• The WEF’s Stakeholder Capitalism Is Just Global Fascism By Another Name
  The WEF’s Stakeholder Capitalism Is Just Global Fascism By Another Name

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

  The concept of “fascism” was originally entered into the Encyclopedia Italiana by Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile, who stated that “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.” Benito Mussolini would later take credit for the quote as if he had written it himself, but it’s important to note because it outlines the primary purpose of the ideology rather than simply throwing the label around at people we don’t like as a dishonest means to undermine their legitimacy.

  Despite the fact that leftists today often attack conservatives as “fascists” because of our desire to protect national boundaries and western heritage, the truth is that all fascism is deeply rooted in leftist philosophies and thinkers.

  Mussolini was a long time socialist, a member of the party who greatly admired Karl Marx. He deviated from the socialists over their desire to remain neutral during WWI, and went on to champion a combination of socialism and nationalism, what we now know as fascism. Adolph Hitler was also a socialist and admirer of Karl Marx, much like Mussolini. It is actually hard to find where Marx, the communists and the fascists actually differ from each other – A deeper sense of nationalism seems to be one of the few points of contention.

  Though Marx saw the existence of nation states as temporary to the proletariat and to the ruling class, he noted that the industrialists were erasing national boundaries anyway. Marx argues in the Communist Manifesto with some optimism:

  “National differences and antagonisms between peoples are already tending to disappear more and more, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, the growth of free trade and a world market, and the increasing uniformity of industrial processes and of corresponding conditions of life.”

  Marx saw the development of corporate power as useful and the next necessary step towards socialism, noting that joint-stock companies (corporations) and the credit system are:

  “The abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the capitalist mode of production itself.”

  In other words, corporations are viewed as a tool for the eventual transition to a socialist “Utopia” and the death of free markets. Once again, we see there is very little difference in motive between the political left and the fascists. The natural progression of every form of Marxism, communism, socialism, fascism etc. all ultimately lead to a kind of globalist ideology and erasure of cultural separation. The methods might differ slightly but the end result is the same. Some think this is a good thing, but it is actually quite poisonous.

  Globalism requires an overarching social dynamic, a single hive mind, otherwise it cannot survive. If people have the ability to choose or create better options (or different options) for living then globalism loses significance. The existence of choice has to be erased. This is a behavior that the political left has fully embraced and they are more than happy to work hand-in-hand with corporate oligarchs to make their ideal system a reality. Long gone are the days of the anti-corporate progressive – They LOVE corporate dominance, but only if those companies promote and enforce leftist models for society.

  Mussolini’s fascism is at the root of the very corporate governance that leftists applaud and lust after today. They have far more in common with fascists than they realize.

  The new fascism is a re-branded philosophy best represented by something called “Stakeholder Capitalism.” It is a term often used by globalists at the World Economic Forum and the head of the WEF, Klaus Schwab. The media friendly definition of Stakeholder Capitalism is:

  A form of capitalism in which companies do not only optimize short-term profits for shareholders, but seek long term value creation, by taking into account the needs of all their stakeholders, and society at large.

  But who are “all stakeholders” in the opinion of the WEF?

  Well, according to Klaus Schwab they are all of human civilization, now and in the future. In other words, the goal of SHC is for corporate leaders and globalist bureaucracy to take responsibility for the entire world, not just their own employees, shareholders and profits. And such leaders would not be acting as individuals, they would be acting as a collective. In other words, SHC requires all major corporations to act as a single unit with a single purpose and a unified collectivist ideology – An ideological monopoly.

  As Klaus Schwab states:

  “The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.

  …What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.”

  The SHC concept is deceptive on its very face because it pretends as if corporations will be held accountable by the public within some form of “business democracy,” as if the public will have a vote on what the corporations do. In reality, it will be corporations telling the public what is acceptable to think and do and corporations in conjunction with governments using their power to punish people who do not agree.

  

  The great magic trick is that these same unified corporations use the shield of “private property” and business rights as a means to control society without repercussions. After all, a primary principle of conservatism and the US constitution is private property rights. So, stepping in to disrupt corporate governance would be violating one of our own beloved ideals. It sounds like a Catch-22, but it’s really not.

  As mentioned above, corporations are at their very core a socialist concept: They are created through government charter, handed legal personhood and given special protections from government. They are NOT free market entities, and Adam Smith, the originator of most free market ideals, stood against corporations as destructive and prone to monopoly.

  As long as they receive protections from government including monetary stimulus and bailouts, corporations should not enjoy the same private property protections as regular businesses do. They are parasitic creations, alien to the natural business world. In a freedom-based society they would be dismantled to prevent authoritarian outcomes.

  Stakeholder Capitalism is also an incredibly arrogant premise because it assumes that corporate leaders have the wisdom or objective intelligence to expand their role beyond business and into social and political spheres. This has already happened in many respects with much chaos created, but open corporate governance is the end game and it is anything but objective or benevolent.

  What are some examples of this kind of corporate/political governance (fascism) in action?

