, the proposition that the novel coronavirus just happened to naturally occur a few hundred yards from the WIV facility seemed too much of a coincidence.

  But in February 2020, barely three months after the virus’s genome had been sequenced, 27 scientists signed a statement in the medical journal The Lancet, unequivocally declaring that the virus had occurred naturally and that any suggestion to the contrary was quackery and a conspiracy theory. Their statement quickly became the accepted orthodoxy for much of the world’s scientific community and virtually all the mainstream media.

  However, as time wore on, circumstances regarding the origin of that statement came under scrutiny. In a 2021 Vanity Fair article, investigative journalist Katherine Eban revealed that the statement was organized by a scientist named Peter Daszak. That statement concluded with a declaration from the scientists who signed it that “we have no competing interests.” However, Eban reported in a follow-up article that Daszak was the director of EcoHealth Alliance, which in 2014 had received a $3.7 million grant from the NIH for gain-of-function research and made a sub-grant for $600,000 – to the WIV.

  I wrote to the email address reserved for the statement in the Lancet post, posing a number of questions about the circumstances around the creation of the letter and the “competing interests” statement. I also reached out to two of the scientists who signed the letter asking for an interview regarding the statement. I received no responses.

  Questions about gain-of-function research predate COVID. In fact, there has been a robust debate over the potential risks and benefits that dates to, at least, 2011. In 2014, a group of 300 prominent scientists, led by Harvard’s highly regarded epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch, signed a statement raising alarms about risks associated with gain-of-function research.

  The academic controversy caused the Obama administration to issue a moratorium on gain-of-function research, but it included a general exception for studies “urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security.” According to Eban’s reporting, the exception quickly became a glaring loophole that essentially rendered the rule useless: the controversial research mostly continued unabated.

  The Trump administration scrapped the moratorium in favor of a complex review process. But that process was mostly conducted outside of the public’s view or even significant peer review, leaving many of the critics, including Lipsitch, still wary.

  The debate over the origins of COVID still rages today and unfortunately has become politicized, with Democrats and Republicans generally lining up behind the natural and lab-leak theories, respectively. In August 2021, the National Intelligence Council issued an unclassified report in response to an order from President Biden to review the origin of the virus. The report stated that the intelligence community had not been able to reach a conclusion and that the origin would likely never be known without more cooperation from the Chinese government. Of course, the more time that passes the less likely it is that the mystery will ever be solved.

  While we would all like to know how the pandemic started, the mere fact that it might have originated from gain-of-function research gone awry makes it imperative to conduct a detailed investigation of the risks and potential benefits of this kind of research. Of all the things we regulate, surely tinkering with viruses to make them more contagious and more lethal should be right at the top of the list. Congress needs to pass laws closely regulating what Rutgers professor Richard Ebright described to Katherine Eban as “looking for a gas leak with a lighted match” and not leave this up to executive orders.

  Congress should also investigate what appears to have been a coordinated attempt to squelch any inquiry into the legitimate questions over COVID’s origins in the early days of the pandemic. For example, the signers of the Lancet statement should be subpoenaed and questioned about what was almost certainly a false certification of “no competing interests” by at least one of the signers. (The criticism regarding potential conflicts of interest is not just coming from the right: The uber-progressive Columbia professor Jeffrey Sachs disbanded a group he had established to study the origins of COVID, citing conflicts of interest. Interestingly, Daszak was part of the group Sachs disbanded.)

  I don’t know whether House Republicans can conduct such hearings without turning them into a carnival sideshow. But hopefully they will rise above partisan instincts and deliver much-needed answers for the American people.

  Bill King is a businessman and lawyer, and is a former opinion columnist and editorial board member at the Houston Chronicle. He has served in a number of appointed and elected positions, including mayor of his hometown. He writes on a wide range of public policy and political issues. Bill is the author of “Unapologetically Moderate” and currently serves as the co-chair of the Forward Party of Texas.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 20:40

• Tesla Kicks Off 2023 By Continuing 10,000 Yuan Sales Incentives In China
  Tesla Kicks Off 2023 By Continuing 10,000 Yuan Sales Incentives In China

  It was an ugly end to 2022 for Tesla shares, to say the least. The automaker fell 37% alone in the month of December, due to fears about Elon Musk’s additional time commitments at Twitter and concerns about demand for vehicles drying up.

  And it looks as though Tesla will begin 2023 by, in part, validating some concern about demand. The automaker is set to open the year in China by extending incentive offers aimed at generating sales in China, according to Bloomberg.

  Bloomberg reported this weekend that Model 3 sedan and Model Y sport utility vehicle buyers will get 10,000 yuan in incentives (about $1,450) if they take delivery by February 28, 2023, per Tesla’s website.

  The automaker is offering a 6,000 yuan subsidy it began early in December, in conjunction with a 4,000 yuan subsidy that is “tied to purchasing insurance through Tesla” and that was started in November 2022, Bloomberg wrote. 

  

  Tesla is also looking to stoke sales in the U.S., offering $7,500 off all of its major models. Delivery numbers for Q4 were announced this morning and missed Wall Street’s expectations. 

  Tesla was down 45% in December before an Adam Jonas note from Morgan Stanley encouraged buying in the waning days of the month.  He lowered his price target on Tesla from $330 to $250, but maintained his overweight rating on the name and argued that the recent selloff had created an “opportunity”.

  “We believe 2023 is shaping up to be a ‘reset’ year for the EV market where the last 2 years of demand exceeding supply will be substantially inverted to supply exceeding demand. Within this environment, we believe players that are self-funded (non-reliant on external capital funding) with demonstrated scale and cost leadership throughout the value chain (from manufacturing to up-stream material supply) can be relative winners,” Jonas wrote.

  “We believe Tesla may bein position to extend its lead vs. the EV competition in FY23 (both legacy and start-up) even before consideration of IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) benefits where Tesla also stands out as the biggest potential winner,” he continued. 

  Jonas is convinced that among peers, Tesla is one of the best suited to handle the macro headwinds, writing: “On a relative basis, the reiteration of our OW rating must be seen vs. more challenged EV-related peers such as EW-rated Fisker (FSR), UW-rated Lucid (LCID),and UW-rated QuantumScape (QS). Between a worsening macro backdrop, record high unafforability,and increasing competition, there are hurdles to overcome. Yet we do believe that in the face of all these pressures, TSLA will widen its lead in the EV race, as it leverages its cost and scale advantages to further itself from the competition.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 20:05

• Mark McCloskey Won’t Have Guns Or Money Returned, Despite Pardon, Missouri Judge Rules
  Mark McCloskey Won’t Have Guns Or Money Returned, Despite Pardon, Missouri Judge Rules

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  St. Louis lawyer Mark McCloskey will not have his guns or the fines he paid returned to him even though he received a governor’s pardon in 2021, a Missouri judge has ruled.

  

  McCloskey and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, both personal injury lawyers, pleaded guilty in June 2021 to misdemeanor charges for assault and harassment, respectively, over an incident in 2020 where they wielded guns as self-defense measures at their property while watching Black Lives Matter protesters walk through their private, gated neighborhood.

  They were required to pay maximum fines totaling $2,750. As part of the plea agreement, the two also surrendered the guns they wielded—a Colt AR-15 rifle and a Bryco pistol.

  After their convictions, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, on July 30, 2021, pardoned the couple and shortly following the move, McCloskey filed a lawsuit in St. Louis City Circuit Court seeking to have the guns returned and the fines paid back to him and his wife.

  Circuit Judge Joan Moriarty rejected the request on Dec. 28, saying that the governor’s pardon doesn’t have any impact on the plea agreement the couple had agreed to.

  “Plaintiff and his wife are required to follow through with their end of the bargain,” she wrote, reported the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

  “While the governor’s pardon does clear plaintiff’s record of the conviction,” she added, “his guilt remains and the terms of an agreement that predicated said guilt also remains.”

  McCloskey said he plans to appeal, the outlet reported.

  Law Licenses Suspended

  In February 2022, the Missouri Supreme Court indefinitely suspended the McCloskeys’ law licenses. The court also stayed the suspension and put the two attorneys on probation for a year, which means they can still practice law, but the suspension would kick in if they violate their probation by not following the “Rules of Professional Conduct.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 19:30

• US Inflation: How Much Have Prices Increased In 2022?
  US Inflation: How Much Have Prices Increased In 2022?

  Inflation has been top of mind over the last year, looming over every aspect of the economy. But how has inflation actually impacted the prices of everyday goods like bread and butter or gas and public transportation?

  In this infographic, Visual Capitalist’s Avery Koop and Bhabna Banerjee showcase select items and how inflation has impacted the price year-over-year. Additionally, we’ve charted the overall price increases across the overarching goods categories, using data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

  

  Note: These numbers are assessed using the Consumer Price Index (CPI)  for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U), using the U. S. city average by detailed expenditure category.

  How Much has the Cost of Goods Gone Up?

  Inflation has caused the cost of many goods to increase significantly compared to last year. The most dramatically affected item is elementary school lunches, a cost in the U.S. that is already unaffordable for many families.

  Here’s a look at every single reported good’s change in price from last year:

  Item	Unadjusted Change YoY (Nov 2021 – Nov 2022)
  Food at elementary and secondary schools	+254.1%
  Food at employee sites and schools	+110.1%
  Fuel oil	+65.7%
  Eggs	+49.1%
  Margarine	+47.4%
  Other motor fuels	+43.3%
  Fuel oil and other fuels	+41.7%
  Airline fares	+36.0%
  Butter and margarine	+34.2%
  Butter	+27.0%
  Flour and prepared flour mixes	+24.9%
  Public transportation	+23.8%
  Other dairy and related products	+22.4%
  Fats and oils	+21.8%
  Canned fruits	+20.9%
  Crackers, bread, and cracker products	+19.9%
  Salad dressing	+19.9%
  Lettuce	+19.8%
  Motor oil, coolant, and fluids	+19.6%
  Frozen and refrigerated bakery products, pies, tarts, turnovers	+19.4%
  Cookies	+19.2%
  Lunchmeat	+18.4%
  Canned fruits and vegetables	+18.4%
  Frozen vegetables	+18.3%
  Other uncooked poultry including turkey	+17.9%
  Cakes, cupcakes, and cookies	+17.6%
  Ice cream and related products	+17.5%
  Rice, pasta, cornmeal	+16.8%
  Cereals and cereal products	+16.6%
  Other bakery products	+16.5%
  Cereals and bakery products	+16.4%
  Dairy and related products	+16.4%
  Bakery products	+16.3%
  Other meats	+16.2%
  Potatoes	+16.2%
  Canned vegetables	+16.2%
  Olives, pickles, relishes	+16.1%
  Processed fruits and vegetables	+15.8%
  Bread	+15.7%
  Pet food	+15.7%
  Fresh milk other than whole	+15.6%
  White bread	+15.5%
  Bread other than white	+15.5%
  Utility (piped) gas service	+15.5%
  Roasted coffee	+15.2%
  Other fats and oils including peanut butter	+15.2%
  Soups	+15.0%
  Motor vehicle repair	+15.0%
  Frozen fruits and vegetables	+14.9%
  Fresh biscuits, rolls, muffins	+14.8%
  Milk	+14.7%
  Coffee	+14.6%
  Other miscellaneous foods	+14.6%
  Fresh cakes and cupcakes	+14.4%
  Stationery, stationery supplies, gift wrap	+14.3%
  Energy services	+14.2%
  Transportation services	+14.2%
  Rice	+14.1%
  Sugar and sugar substitutes	+14.1%
  Household paper products	+14.1%
  Apparel services other than laundry and dry cleaning	+14.1%
  Frozen and freeze dried prepared foods	+14.0%
  Instant coffee	+13.9%
  Other food at home	+13.9%
  Delivery services	+13.8%
  Fresh whole chicken	+13.7%
  Beverage materials including coffee and tea	+13.7%
  Sauces and gravies	+13.7%
  Electricity	+13.7%
  Vehicle accessories other than tires	+13.7%
  Health insurance	+13.5%
  Frankfurters	+13.4%
  Motor vehicle insurance	+13.4%
  Breakfast cereal	+13.3%
  Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage materials	+13.2%
  Nonfrozen noncarbonated juices and drinks	+13.2%
  Poultry	+13.1%
  Fresh whole milk	+13.1%
  Sugar and sweets	+13.1%
  Energy	+13.1%
  Pets and pet products	+13.0%
  Juices and nonalcoholic drinks	+12.9%
  Candy and chewing gum	+12.9%
  Other foods	+12.9%
  Carbonated drinks	+12.8%
  Tools, hardware and supplies	+12.8%
  Other sweets	+12.7%
  Cheese and related products	+12.4%
  Oranges, including tangerines	+12.4%
  Gasoline, unleaded premium	+12.4%
  Housekeeping supplies	+12.4%
  Motor vehicle body work	+12.4%
  Energy commodities	+12.2%
  Other beverage materials including tea	+12.1%
  Food at home	+12.0%
  Chicken	+12.0%
  Miscellaneous household products	+11.9%
  Vehicle parts and equipment other than tires	+11.8%
  Household cleaning products	+11.7%
  Motor vehicle maintenance and repair	+11.7%
  Fresh and frozen chicken parts	+11.6%
  Motor vehicle parts and equipment	+11.6%
  Food from vending machines and mobile vendors	+11.5%
  Snacks	+11.1%
  Spices, seasonings, condiments, sauces	+11.1%
  Veterinarian services	+11.0%
  Baby food	+10.9%
  Pet services including veterinary	+10.9%
  Motor fuel	+10.8%
  Miscellaneous personal goods	+10.8%
  Gasoline, unleaded midgrade	+10.7%
  Food	+10.6%
  Other processed fruits and vegetables including dried	+10.4%
  Living room, kitchen, and dining room furniture	+10.3%
  Tires	+10.3%
  Floor coverings	+10.2%
  Gasoline (all types)	+10.1%
  Tools, hardware, outdoor equipment and supplies	+10%
  Gasoline, unleaded regular	+9.8%
  Fruits and vegetables	+9.7%
  Fresh vegetables	+9.6%
  Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecakes, doughnuts	+9.5%
  Citrus fruits	+9.5%
  Prepared salads	+9.5%
  Hair, dental, shaving, and miscellaneous personal care products	+9.3%
  Motor vehicle maintenance and servicing	+9.3%
  Tax return preparation and other accounting fees	+9.1%
  Full service meals and snacks	+9.0%
  Purchase of pets, pet supplies, accessories	+8.9%
  Video discs and other media	+8.9%
  Frozen fish and seafood	+8.8%
  Women’s underwear, nightwear, swimwear, and accessories	+8.6%
  Food away from home	+8.5%
  Dishes and flatware	+8.5%
  Outdoor equipment and supplies	+8.4%
  Household furnishings and supplies	+8.3%
  Fresh fruits and vegetables	+8.0%
  Wine away from home	+7.9%
  Rent of primary residence	+7.9%
  Laundry and dry cleaning services	+7.9%
  Ham	+7.8%
  Dried beans, peas, and lentils	+7.8%
  New cars	+7.8%
  Breakfast sausage and related products	+7.7%
  Processed fish and seafood	+7.7%
  Beer, ale, and other malt beverages at home	+7.7%
  Ham, excluding canned	+7.6%
  Other goods	+7.5%
  Apples	+7.4%
  Other fresh vegetables	+7.4%
  Personal care products	+7.4%
  Pet services	+7.4%
  Admission to movies, theaters, and concerts	+7.4%
  Frozen noncarbonated juices and drinks	+7.3%
  Medical equipment and supplies	+7.3%
  Rental of video discs and other media	+7.3%
  New vehicles	+7.2%
  Rent of shelter	+7.2%
  New trucks	+7.1%
  Music instruments and accessories	+7.1%
  Alcoholic beverages away from home	+7.1%
  Shelter	+7.1%
  Owners’ equivalent rent of residences	+7.1%
  Owners’ equivalent rent of primary residence	+7.1%
  Distilled spirits away from home	+7.0%
  Salt and other seasonings and spices	+6.9%
  Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs	+6.8%
  Furniture and bedding	+6.8%
  Services less energy services	+6.8%
  Personal care services	+6.8%
  Haircuts and other personal care services	+6.8%
  Limited service meals and snacks	+6.7%
  Shelf stable fish and seafood	+6.6%
  Fresh fruits	+6.6%
  Beer, ale, and other malt beverages away from home	+6.6%
  Garbage and trash collection	+6.6%
  Fish and seafood	+6.5%
  Indoor plants and flowers	+6.5%
  Other personal services	+6.5%
  Cigarettes	+6.4%
  Dental services	+6.4%
  Video discs and other media, including rental of video	+6.4%
  Men’s suits, sport coats, and outerwear	+6.3%
  Tobacco and smoking products	+6.3%
  Miscellaneous personal services	+6.3%
  College textbooks	+6.2%
  Legal services	+6.2%
  All items less food and energy	+6.0%
  Women’s suits and separates	+5.9%
  Clocks, lamps, and decorator items	+5.8%
  Peanut butter	+5.7%
  Women’s apparel	+5.7%
  Window and floor coverings and other linens	+5.6%
  Women’s and girls’ apparel	+5.6%
  Other fresh fruits	+5.5%
  Other food away from home	+5.5%
  Other household equipment and furnishings	+5.5%
  Newspapers and magazines	+5.5%
  Alcoholic beverages	+5.5%
  Tobacco products other than cigarettes	+5.5%
  Fresh fish and seafood	+5.4%
  Nonprescription drugs	+5.4%
  Cosmetics, perfume, bath, nail preparations and implements	+5.4%
  Recreation services	+5.4%
  Financial services	+5.4%
  Sports equipment	+5.3%
  Educational books and supplies	+5.3%
  Day care and preschool	+5.3%
  Other condiments	+5.2%
  Girls’ apparel	+5.2%
  Jewelry and watches	+5.2%
  Watches	+5.1%
  Jewelry	+5.1%
  Toys, games, hobbies and playground equipment	+5.1%
  Club membership for shopping clubs, organizations, or participant sports fees	+5.1%
  Other linens	+5.0%
  Other furniture	+5.0%
  Water and sewer and trash collection services	+5.0%
  Fees for lessons or instructions	+5.0%
  Funeral expenses	+4.9%
  Alcoholic beverages at home	+4.5%
  Nursing homes and adult day services	+4.5%
  Water and sewerage maintenance	+4.4%
  Domestic services	+4.4%
  Medical care services	+4.4%
  Photographers and photo processing	+4.4%
  Other recreation services	+4.4%
  Residential telephone services	+4.4%
  Meats, poultry, and fish	+4.3%
  Video and audio services	+4.2%
  Postage and delivery services	+4.2%
  Cable and satellite television service	+4.0%
  Infants’ and toddlers’ apparel	+3.9%
  Bananas	+3.8%
  Propane, kerosene, and firewood	+3.8%
  Care of invalids and elderly at home	+3.8%
  Commodities less food and energy commodities	+3.7%
  Services by other medical professionals	+3.7%
  Admissions	+3.7%
  Tomatoes	+3.6%
  Apparel	+3.6%
  Recreation commodities	+3.6%
  Moving, storage, freight expense	+3.5%
  Elementary and high school tuition and fees	+3.5%
  Photographic equipment and supplies	+3.3%
  Other lodging away from home including hotels and motels	+3.3%
  Recreational reading materials	+3.2%
  Lodging away from home	+3.2%
  Hospital and related services	+3.2%
  Postage	+3.2%
  Medical care commodities	+3.1%
  Professional services	+3.1%
  Intracity transportation	+3.1%
  Tuition, other school fees, and childcare	+3.1%
  Wine at home	+3.0%
  Outpatient hospital services	+3.0%
  Other appliances	+2.9%
  Hospital services	+2.9%
  Bedroom furniture	+2.8%
  Medicinal drugs	+2.8%
  Housing at school, excluding board	+2.8%
  Inpatient hospital services	+2.8%
  Sporting goods	+2.7%
  Men’s shirts and sweaters	+2.5%
  Window coverings	+2.4%
  Men’s footwear	+2.4%
  Transportation commodities less motor fuel	+2.4%
  Checking account and other bank services	+2.4%
  Men’s apparel	+2.3%
  Footwear	+2.3%
  Boys’ and girls’ footwear	+2.3%
  State motor vehicle registration and license fees	+2.3%
  Bacon, breakfast sausage, and related products	+2.2%
  Women’s footwear	+2.2%
  Education and communication services	+2.2%
  Photographic equipment	+2.0%
  College tuition and fees	+2.0%
  Prescription drugs	+1.9%
  Recorded music and music subscriptions	+1.8%
  Eyeglasses and eye care	+1.8%
  Motor vehicle fees	+1.8%
  Appliances	+1.7%
  Distilled spirits at home	+1.7%
  Whiskey at home	+1.7%
  Distilled spirits, excluding whiskey, at home	+1.7%
  Pork chops	+1.6%
  Other intercity transportation	+1.6%
  Men’s pants and shorts	+1.5%
  Physicians’ services	+1.5%
  Telephone services	+1.5%
  Audio equipment	+1.4%
  Other recreational goods	+1.4%
  Internet services and electronic information providers	+1.4%
  Men’s and boys’ apparel	+1.3%
  Pork	+1.2%
  Meats	+1.1%
  Women’s dresses	+1.1%
  Sports vehicles including bicycles	+1.1%
  Parking fees and tolls	+1.1%
  Technical and business school tuition and fees	+1.1%
  Wireless telephone services(1)(2)	+1.0%
  Sewing machines, fabric and supplies	+0.9%
  Parking and other fees	+0.9%
  Nonelectric cookware and tableware	+0.8%
  Men’s underwear, nightwear, swimwear, and accessories	+0.8%
  Toys	+0.6%
  Tenants’ and household insurance	+0.6%
  Intracity mass transit	+0.4%
  Laundry equipment	+0.1%
  Recreational books	0.0%
  Uncooked ground beef	-1.0%
  Major appliances	-1.0%
  Bacon and related products	-1.1%
  Boys’ apparel	-1.7%
  Computer software and accessories	-1.7%
  Women’s outerwear	-2.0%
  Used cars and trucks	-3.3%
  Ship fare	-3.6%
  Computers, peripherals, and smart home assistants	-4.4%
  Other pork including roasts, steaks, and ribs	-5.1%
  Beef and veal	-5.2%
  Car and truck rental	-6.0%
  Uncooked other beef and veal	-7.2%
  Admission to sporting events	-7.2%
  Uncooked beef steaks	-7.4%
  Uncooked beef roasts	-8.1%
  Video and audio products	-8.2%
  Other video equipment	-9.5%
  Education and communication commodities	-9.7%
  Information technology commodities	-11.5%
  Televisions	-17.0%
  Telephone hardware, calculators, and other consumer info items	-17.9%
  Smartphones	-23.4%
  Household operations	–
  Gardening and lawncare services	–
  Repair of household items	–
  Leased cars and trucks	–
  All items	+7.1%

  School lunches became more expensive this year as a federal waiver program came to an end. The program had provided every school child in the country with free lunches.

  After school lunches, fuel oil and eggs rank high in terms of big jumps in their prices, increasing by 66% and 49% respectively. Some other notable increases: airfares have gone up by 36%, living room, kitchen, and dining room furniture by 10.3%, and alcoholic beverages at home by 4.5%. 

  However, a number of goods have actually gone down in the index, including:

  • Smartphones: -23%

  • Televisions: -17%

  • Uncooked beef roasts: -8%

  • Admission to sporting events: -7%

  • Car and truck rentals: -6%

  Interestingly, smartphones are not actually getting cheaper, rather the BLS adjusts for products that improve rapidly in quality year-over-year. Usually, most items are identical on a year-to-year basis, but smartphones are improving in their quality, which is why their price appears to be deflating rather than inflating.

  U.S. Inflation

  Overall, the items in the basket of goods under the Consumer Price Index have increased by a collective 7.1% since last year, making purchasing necessary food and energy items more difficult.

  Here’s another look at how each overarching category increased, between November 2021 and November 2022:

  • Food: +10.6%

  • Energy: +13.1%

  • All other items excluding food and energy: +6.0%

  Purchasing your everyday ingredients to cook with, energy to heat your home, and all other items that are standard in our everyday lives has become increasingly expensive. In an effort to counter inflation pressures, the U.S. Federal Reserve has been raising interest rates to make borrowing more difficult in order to push down demand.

  Heading into 2023, many feel that a recession is on the way, and a lot of households will have to continue borrowing at higher rates to keep up with basic goods purchases. On the upside, some experts anticipate that although there will be economic downturn, it will be brief and won’t deeply impact the economy like past ones.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 18:55

• Have We Seen A Peak In Pax Americana
  Have We Seen A Peak In Pax Americana

  By Russell Clark of The Capital Flows and Asset Markets substack

  

  Happy New Year! Welcome to a special on the idea of a perhaps we are seeing a peak in the Pax Americana.

  Pax Americana implies that America has become the dominant empire as Rome once was, or perhaps on a more comparable basis, as Britain used to be. In financial markets and elsewhere, the question is asked where we have entered an era of decline for the US.

  Conventional thoughts on Pax Americana link the decline of the British Empire with the rise of the America. I think this analysis is wrong. The decline of the British Empire saw the rise of two new empires, the US and the Soviet Union. In military terms, the Soviet Union was largely responsible for the the defeat of Germany in World War II, and the Soviet Union and Chinese assistance saw US forces turned back in the Korean War of 1950 to 1955, and defeated in Vietnam War. The US centred trading system only incorporated North America, Western Europe, and some parts of East Asia. Most of the rest of the world was either socialist on non-aligned. If this is at odds with how you think of modern history, then I would recommend Eric Hobsbawm series of books: Age Of Capital 1848 -1875, Age of Empire 1875 – 1914 and Age of Extremes 1914 – 1991. Hobsbawm is probably correct in marking 1991 as the beginning of Pax Americana. Not only did it mark the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was also when the first Gulf War demonstrated to the world that US military power was far beyond the capabilities of all other powers, but also the integration of the world into a single trading system – globalization. First military domination, then financial domination. Or as in Dark Knight Rises when Bain askes Daggett, “Do you feel in charge?”, are politics and military really in charge or finance and corporates? The former is really in charge in my view. If we look at Russian invasion of Ukraine, financial sanctions matter far less than the ammunition that the US is providing.

  

  The question of Pax Americana is whether US military can still project power? Defeat in Ukraine would almost certainly signal an end to Pax Americana. If Russia was to take control of Ukraine, the ability of the US to protect the global trade system would come under severe pressure. Could countries really rely on imports of key resources from elsewhere? Could Europe and Japan continue to have undersized armed forces? The key tenets of globalisation would fall apart, and with it the underpinnings of Pax Americana. However, a rout of Russia, and the regime change in Russia would offer the potential of an increase in Pax Americana, and a new age in European integration. In my mind, the future of Pax Americana will be decided at home, rather than on black earth of Ukraine. To confront the rising powers, US military spending will need to rise. Going back to levels seen in 1980s implies a tripling of the current military budget.

  

  But here is the problem. Domestically will voters stand for increasing military spending as their own domestic conditions worsen? The biggest spending item for the US government is social security, but it is plain that this spending is not benefiting the majority of Americans. While most countries saw a stagnation in life expectancies during Covid, the US has seen three years of decline, wiping out at least two decades of gains.

  

  A similar decline in visible in the relatively capitalist UK. However compared to a relatively more “socialist” Japan – the flattening out of life expectancy in the UK and the US is striking.

  

  It is likely that the US policy makers understand these issues, which is why there has been increasing use of export controls of technology to China. How effective is this likely to be? Very hard to tell. Export controls are very unlikely to stop China from catching up to already existing technology. For example, ever since the US invented nuclear weapons, it has worked very hard to keep the technology as a monopoly and to limit other countries access to it. The Soviet Union successfully tested it first atomic bomb in 1949, China followed in 1964, France in 1968. North Korea in 2006 tested its first atomic weapon, despite severe sanctions, and very weak technological development elsewhere. But can the US stop China developing a lead in technology? Possibly, but ultimately, Pax Romana or the British Empire did not head for decline due to losing a technological lead, more that the political structure of Empire declined. That was that local politics lead to the decline of empire, and looking at the US, with high income inequality, falling life expectancy, and a Republican party that is split between free trade and Trump politics, a decline in Pax Americana seems likely.

  How do we trade this? My best trade remains, long gold short treasuries, for reasons outlined many times before.

  

  The key takeaway from all of this, is that corporates and financial markets feel like they are in charge. Financial market assumed that Russia would not invade in Ukraine and were wrong. Politics is Bane, while financial market are Daggett. Do financial markets really feel like “they are in charge?” anymore? I don’t think so. Long GLD, short TLT. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 18:20

• Virgin Islands AG Fired Three Days After Suing JPMorgan Over Jeffrey Epstein
  Virgin Islands AG Fired Three Days After Suing JPMorgan Over Jeffrey Epstein

  As we noted last week, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George filed a lawsuit against JPMorgan for allegedly reaping financial benefits from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation – less than a month after George secured a $105 million settlement with Epstein’s estate, which agreed to liquidate Epstein’s islands and cease all business operations in the region.

  

  Three days later, George is now unemployed, after Governor Albert A. Bryan Jr. fired her for allegedly filing the suit against JPMorgan without his permission.

  According to the complaint, for “Over more than a decade, JPMorgan clearly knew it was not complying with federal regulations in regard to Epstein-related accounts as evidenced by its too-little too-late efforts after Epstein was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges and shortly after his death, when JPMorgan belatedly complied with federal law.”

  JPMorgan Sued By Virgin Islands Over Jeffrey Epstein’s Alleged Sex-Trafficking Operation https://t.co/d8tH2eytdE

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 29, 2022

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

  It goes much deeper than just the JPMorgan lawsuit…

  The suit against JPMorgan Chase was not the whole scope of George’s pursuit of the remnants of Epstein’s network of conspirators. Although Little St. James (“Pedo Island”) and its adjacent island owned by the Epstein estate went up for sale in March 2022, action taken by George kept the premise of any sale from going through. Acting in her former capacity as US Virgin Island Attorney General, she placed criminal activity liens on the islands from a civil racketeering lawsuit. That lawsuit was filed in 2020 following Epstein’s “death” in August of 2019. The suit alleged that Little St. James Island was used as part of a network of shell companies that Epstein manipulated to conceal the activities of his human trafficking network.

  

  However, that suit was settled between the Epstein estate and George’s office in early December 2022. Under the agreement, Epstein’s estate would pay over $105 million to the Government of the US Virgin Islands as restitution. In addition to that sum, the liens preventing the sale of Epstein’s islands become removed under the condition that half of the proceeds from the sale will also be given to the US Virgin Islands through a trust it has opened to allocate the money to fund government programs to fight sexual abuse on the archipelago. “This settlement restores the faith of the People of the Virgin Islands that its laws will be enforced, without fear or favor, against those who break them. We are sending a clear message that the Virgin Islands will not serve as a haven for human trafficking,” Attorney General George stated upon the announcement of the settlement in one of her last acts before being fired.

  

  Despite the resolution of the US Virgin Islands’ direct case against the assets held by the Epstein estate, questions still linger about its operations in George’s jurisdiction. One of the most mysterious and perhaps most vital to examine of those shell companies, Southern Country International, was the first internationally operating bank to be opened in the US Virgin Islands by Epstein in 2014. The bank opened when John Percy de Jongh Jr. served as the governor of the territory. During his term, de Jongh appointed present-governor Albert A. Bryan Jr. into his administration as Commissioner of the US Virgin Islands Department of Labor. Despite not having much activity on its books, Southern Country International would renew its license with the US Virgin Islands five times before Epstein’s purported demise.

  

  By the time Epstein died, his Virgin Islands based bank had less than $700,000 in assets. However, in December of 2019, months after his purported suicide, Epstein’s estate transferred a whopping $15.5 million into Southern Country International. In under a month, the bank’s assets diminished to less than $500,000. Mark Epstein, Jeffrey’s brother and executor of his estate, stated that the bank was used to pay existing debts of the assets he had control over. Though the bank was not explicitly referenced in the press release on the December settlement, that announcement does detail the Virgin Islands action against Southern Trust Company, a holding company which points to a larger scale of Epstein owned enterprises connected to Southern Country International. It is unclear how the allegations made in George’s lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase connect to the posthumous activity conducted by Epstein’s Virgin Islands banking operation.

  Following her dismissal, Assistant Attorney General Carol Thomas-Jacobs has been named to an interim position to fill George’s vacated seat. She will inherit the office as it joins an on-going list of plaintiffs who have taken action against large scale banks relating to their accounts with Epstein. Just over a month before George’s filing, multiple class action suits were filed against JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank alleging each institution knowingly profited from Epstein’s criminal activity. Those suits coincided with another filed against Epstein associate Leon Black, the billionaire who previously served as CEO of Apollo Global Management before his relationship with the pedophile thrust him into the spotlight.

  

  The civil suit against Black alleges that the disgraced financier raped the plaintiff in 2002 at a mansion owned by Epstein. A spokesman for Black told Forbes that the claims made against their client were “categorically” false. Their response to Forbes follows one of a similar like from Deutsche Bank who told the publication that the suit filed against them “lacks merit.” Despite the magnitude of these lawsuits, the gravity of George’s suit against JPMorgan Chase surely made the biggest splash in the once-stagnant waters of the cesspool of the Epstein debacle. However, the firing leaves little hope that the waves caused by her last act as Attorney General will wash any truth to shore.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 17:45

• North Carolina Lawmakers Urge Governor To Follow Other States In Banning TikTok
  North Carolina Lawmakers Urge Governor To Follow Other States In Banning TikTok

  Authored by Matt McGregor via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Two North Carolina representatives are pressing Gov. Roy Cooper’s office to follow other states in issuing an executive order banning TikTok from government devices.

  

  State Reps. Jason Saine and Jon Hardister, both Republicans, sent a letter to the Democrat governor (pdf) insisting that Cooper remove the Chinese video app “swiftly and decisively,” deeming it to be a “matter of national security.”

  “As we know, the Chinese government is constantly working to infiltrate our communications and access intellectual data within the United States,” Saine and Hardister wrote. “If sensitive data is breached, it could pose both an economic and security threat for North Carolina. We have a responsibility to prevent this from happening, which is why we are urging an executive order as soon as possible.”

  Saine and Hardister referenced past orders, such as the chief administrative officer for the U.S. House of Representatives issuing an order on Wednesday for all lawmakers to delete the app on all devices managed by the House.

  The $1.7 trillion omnibus bill President Joe Biden signed into law on Thursday includes legislation banning the social media app from government devices due to concerns over national security.

  State-Level Bans

  State governments have also banned TikTok, which is owned by the Beijing-based ByteDance Ltd.

  As of Friday, Indiana became the 20th state to block TikTok from being used on state devices.

  In addition, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, a Republican, filed two lawsuits against TikTok stating that the app made false claims.

  “The TikTok app is a malicious and menacing threat unleashed on unsuspecting Indiana consumers by a Chinese company that knows full well the harms it inflicts on users,” Rokita said in a press release. “With this pair of lawsuits, we hope to force TikTok to stop its false, deceptive and misleading practices, which violate Indiana law.”

  Rokita said the first lawsuit alleges that TikTok lured children onto the platform using misleading advertising stating that the app contains only “’infrequent/mild’ sexual content, profanity, or drug references.”

  However, Rokita said the app is in fact “rife with examples of such material.”

  “An essential part of TikTok’s business model is presenting the application as safe and appropriate for children ages 13 to 17,” he said.

  The second lawsuit alleges that TikTok collects data from its consumers and that it “deceived those consumers to believe that this information is protected from the Chinese government and Communist party.”

  “In multiple ways, TikTok represents a clear and present danger to Hoosiers that is hiding in plain sight in their own pockets,” Rokita said. “At the very least, the company owes consumers the truth about the age-appropriateness of its content and the insecurity of the data it collects on users. We hope these lawsuits force TikTok to come clean and change its ways.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 17:10

• Flu Or Stroke? Hezbollah Leader's Hospitalization Sets Off Intense Speculation
  Flu Or Stroke? Hezbollah Leader’s Hospitalization Sets Off Intense Speculation

  Regional media is reporting that Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah is in a Beirut hospital and said to be in serious condition, setting off intense speculation over the fate and future leadership of the powerful Lebanese Shia paramilitary group with ties to Iran.

  Israeli media is claiming that Nasrallah suffered a stroke after an important Friday speech was unexpectedly canceled. Nasrallah is among the most powerful and prominent leaders in Lebanon and throughout the region, seen as head of an Iran-backed terror organization by Israel, the US, and much of the West. However, he’s hailed as a “hero” by many from Syria to Iraq to Iran as part of the ‘axis of resistance’. 

  

  For years, Israeli intelligence has sought to track his whereabouts in hopes of initiating a kill or capture mission, but the Hezbollah leader is known for his secrecy and ability to evade Israeli eavesdropping measures, and also rarely does in-person speeches – instead appearing to supporters via televised feed from secret locations.

  As The Jerusalem Post notes, Hezbollah officials are denying that a stroke hospitalized Nasrallah, instead saying its a bad bout of the Flu. “The reports came after Nasrallah canceled a planned Friday speech, with the Lebanese terrorist organization announcing through its affiliated media he had fallen ill with influenza and was unable to speak well,” according to the report.

  “Saudi journalist Hussein al-Gawi contradicted Hezbollah’s statement, claiming that Nasrallah indeed suffered a second stroke instead of falling ill as was reported,” Jerusalem Post continues. “The Hezbollah leader was reportedly hospitalized at the Great Prophet Hospital in Beirut.”

  This led to reports that he’s unconscious and in intensive care, but this was shot down by his son as “untrue”. 

  Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah cancelled a speech scheduled for this evening due to health reasons. Hezbollah said in a statement that Nasrallah has the flu, “which hinders his Eminence from speaking in the usual and natural manner while he is receiving appropriate treatment.” pic.twitter.com/5qYlG5A33Z

  — Ariel Oseran (@ariel_oseran) December 30, 2022

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

  Since emerging as head of Hezbollah in the early 1990’s, Nasrallah’s state of health has long been subject of intense speculation and rumors, especially when he abruptly cancels a speech or disappears from the public eye – much like the kind of close scrutiny that North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un receives. 

  It’s well know that Israeli and US intelligence closely monitors Hezbollah’s media arm for any indicators that would impact the military readiness and leadership of the organization. This is especially as Israel sees Hezbollah as its most immediate ‘enemy #1’ on the Jewish state’s northern border.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 16:35

• Analysts Predict 1 Million Bpd Drop in Russian Crude Output
  Analysts Predict 1 Million Bpd Drop in Russian Crude Output

  By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

  • UBS’ Giovanni Staunovo: The European Union’s ban on Russian oil products set to come into force on February 5 could lead to a 1 million barrel per day drop in Russian crude oil output for the New Year.
  • Moscow has also warned it could cut production by up to 700,000 bpd as it responds to the $60/barrel price cap on its oil implemented by the G7 in December.
  • According to Energy Intelligence, Russian refineries are already struggling with a labor shortage due to conscription for Putin’s war on Ukraine.

  

  The European Union’s ban on Russian oil products set to come into force on February 5 could lead to a 1 million barrel per day drop in Russian crude oil output for the New Year, commodity analysts for UBS told Insider on Monday.

  “We expect the European ban on seaborne Russian crude and refined products (to come into force on February 5) to result in a drop of Russian production of at least 1 million barrels per day in 2023, with Russia having difficulties in finding alternative markets,” UBS’ Giovanni Staunovo, told Insider.

  While Russia has been rerouting crude volumes to Asia, traders are finding it increasingly challenging to secure the necessary insured vessels to carry sanctioned Russian crude. As of the first week of December, Moscow was sending nearly 90% of its crude to Asia. 

  Moscow has also warned it could cut production by up to 700,000 bpd as it responds to the $60/barrel price cap on its oil implemented by the G7 in December.

  Another analyst, Saxo Bank’s Ole Hansen, told Insider that global supplies will experience more tightness, leading oil prices to top $100 bpd this year, once Chinese demand improves. 

  “Following a soft first quarter, I see the price of Brent returning to a $90-100 dollar range. What happens later will depend on the strength of an incoming economic slowdown,” Saxo told Insider. 

  Russia boasts the world’s third-largest refining industry, and the EU ban that goes into effect on February 5 is expected to have a fairly significant impact. 

  According to Energy Intelligence, Russian refineries are already struggling with a labor shortage due to conscription for Putin’s war on Ukraine. Energy Intel analysts expect to see a further decline in Russian refining margins this year as they pay more for tankers to export further, predicting a 600,000-bpd drop in refining throughput in 2023, year-on-year.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 16:00

• 2023 Starts Off With A Bang: Winklevoss Slams Barry Silbert's Genesis, Accuses Of Commingling Funds
  2023 Starts Off With A Bang: Winklevoss Slams Barry Silbert’s Genesis, Accuses Of Commingling Funds

  If anyone expected that the bursting of the crypto bubble and the resulting unprecedented tidal wave of failure and fraud would somehow be confined to 2022 we have some bad news.

  As if the collapse of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto empire wasn’t bad enough, its fallout just got much messier after digital-asset entrepreneur and Facebook billionaire, Cameron Winklevoss, accused fellow crypto businessman Barry Silbert of “bad faith stall tactics” and the commingling of funds within his conglomerate that Winklevoss says have left $900 million in customer assets needlessly in limbo since FTX’s meltdown.

  First, some background: in early November, shortly after FTX imploded, Gemini Trust which was founded by the Winklevoss twins, paused redemptions on a lending product called Earn, which offered investors the potential to generate as much as 8% in interest on their digital coins. It did so by lending them out to Genesis Global Capital, one of the companies owned by Silbert’s Digital Currency Group. The Earn halt came after Genesis suspended both redemptions and new loan originations at its lending unit because of its exposure to FTX. Genesis has told clients that it could take “weeks” to find a path forward, and that bankruptcy may be one possibility.

  Which brings us to today: this morning, facing pressure of his own from angry customers locked out of their Gemini accounts and a lawsuit alleging fraud, Cameron Winklevoss published an open letter saying he had provided Silbert with multiple proposals to resolve the issue, including as recently as Dec. 25. He told Silbert “this mess is entirely of your own making,” citing some $1.675 billion owed to Genesis by DCG, which it used for other business purposes within Silbert’s conglomerate. “This is money that Genesis owes to Earn users and other creditors.”

  “It’s not lost on us that you’ve been working desperately to try and firewall DCG from the problems that you created at Genesis,” Winklevoss added, strongly hinting that the relationship between DCG and Genesis is similar to that between FTX and Alameda. And in case that wasn’t clear, the next sentence strikes it home: “You should dispense with this fiction because we all know what you know — that DCG and Genesis are beyond commingled.”

  Earn Update: An Open Letter to @BarrySilbert pic.twitter.com/kouAviTho4

  — Cameron Winklevoss (@cameron) January 2, 2023

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

  An Open Letter to Barry Silbert

  Barry — today marks 47 days since Genesis halted withdrawals. I am writing on behalf of more than 340,000 Earn users who are looking for answers. These users aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet, they are real people. A single mom who lent her son’s education money to you. A father who lent his son’s bar mitzvah money to you. A husband and wife who lent their life savings to you. A school teacher who lent his children’s college funds to you. A policeman, and so many more. All together, these people entrusted more than $900 million of their assets to you. They deserve concrete answers and we are here to get them.

  For the past six weeks, we have done everything we can to engage with you in a good faith and collaborative manner in order to reach a consensual resolution for you to pay back the $900 million that you owe, while helping you preserve your business. We appreciate that there are startup costs to any restructuring, and at times things don’t go as fast as we would all like. However, it is now becoming clear that you have been engaging in bad faith stall tactics.

  For example, on December 2nd we expressed our belief “that getting everyone in a room together as soon as possible will be the most productive path towards reaching a resolution.” You agreed, but stated you would only do so after there was a proposal on the table. On December 17th, a proposal was delivered to you. On December 25th, Christmas Day, an updated version of this proposal was delivered to you. Despite this, you continue to refuse to get into a room with us to hash out a resolution. In addition, you continue to refuse to agree to a timeline with key milestones. Every time we ask you for tangible engagement, you hide behind lawyers, investment bankers, and process. After six weeks, your behavior is not only completely unacceptable, it is unconscionable.

  The idea in your head that you can quietly hide in your ivory tower and that this will all just magically go away, or that this is someone else’s problem, is pure fantasy. To be clear, this mess is entirely of your own making. Digital Currency Group (DCG) — of which you are the founder and CEO — owes Genesis (its wholly owned subsidiary) ~$1.675 billion. This is money that Genesis owes to Earn users and other creditors. You took this money — the money of schoolteachers — to fuel greedy share buybacks, illiquid venture investments, and kamikaze Grayscale NAV trades that ballooned the fee-generating AUM of your Trust; all at the expense of creditors and all for your own personal gain. It is now time for you to take responsibility for this and do the right thing.

  It’s not lost on us that you started your career as a bankruptcy restructuring associate. And it’s not lost on us that you’ve been working desperately to try and firewall DCG from the problems that you created at Genesis. You should dispense with this fiction because we all know what you know — that DCG and Genesis are beyond commingled. Everyone takes orders from you and always has. And anything you have done after the fact to pretend otherwise, won’t hold up. If instead, you had put all of this energy towards finding a resolution, we would have been done by now. Everyone would be in a better place, including you.

  Earn users are tired. They’re scared. Many are now in dire straits. And yet despite all that they have had to endure, they have been remarkably patient and supportive. But there is only so much more they can take. They deserve a resolution for a recovery of the assets they lent to you and an end to this nightmare. To that end, and for the final time, we are asking you to publicly commit to working together to solve this problem by January 8th, 2023. We remain ready and willing to work with you, but time is running out.

  Sincerely,

  Cameron Winklevoss

  Winklevoss claims the $1.675 billion borrowed by DCG from Genesis was used “to fuel greedy share buybacks, illiquid venture investments, and kamikaze Grayscale NAV trades,” referring to another of Silbert’s businesses, Grayscale Investments, whose largest vehicle is the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust. This came, he said, “all at the expense of creditors and all for your own personal gain.”

  Winklevoss also asked Silbert to “publicly commit to working together to solve this problem,” which he says affects more than 340,000 Earn customers, by Jan. 8. He didn’t say what would happen if no agreement was reached by then.

  Silbert prompted responded in kind, tweeting a refutation to several of Wilkevoss’s accusations, saying “DCG did not borrow $1.675 billion from Genesis” and “never missed an interest payment to Genesis and is current on all loans outstanding,” without providing more detail. Silbert also claimed DCG delivered a proposal for resolving the dispute to Genesis and Winklevoss’s advisers on Dec. 29, but had received no reply.

  DCG did not borrow $1.675 billion from Genesis

  DCG has never missed an interest payment to Genesis and is current on all loans outstanding; next loan maturity is May 2023

  DCG delivered to Genesis and your advisors a proposal on December 29th and has not received any response

  — Barry Silbert (@BarrySilbert) January 2, 2023

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

  That would not be the last of it, and moments later, Cameron Winklevoss doubled down, urging Silbert to “stop trying to pretend that you and DCG are innocent bystanders and had nothing to do with creating this mess. It’s completely disingenuous. So how does DCG owe Genesis $1.675 billion if it didn’t borrow the money? Oh right, that promissory note…”

  And then, in an apparent attempt to avoid the nuclear option and filing a notice of default against Genesis – an event that will likely lead to even more havoc and mayhem across the crypto community – WInklevoss tweeted “Will you, or will you not, commit to solving this by January 8th in a manner that treats the $1.1 billion promissory note as $1.1 billion?”

  Will you, or will you not, commit to solving this by January 8th in a manner that treats the $1.1 billion promissory note as $1.1 billion?

  — Cameron Winklevoss (@cameron) January 2, 2023

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

  Previously Silbert’s DCG has been trying to emphasize that it’s separate from Genesis and insulated from its troubles. After Genesis suspended redemptions, DCG said in a tweet that “this temporary action has no impact on the business operations of DCG and our other wholly owned subsidiaries.”

  Silbert, in a letter to shareholders last month, said that intercompany loans were made “in the ordinary course of business.” He noted that DCG has a liability of $575 million to Genesis. In the letter, he also described a $1.1 billion promissory note, due June 2032, which he said came about as the parent company stepped in to assume liabilities from Genesis related to the collapse of digital-assets hedge fund Three Arrows Capital.

  As Bloomberg notes, Winklevoss’s aggressive stance comes as Gemini and its founders faces a lawsuit from investors who accuse the company of fraud, claiming the Earn product was in effect an interest-bearing account that it failed to register as a security.

  As for the public spat between Winklevoss and Silbert, which is all too reminiscent of what happened between CZ and SBF in the days before the failure of FTX, as twitter user Jeremey Padawer summarizes “When these sorts of issues become public, almost every single time the worst is still to come… good luck crypto community.” Indeed.

  When these sorts of issues become public, almost every single time the worst is still to come… good luck crypto community. 💔

  — Jeremy Padawer (@JeremyCom) January 2, 2023

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

  And even Edward Snowden is bracing for what’s coming.

  *sigh* gonna be a big week https://t.co/E0QQzX0rvO

  — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) January 2, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 15:25

• David Stockman On The Parallels Between The COVID Hysteria And The Salem Witch Trials
  David Stockman On The Parallels Between The COVID Hysteria And The Salem Witch Trials

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  It would not be going too far to say that the eruption of irrationality and hysteria in America during the COVID-19 period of 2020-2021 most resembled not 1954, when Senator McCarthy set the nation looking for communist moles behind every government desk, or 1919, when the notorious raids of Attorney General Mitchell were rounding up purported Reds in their tens of thousands, but the winter of 1691-1692. That’s when two little girls—Elizabeth Parris and Abigail Williams of Salem, Massachusetts—fell into the demonic activity of fortune-telling, which soon found them getting strangely ill, having fits, spouting gibberish, and contorting their bodies into odd positions.

  

  The rest became history, of course, when a malpracticing local doctor claimed to have found no physical cause for the girls’ problems and diagnosed them as being afflicted by the “Evil Hand,” commonly known as witchcraft. Other ministers were consulted, who agreed that the only cause could be witchcraft and since the sufferers were believed to be the victims of a dastardly crime, the community set out to find the perpetrators.

  Within no time, three witches who were famously accused —the Parris’ slave, Sarah Good, an impoverished homeless woman and Sarah Osborne, who had defied conventional Puritan society. Many more followed, and as the hysteria spread, hundreds were tried for witchcraft and two dozen hanged.

  But there is a lesson in this classic tale that is embarrassing in its verisimilitude. Namely, one of the best academic explanations for the outbreak of seizures and convulsions which fueled the Salem hysteria was a disease called “convulsive ergotism”, which is brought on by ingesting rye grain infected with a fungus that can invade developing kernels of the grain, especially under warm and damp conditions.

  During the rye harvest in Salem in 1691 these conditions existed at a time when one of the Puritans’ main diet staples was cereal and breads made of the harvested rye. Convulsive ergotism causes violent fits, a crawling sensation on the skin, vomiting, choking, and, hallucinations—meaning that it was Mother Nature in the ordinary course working her episodically unwelcome tricks, not the “Evil Hand” of a spiritual pathogen, which imperiled the community.

  Similarly, in 2020 there Was no Evil Hand Sci-Fi Pathogen

  The truth is, in 2020 it was also Mother Nature—likely abetted by the Fauci-sponsored gain-of-function researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology—who disgorged one of the nastier among ordinary respiratory viruses.

  Such viruses, of course, have afflicted humankind over the ages, which, in turn, has evolved marvelous adaptive immune systems to cope with and overcome them. So again, there was no Evil Hand sci-fi pathogen at large that was something new under the sun, nor a disease that was extraordinarily lethal for 90% of the population.

  In the grand scheme of things, therefore, the COVID-19 pandemic has already been recorded as an unfortunate bump on the road to longer and more pleasant lives for Americans and much of the rest of the world, too. That truth is strikingly depicted in the chart below.

  

  While the all-cause mortality figure for 2020 did not exist when the CDC published the chart above, the green line would have depicted it as only a tiny upward blip—of which there have been several during the last 120 years shown above.

  Was COVID-19 an Analogue of the Spanish Flu?

  Indeed, the true analogue is the year 1918 when an estimated 675,000 Americans succumbed to the Spanish Flu from a population (100 million) just 30% of today’s level.

  In that case, the green line in the chart above (all cause deaths) pushed up by nearly 400 per 100,000 population compared to the pre-war baseline (1914). By contrast, the excess rate in 2020 over 2019 was just 118 per 100,000.

  And, yes, there is the sad fact of senseless dough-boy deaths on the killing fields of France embedded in these 1918 numbers, but it turns out that upwards of 45% of the conventionally reported 117,000 GI (gastrointestinal) deaths were not from German bullets, but the Spanish Flu that ripped through the massive US training camps that were hastily-assembled after Wilson foolishly declared war in April 1917 with no meaningful standing army to fight it.

  So on the true measure of pandemic lethality—deaths from all causes—the COVID-19 was not even in the same ballpark as the Spanish Flu. And as the chart also shows, the former occurred way down the green line curve that is actually the ultimate rebuke to today’s on-going COVID-policy disaster.

  The US age-adjusted death rate in 2020 (828 per 100,000) was actually 67% lower than it had been in 1918 (2,542 per 100,000) because since then a free capitalist society has gifted the nation with the prosperity and freedom to progress that has ushered in better sanitation, nutrition, shelter, life-styles and medical care.

  It is those forces which have pushed the green line relentlessly to the lower-right corner of the chart, not the Federales atop their bureaucratic perches in Washington.

  Hope for a New Great Barrington Declaration to Serve as Antidote to the Totalitarian Lockdown

  At length, perhaps some future historian will need to find the “convulsive ergot” theory of 2020 to explain the COVID-Hysteria because the explanation will not be found in the “science” embedded in what will be a tiny blip in the green line of the chart above.

  The Great Barrington Declaration was penned by three fearless world leading epidemiologists—Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Sanford—and was a powerful antidote to the Evil Hand theory then raging through the MSM and political class of almost every stripe.

  At essence, it said the real science was that America was not being attacked by a Grim Reaper visiting death upon one and all regardless of age, health status or physical circumstances, but, instead, was a highly selective respiratory disease variant that honed-in tightly on the immunity-impaired aged and co-morbid.

  Accordingly, the one-size-fits all Lockdown policy was dead wrong, and what was needed was highly targeted help, protections and treatments for the smallish minority of the vulnerable, which policy would presently lead to the attainment of “herd immunity” and the ultimate extinguishment of the pandemic in the normal way.

  Colonial America found its way out of the Salem aberration in 1692, and surely 330 years and much science later it can do so again, exposing the 21st century miscreants who brought on this insensible hysteria as it does.

  *  *  *

  We’ve seen governments institute the strictest controls on people and businesses in history. It’s been a swift elimination of individual freedoms. But this is just the beginning… Most people don’t realize the terrible things that could come next, including Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), the abolition of cash, and much more. If you want to know how to survive what the central bankers and the Deep State have planned, then you need to see this newly released report from legendary investor Doug Casey and his team. Click here to download it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 14:50

• Huge Death Toll After US-Supplied Himars Leveled Russian Barracks In Donetsk, Possibly Hundreds Killed
  Huge Death Toll After US-Supplied Himars Leveled Russian Barracks In Donetsk, Possibly Hundreds Killed

  Russian forces have just suffered what may be their single biggest loss of the war in an attack, after a Ukrainian strike killed multiple dozens, or possibly hundreds, of newly mobilized troops in the east of the country. Moscow is now pointing to a US role in the devastating attack.

  “Russia’s Defense Ministry said Monday that Ukrainian forces used a U.S.-supplied Himars rocket system to destroy a facility used as a base for mobilized troops in the city of Makiivka,” The Wall Street Journal reports of the attack in Russian-occupied Donbas.

  

  The defense ministry confirmed that 63 Russian troops died in the blast, saying that a wave of HIMARS rockets delivering “high-explosive warheads” struck the facility that housed the troops.

  A statement by top Russian commanders carried in state-run TASS reads: “The Kiev regime delivered a strike firing six projectiles from the US-made HIMARS multiple rocket launcher on a Russian unit near Makeyevka in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR). The attack left 63 Russian service members killed.”

  Though only revealed for the first time Monday, the strike reportedly took place soon after midnight on Sunday, New Year’s Day. Some Russian sources are suggesting an ammunition depot was next to the targeted facility, which likely resulted in a deadlier, expanded blast. 

  The Ukrainian side is meanwhile claiming the true numbers among the Russian dead is much higher, with the Ukrainian military asserting that some 400 were killed and other 300 wounded – though Kiev didn’t directly take responsibility in the immediate aftermath.

  

  Western media, including CNN and Reuters, have acknowledged being unable to independently verify the casualty numbers, however, some notable pro-Russian separatist officials have suggested it is more that the 63 dead officially cited by the Kremlin: 

  Igor Girkin, a former Federal Security Service officer who helped Russia annex the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea in 2014 and then organize pro-Russian separatist forces in eastern Ukraine, said on Monday that “the number of dead and wounded runs into many hundreds.”

  That same official is one among several Russian military commentators who lashed out at top commanders for the apparent lack of protection for the hundreds of personnel staying in a small area. Russian sources say at least two of the inbound missiles among the six fired by the Ukrainians were shot down by anti-air defenses.

  Girkin said on Telegram: “This is not the only such [extremely dense] deployment of personnel and equipment in the destruction zone of HIMARS missiles,” also in reference to reports of ammunition stored dangerously close.

  Other pundits are saying troops’ use of cellular phones or other possible open source communications could have tipped off the Ukrainians as to the presence and location of the base, given the potential for intercepted signals…

  So the Ukrainian army appears to have hit a base of mobilised Russians in Makiivka in Donetsk. Reports suggest that at least 100 Russians were killed. They were using open source communications. So Rus army is starting 2023 like it ended 2022 then. Still using open source comms! pic.twitter.com/cHXMfQPnp6

  — Dr Stephen Hall (@stephengfhall) January 1, 2023

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

  Additionally, Reuters references the following source from the Russian side:

  One Russian pro-war military blogger known as Rybar, who has more than one million subscribers on the Telegram messaging app, said more than 100 people had been wounded in the strike and that rubble was still being cleared.

  Rybar said there had been about 600 people in the building, and that ammunition had been stored in the same facility.

  And The Telegraph points out this could surpass the prior single most disastrous event from early on in the invasion:

  Ukraine estimated the death toll at “about 400”, with some pro-Russian separatists in the region agreeing “hundreds” had died. The Kremlin, in a rare admission, said 63 men had been killed – far outweighing the official death toll from the sinking of the flagship Moskva.

  Rare for battlefield casualties to be confirmed by Moscow. But Makiivka attack was so deadly that staying silent may not have been an option. Russian MOD says 63 Russian soldiers killed when “temporary deployment point” hit, it says, by Himars rockets fired by Ukrainian forces.

  — Steve Rosenberg (@BBCSteveR) January 2, 2023

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

  Beyond the issue of the disputed death toll, another question is whether the Ukrainians had targeting assistance from US intelligence.

  Interestingly, Ukraine’s defense ministry on the same day as the attack posted footage of what appears to be Himars system launching a strike in the dark.

  Surprise! pic.twitter.com/R0gSLvm2LN

  — Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) January 1, 2023

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

  In the past months, mainstream US press has increasingly acknowledged that the Ukrainians are receiving direct battlefield targeting help, based on the admissions of anonymous Pentagon and US intelligence officials. 

  However, there’s currently no confirmation or clear evidence that US-supplied HIMARS were indeed used, as the Russians allege. But the fact that the facility struck was significantly behind the front lines may point to a longer range weapon being used, such as has been supplied by Western powers. Ukraine also seems to now be openly boasting of its US-supplied capabilities in the wake of the mass casualty attack on Makiivka.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 14:15

• 2023 Outlook: Pain
  2023 Outlook: Pain

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  2023 Outlook – PAIN

  First, I need to apologize for last weekend’s Bah Humbug! T-Report. I meant to give a shout out to “Christmas Wrapping” by the Waitresses, which starts with the line “Bah Humbug, now that’s too strong”. If I had to listen to one holiday song on infinite replay all December, that song would be the one (apologies to Mariah Carey). But enough delaying, let’s get to the heart of the matter, which is why I think that 2023 (at least for the start of the year) will be a big bust! Maybe, much like the A-Team always won in the end, this year could finish well (for markets and the economy), but it will start with “PAIN” (okay, I’m mixing Mr. T lines, but let’s just roll with it).

  • Not much help from the bond markets. I’m a bond bull and expect a “risk-off” trade early in the year, but bonds just aren’t going to help portfolios or the economy enough to stem the tide.

  • The wealth effect (on individuals, companies, and governments) will weigh on the economy and markets. The amount of wealth destruction was large by historical standards and was more “circular” than in previous bouts of wealth destruction.

  • Unlike Weebles (which wobble, but don’t fall down), economic data will fall down. Consumers and jobs, two areas that have given many people reasons to support an optimistic outlook, will succumb to the same problems that the rest of the economy is facing and it will finally show up in the data.

  • There is a chance for some geopolitical respite, but globalization in 2023 and beyond will never go back to where it was in 2017.

  • The valuation re-valuation is not done, and that will reduce whatever earnings (or free cash flow) we have to multiply these metrics by to calculate valuations. Credit contraction is a risk.

  Those are the main points driving much of this very bleak outlook (but just because it is bleak, doesn’t mean that it is pessimistic because bad things can and do happen).

  The Foundation – Key Building Blocks

  There are some ongoing themes in last year’s work that set the stage for some of this analysis. We will refine the points listed in the first section, but it is important to lay the foundation.

  We had several non-traditional factors that drove inflation, many of which are gone. Using responses that worked for “traditional” inflation when we have a unique fact set this time around is going to lead to large and difficult policy mistakes.

  • See Rise and Fall of Inflation Risk Factors which examines the roles of the Fed, Stimulus, Supply Chains, War, and “Disruption” on inflation.

  • 2 + 2 = 5 explores why the Fed seems to be looking at data very “weirdly” and the problems that these views are likely to cause.

  • The last piece in this series, the Path to Q1 Deflation, lays out how this comes together to shock the system (deflation is not healthy when it is caused by an economy hitting a wall).

  These are important pieces of the “PAIN” outlook, but they are not the only elements. Even if you disagree with the above, there is plenty of wiggle room to come to the “PAIN” conclusion and those arguments just help make the case stronger.

  Relationships with China have changed and aren’t going to revert to what passed as “normal” any time soon. It isn’t just at the government level (where national security concerns are paramount), but at the company level where there is a threat to IP and supply chains. There is also unwillingness to truly provide open and equal access to the domestic economy. All these factors have left C-Suites working on alternatives to China.

  It is almost sad (but true) that by the time markets and the mainstream media catch up to Academy’s view on China, our view will have become more negative. However, the gap is finally narrowing for most investors and corporations.

  • The Beijing Olympics as Cultural Bookends is a “thought” piece but looks at the changes since China’s “coming out” party at the Beijing Summer Olympics and their “going away” party at the Winter Olympics last year. Topics include the reassertion of the Communist Party, Digital Yuan, Debt Diplomacy/Economic Colonization, Military Expansion, and the Real-Estate bubble. While that report is almost a year old, it sets the tone for much of how people should think about China.

  • The Recentralization of China (August 2021) set the stage for the move from seeing China as a Strategic Competitor (December 2019) to more of an enemy across the globe.

  • China’s zero-COVID policy. I dismissed the re-opening as being a “big deal” on national TV just a couple weeks ago (supply chain issues have been largely dealt with and the last thing this economy needs is more cheap goods). However, it is still interesting that it failed to help markets rally. Maybe that is because few people want to risk travelling to China at this stage (getting COVID there seems precarious at best in terms of treatment). Maybe it is because China’s importance to our economy has been greatly diminished. The full story hasn’t played out here, but I remain in the camp that China’s re-opening is only helpful at the margins given how companies and countries have adapted to the past few years of behavior.

  Again, this “foundation” isn’t critical in coming to the “PAIN” conclusion, but it is an important building block.

  Bond Market – Supply/Demand Imbalances?

  I want to be bullish on bonds despite the fact that this is rapidly becoming a consensus view. I’m fully committed to the high probability of a “risk-off” trade that brings bond yields lower and takes stocks below their 2022 lows. Yet, things seem “off” in the bond world.

  It is somewhat “difficult” (at least from this seat) to put a finger on exactly what is wrong, but let’s highlight a few potential risks to the bond world. These are primarily risks to the Treasury market, but many of those risks would cause problems for credit especially if the economy slows as rapidly as I expect it to (it is already slowing rapidly based on PMI data and other reports).

  • Will foreign buyers of dollar denominated debt continue to buy? This question first got some serious attention as dollar strength and FX volatility made it more difficult for foreigners to buy dollar denominated debt and hedge out the FX risk (primarily a Treasury and investment grade bond issue). With Japan starting to increase the target levels on their bonds, will we see more buying of yen denominated bonds vs. buying dollar denominated bonds with the associated FX hedging? I am a strong believer that the “0% bound” is non-linear. Basically, a number of market participants will do a lot to avoid 0 or near-0 returns and will quickly revert to “simpler” strategies once they can achieve even a modicum of yield. Large/sophisticated institutions don’t think that way, but many smaller institutions seem to.

  

  • Japanese investors (for the first time in well over 5 years) can achieve a little over 20 bps by investing in 5-year JGBs. Certainly not an earth-shattering return, but it isn’t a particularly long maturity and it alleviates the need to run FX hedging strategies. This will be a small problem for bond markets, not material, but not entirely inconsequential. It is a risk that increases as Japanese yields rise (presumably while global bond yields are also rising) creating a negative feedback loop. This isn’t keeping me awake at night, but I am keeping an eye on it.

  • Higher deficits? As yields rise, the cost of running existing debt burdens for countries goes up. Yes, it takes a long time for rising yields to have a significant impact on average coupons outstanding, but the U.S. has $3.8 trillion of bills and $2.6 trillion of bonds maturing in 2023, all of which will need to be refinanced at higher coupons than the bonds that are maturing. In 2021, the Federal Reserve helped reduce the government deficit by $107 billion. Since the Fed uses accrual accounting, the higher cost of borrowing impacted the remittance for 2022 (guessing around breakeven). This means that at the end of 2022, the Treasury Department did not receive the $100 billion it got in 2021. Unless the Fed does some form of “Operation Twist”, where they work with Treasury to retire longer-dated bonds (trading well below par) to book profits, this year’s number will end up being a significant loss. We could also see decreased remittances, especially if financial assets continue to struggle (which is my base case). Lots of moving parts, but we could see increased supply from governments which won’t be completely offset by lower supply from corporates.

  • Quantitative Tightening. Quantitative tightening does not behave like rate hikes (see Rube Goldberg Translating QT to bps). I find quantitative easing much easier to explain. Every day, investors in every asset class get forced to take on more risk to get a similar expected return. If a T-bill is bought by the Fed, someone who used to be able to buy that T-bill now either needs a longer T-bill or something with slightly more risk (say Agency Discount Notes or CP) or something slightly less liquid (maybe ABS related or private credit). Their decision thrusts the same decision on the investors who used to buy what they are now buying. That goes on and on until it impacts the riskiest of assets (unprofitable tech and crypto certainly seemed to fit the bill). This is Newton’s Cradle in action (where you drop a ball at one end and the ball it hits doesn’t move, but the ball at the far end of the chain moves). Quantitative tightening acts in reverse (though with less impact since it is relying on bonds that are maturing, limiting the “duration” being taken out of the market). But every day investors seem to wake up with the ability to take less risk (less credit risk, shorter maturities, or more liquidity) for similar expected returns.

  

  • This is not the “best” chart (and I’m sure that there are some Chart Crimes committed here). However my view is that QE is extremely prone to asset price inflation and the Fed knows it (even if they don’t harp on it) and they will keep QT even when they are done hiking rates because they want to “fix” this “problem”. This doesn’t get enough discussion in the inflation dialogue. This point also bothers me when thinking about the potential for bond or stock strength this year.
  • The shape of the yield curve is not conducive to a great year for bonds. With 2s vs 10s still inverted by 55 bps, we need one heck of a bull market across the entire curve to generate big returns. While 20-year bonds seem to offer some respite, no one wants to touch them because the long bond only highlights these issues. As much as bond investors want long duration, the pickup in yield (relative to the risk/reward by moving to shorter-dated bonds) could be attractive and would be completely in line with how we see QT working.
  • Corporate bond risk/reward. High end corporates should do “okay”, but if our theory plays out, there will be pressure on credit spreads. My “rough” thinking is that for every basis point Treasury yields rise, corporate spreads will tighten by less than a ½ of a bp. Overall yields on corporates will go up if Treasury yields rise. For every bp Treasury yields fall, beyond a threshold of say 10 to 20 bps from current levels, spreads will widen 1:1 or worse (it will be a risk-off trade, not as bad as in March 2020 or 2008, but still serious considering the IG level of risk). From an all-in yield basis, the risk/reward for corporates seems slightly worse than for Treasuries themselves. Less supply will help corporate credit, but liquidity is worse, which amplifies any hiccup. If I was an issuer I’d start the year trying to issue, but if I was an investor, I’d start the year reducing exposure.

  I want to be a “pound the table” bond bull, but I struggle due to all these risks (5-year, highest quality paper is the best option here.)

  The “Circular Error” in “Disruption”

  Company XYZ raises money (public or private) at a new (and higher) valuation.

  Company XYZ’s employees feel richer as the new valuation increases the value of their options.

  Company XYZ’s other investors are also richer based on these new valuations.

  Company XYZ’s employees spend money because they are (in some cases) “rich”. They buy fancy cars (mostly EV), big houses, and expensive vacations. They also take some of their newfound wealth to invest in companies similar to XYZ (and apparently in crypto).

  • Real estate agents, lawyers, house sellers, auto dealers, etc., benefit from this surge in spending.

  Company XYZ spends money on equipment (mostly tech), office spaces (to highlight their prowess in a physical manifestation), and on advertising so people hear about their product. Their mentality is “the faster I spend, the sooner I can do my next raise at an even higher valuation”.

  • Real estate agents, lawyers, big tech, small tech, venues, ad sites, etc., all benefit from this spending.

  The “second” order effect of this spending is smaller, but not only do the outside investors spend more, so do the real estate agents, lawyers, house sellers, tech companies, etc. The money multiplier increases the wealth “shock” that spreads throughout the economy.

  Peloton, a company whose product I’m trying to use with more regularity this winter, went from $6 billion to $49 billion in market cap. This was one of hundreds of public companies that saw that sort of gain! That doesn’t include crypto/private equity investments and doesn’t even try to put a number on SPACs (though NKLA hit a market cap of $28 billion and is now at $1 billion). This is a good segue to the “circular” nature of all this.

  If there was a “virtuous cycle” on the way up, it seems plausible that the cycle will be “unvirtuous” on the way down. That is the problem with “circularity”. Things circle back on themselves and you do not have the ability to get the correct answer.

  This is probably the area on which I seem to differ most from many economists (I’m just a strategist). I see circularity and spirals where others see straight line extrapolations. Maybe I’m wrong, but this feels an awful lot like 2000/2001 (tech bubble), 2007/2008 (housing was the main culprit), and 2015/2016 (energy boom/bust), but with the focus being on “disruption” this time around in 2022/2023.

  This keeps me awake at night.

  Weebles

  We will get a lot more information on jobs in the first week of January. I expect that the data will disappoint and we can do a retrospective on that in next weekend’s T-Report. At that point, it will hopefully be clear whether we were right or wrong (though given the quality of the data collected, the week will probably prove to be far less conclusive on the job front than it should be).

  The health of the consumer is a big question mark.

  • 2022 hurt low wage earners the most. Low income households were hit by inflation, but they had benefitted the most from stimulus (as a percentage of income) and an incredibly robust job market.
  • 2023 may play out as the “high income” hit year. The wealth effect is taking a toll, but more importantly this part of the work force seems to be facing the brunt of recent layoffs. This year won’t be about the number of jobs lost, but it will be a function of the number of jobs lost multiplied by the average income (which could be surprisingly high). Employees at the “granular” level are still in high demand (though that could tail off too), but it will be a combination of job fears (even if unfounded) coupled with the wealth effect that will make the consumer seem much weaker in 2023 than in 2022.

  I need to improve my charting capability on the “consumer” health side of things, but this chart caught my eye.

  

  Similar to the alleged “inventory” build story (which we will revisit next week), this is just playing catch-up to the “excess savings”. But what if consumers are living beyond their means to an uncomfortable degree? Will Q4 and the holiday season be the last binge as the consumer embarks on a “dry January”?

  I’m not optimistic on the consumer coming into 2023. Again, not keeping me up at night, but a definite concern and one that we need to do a lot more work on in the coming days and weeks.

  “Positive” Geopolitical Surprises?

  Last year we saw a shock to the system with a war in Europe! A year into this, it is still difficult to conceptualize that there is a war in Europe.

  Academy’s current take is that Russia will make one more big push this winter, but if that fails, some sort of negotiations should begin, which would be a boost to global markets. But, like so many other things, nothing is returning to how it used to be! Russia has found new buyers for its energy products. These buyers care little about their behavior and are in no rush to shift away from traditional energy products. Probably, from the Russian perspective, this is a better client base.

  I need to highlight that the U.S. changed the nature of global commerce permanently the minute “we” weaponized Russia’s dollar reserves. That was not lost on any country, but was most noticed by autocratic nations swimming in natural resources. This will impact policies and trade negotiations for decades to come and will put “us” at a distinct disadvantage to China and India. As we deal with the reality of what resources we will need in the future, this will be another hurdle.

  So, the situation in Russia could result in some change globally, but more of a “Potemkin village” than a real change to the global commodity industry (and therefore to the global economy).

  China may back down on some rhetoric (they are good at taking “5 steps forward, 1 step back” and highlighting their “1 step back” hoping that no one noticed they gained 4 steps.)

  There is the opportunity to work with China, but they are now truly viewed as a competitor and a possible threat, so we cannot and will not go back to how it was (this applies to both nations and companies).

  Geopolitics might provide some boosts, but they will be mild and temporary, and we will need to remain vigilant with China, Taiwan, Russia, Turkey and many other regions in the world as the geopolitical landscape continues to evolve, and not in a good direction!

  Bottom Line

  I’m not optimistic on risk (equities will do worse than IG credit spreads, but risk across the continuum is still not priced cheaply enough).

  I’m not as optimistic on bonds as I’d like to be. That, sadly, is not comforting.

  Hopefully I’m wrong! Maybe like Mr. T, we can go from being the adversary to a much-loved character, but for now my New Year’s message is anything but happy.

  I’ll be looking for reasons to become more optimistic and a “pound the table bull” (I’m okay being “long for a trade” here), but think that we are best served by being cautious and seeing if whether the “straight line extrapolation” people were correct or there is a spiral effect that has been put in motion and has its own energy.

  Good luck and on behalf of Academy Securities; we look forward to working with you in 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 13:40

• Tesla Delivers Record 405,278 Vehicles In Q4 2022, But Misses Wall Street Estimates
  Tesla Delivers Record 405,278 Vehicles In Q4 2022, But Misses Wall Street Estimates

  In a press release put out midday on Monday, Tesla announced it had delivered a record 405,278 vehicles for the Q4 2022 quarter. The number marks a record for the company, but comes in below most Wall Street estimates, even some that were revised lower. Consensus estimates for deliveries stood at 420,760 into the report, according to Bloomberg.

  “In 2022, vehicle deliveries grew 40% YoY to 1.31 million,” the company’s press release says. This falls short of the 50% growth figure the company had once projected for the year. 

  

  Tesla commented: “We continued to transition towards a more even regional mix of vehicle builds which again led to a further increase in cars in transit at the end of the quarter. Thank you to all of our customers, employees, suppliers, shareholders and supporters who helped us achieve a great 2022 in light of significant COVID and supply chain related challenges throughout the year.”

  The breakdown of vehicles included 388,131 Model 3 and Model Y deliveries, which fell short of the 405,597 estimated:

  

  And 17,147 Model S/X deliveries, which fell short of the 18,578 estimate:

  

  Perhaps an interesting delta to keep an eye on is the company’s production versus delivery – production numbers all beat Wall Street estimates across the board, per Bloomberg:

  *TESLA 4Q PRODUCTION 439,701 VEHICLES, EST. 438,840

  *TESLA 4Q MODEL S/X PRODUCTION 20,613, EST. 18,611

  *TESLA 4Q MODEL 3/Y PRODUCTION 419,088, EST. 411,828

  $TSLA deliveries fall 8.5% vs production. Those backlog forecasts comped to pandemic demand will not be good for 1H inventories. 🚩

  — Linsanity Capital (@JLinWins) January 2, 2023

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

  Despite the delivery number missing most consensus estimates, we noted days ago that Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas had actually revised his Q4 delivery estimate to as low as 399,000 vehicles. 

  Jonas seems to think headwinds out of China, which have been cited as part of the reason for Tesla’s recent share price plunge, may continue: “According to Morgan Stanley lead China auto analyst Tim Hsiao, Nio just announced a cut to its 4Q delivery target given Covid-related disruption to production and registrations. Despite sequential volume improvement MTD, the uptick of auto/NEV sales has come in weaker than expected given a surge in Covid cases following reopening.”

  Jonas also continues to believe that Tesla is well suited to face macro headwinds heading into 2023. He wrote last week:

  “On a relative basis, the reiteration of our OW rating must be seen vs. more challenged EV-related peers such as EW-rated Fisker (FSR), UW-rated Lucid (LCID),and UW-rated QuantumScape (QS). Between a worsening macro backdrop, record high unafforability,and increasing competition, there are hurdles to overcome. Yet we do believe that in the face of all these pressures, TSLA will widen its lead in the EV race, as it leverages its cost and scale advantages to further itself from the competition.”

  Tesla has also started 2023 by continuing to offer 10,000 yuan incentives in China in a bid to help boost sales, we noted this weekend. The company may also see another subsidy shot-in-the-arm in the U.S. heading into the new year. 

  Days ago we asked whether or not the Biden administration could work as a tailwind heading into 2023: “At the start of the new year, buyers will once again enjoy a tax credit when they purchase a Tesla vehicle. The original 2010 EV tax credit had a quota of 400K units. For Tesla, the tax credits fully disappeared in early 2020 when Tesla reached that unit sales quota. But thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that Congress passed earlier this year and Biden signed [last week], the tax credits are back in 2023.”

  We continued:

  “In the IRA there is a $7,500 tax credit for buyers of EVs, including TSLA and GM, who lost their previous tax credits. However, there are other strict limits on which brands would be eligible for the full credit, based on the selling price and where the cars and components are made. Unless the car is made in North America (NAFTA), the buyer is not eligible for the full tax credit. In addition, at least 50% of the battery parts will need to be made in North America. Lastly, a minimum of 40% of minerals used in the batteries must be sourced from the US or countries with free trade agreements with the US. So even buyers of GM and Tesla cars might only be eligible for half ($3,750) of the tax credit because their batteries and minerals come from a “foreign entity of concern” (China/Russia).”

  To finish the year, Tesla has traded the furthest below its 200DMA (61% lower) in the company’s history – whether or not this is a sign of continued bearishness or a setup for a whipsaw higher remains to be seen…

  

  Shares initially fell, before bouncing, in Europe where equity futures trading is open, versus the U.S. where markets are closed for the New Year’s holiday.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 13:10

• The Final "Tale Of The Tape": The 13 Most Striking Market Facts Of 2022
  The Final “Tale Of The Tape”: The 13 Most Striking Market Facts Of 2022

  By Tony Pasquariello, Goldman head of hedge fund sales

  For only the third time since 1926, both US stocks and bonds lost money in 2022 (the other two occurrences were 1931 and 1969).

  The intra-year path was extraordinary — be it the high print on inflation (I wonder when we’ll see a 9.1% headline on CPI again), the Fed’s response (425 bps of hikes across just seven meetings) or the geopolitical backdrop (one variable that very much carries through to 2023).

  Then consider this fundamental oddity: US real GDP growth should only amount to +0.7% this year (Q4/Q4) … yet, there’s been over 4.5mm new jobs created (payrolls survey) [ZH: with even the Philly Fed confirming our speculation that the BLS is fabricating job numbers it’s no longer much of an oddity].

  In that context, I’ll borrow a line from Barton Biggs, which I think captures the raw material of what served folks well in 2022:

  Although those quantitatively inclined would disagree, to me, investing is much more an art than a science … experience, diligence, a knowledge of history, an open mind, and an obsessive nature are all important ingredients for the successful [investor] … as are intuition, imagination, flexibility and maybe just a touch of the seeing eye.

  What of 2023?

  For the macro crowd, my instinct is these tensions won’t go quietly into the night and the opportunity set will remain decently target rich (e.g. China and Japan could be very actionable theaters).

  At the same time, I concede that the broad setup across asset prices today is far less asymmetric than it was at the start of this year.

  Therefore, I suspect we’re shifting from a macro environment that favored aggressive trading (see chart below) and brute force (i.e. US 2-year notes surged from 70 bps to 470 bps, that’s about as good as it gets for trend following strategies) to one that is more nuanced, featuring less volatility and more dispersion across markets (which should play to the strengths of RV and equity long/short).

  With thanks to Ben Snider in Goldman Research, what follows from here is a check-down of the score board … I also included the recap on last year at the very bottom of this note, if only for a compare-and-contrast that speaks (quite loudly) for itself.

  * * *

  The tale of the tape in 2022:

  1. The S&P 500 fell by 19%. Including dividends, the total return was -18%. This ranks in the 5th percentile of all annual returns since 1962.

  2. Realized volatility was 24%. This ranks in the 92nd historical percentile.

  3. Putting those together, the ratio of S&P return-to-vol was -0.7, ranking in the 12th historical percentile.

  4. The largest S&P peak-to-trough drawdown during the year was 25%, almost 2x the median historical annual drawdown.

  5. The market traded higher on just 43% of days in 2022, the second worst year since WWII (after 1974). This is interesting: the median gain on those days was 115 bps, the highest in postwar history.

  6. 31% of S&P stocks posted positive returns, including 66 names up 20% or more and 18 names up 50% or more. On the other side, 188 stocks closed down more than 20% and 26 names were down 50% or more.

  7. NDX returned -32%, lagging S&P by 14 percentage points and registering the worst year of underperformance since 2002.

  8. US Treasury 10-year notes returned -16%, the worst return on record.

  9. Only two of the GICS level one sectors generated positive returns: energy +65%, utilities +2%.

  10. The worst sectors: communication services -40%, consumer discretionary -37%, information technology -28%.

  11. The best global markets (in local FX): Venezuela +254%, Turkey +207%, Argentina +142%.

  12. The worst: Russia -37%, South Korea -24%, China A-shares -20%.

  13. Finally, I’ll conclude with a chart, from Ryan Hammond in GIR: as mentioned before, you have probably seen work suggesting that one should not try to time the markets, as missing the best days is a serious drag on returns. While that rang true again (see the gray line), for the world’s best traders, note how dodging the worst days this year generated an immense amount of alpha (see the light blue line):

  

  More in the full Pasquariello note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/02/2023 – 12:40