  How about Big Tech social media censorship leaning HEAVILY against conservatives and liberty activists? How about evidence of collusion between Big Tech companies and government, such as the Biden Administration and the DHS working closely with Twitter and Facebook to actively remove voices and viewpoints they don’t like? How about corporate leaders colluding to destroy conservative based social media competitors like Parler?

  How about ESG loans funded by corporate backers such as Blackrock or globalist non-profits like the Rockefeller Foundation?

  If all corporate lenders applied ESG to their loan practices, all individuals and businesses would have to adopt leftist social ideologies and dubious environmental claims in order to have access to credit. ESG is a monetary incentive created by corporate elites to keep all other businesses in line. If it continues, ESG could wipe out political opposition to globalism in the span of a single generation.

  And, what about the Council For Inclusive Capitalism? This is the most blatant expression of open global fascism I have ever seen, with money elites and politicians working in concert with the UN and even religious leaders like Pope Francis. Their goal is to institute a single centralized world governing platform built around the same agendas outlined in ESG and SHC, making corporations members of a new global council which they refer to as “The Guardians.” They aren’t even trying to hide the conspiracy anymore, it’s right out in the open.

  Klaus Schwab takes special care to mention often that global crisis events are the “opportunity” that is needed to push the public into the arms of Stakeholder Capitalism through a nexus point called “The Great Reset.” Meaning, he thinks that widespread fear and desperation must exist (or be engineered) to perpetuate the SHC framework quickly.

  Obviously, the globalists are on a shrinking timeline, though it’s hard to say why. They are tearing off the mask faster in the past two years than they have in the previous decade. More than likely they understand to some degree that if they go too slow the public will have time to mount a defense against them.

  They will conjure all kinds of distractions and scapegoats to prevent liberty minded people from hitting them back. They’ll aim us at Russia, they’ll aim us at China, they’ll aim us at useful idiots among the leftists. They’ll aim Russia, China and the leftists at us. They will try to send us to war, they will call us insurrectionists, they will call us terrorists, they will say we started the whole collapse and that we are to blame for the world’s ills. None of this matters. What matters is that the globalists at the top pay the price for the harm they cause.

  When the head of the snake is removed, only then can we sort out who is to blame; who were the heroes, who were the villains, and who were the idiots. Only then can we rebuild with true freedom in mind.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 23:40

• The US And China Lead The Space Race 2.0
  The US And China Lead The Space Race 2.0

  Private space travel is taking off, with around $265 billion having been invested in space startups since 2014. 

  According to Space Capital, almost half of this sum went to companies in the U.S., while another 30 percent was invested in Chinese firms.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Space 2.0 marks a new wave of space travel. As Statista’s Anna Fleck details below, the boom is primarily being shaped by private companies, including an increasing number of start-ups, which are combining the latest tech innovations with new business models.

  In the past, space travel was financed almost exclusively by the state and operated by a few established companies such as Boeing, Airbus or Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, among others.

  Founded in 2002 by Tesla founder Elon Musk, SpaceX is currently the leading company in terms of number of spacecraft launches. The company is known for a number of projects, including providing supply flights to the International Space Station (ISS), with its first manned flight having docked there at the end of May 2020. SpaceX is also the pioneer of Starlink satellites, which are low orbit satellites intended to provide broadband internet to communities with little or no connectivity. As of August 2022, around 2,800 of SpaceX’s Starlink satellites orbited the earth. This is set to rise to 12,000 in the coming years.

  On September 15, 2021, SpaceX took four space tourists into space for three days, marking the world’s first space mission without a professional astronaut. In the long term, SpaceX plans to colonize Mars.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 23:20

• New Chinese Property Support No Match For $456 Billion Hole
  New Chinese Property Support No Match For $456 Billion Hole

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg markets live reporter and analyst

  Another day, another measure to support the beleaguered Chinese property sector. Developers rallied Wednesday after Beijing expanded a funding program to support debt sales by private companies, including builders.

  It’s a positive that the authorities are doing more to bolster the housing sector. But it’s another bandage that’s unlikely to turn around the market.

  Stocks of developers such as Country Garden Holdings and CIFI Holdings surged after the National Association of Financial Market Institutional Investors widened the bond financing program to about 250 billion yuan ($35 billion) for private companies, including developers.

  The program, first introduced in late-2018, is one of the “three arrows” that the People’s Bank of China uses to help private companies raise capital. The other two channels include bank loans and equity financing.

  In September, Bloomberg reported that policymakers have asked state banks to increase lending to developers to ease their liquidity crunch. After firing the first arrow, Beijing is now pulling the trigger on the second one.

  

  But as Nomura’s economist Lu Ting pointed out, there are reasons to question the effectiveness of the program. First, new home sales revenue is the largest funding source for developers, far more than any other channels. It accounted for 53% of overall funding for developers last year, compared with 12% from bank loans.

  In the first nine months, new home sales contracted 31%. At this rate, developers’ funding from home sales will fall by 3.3 trillion yuan ($456 billion) this year, according to Nomura’s estimate. That’s too big of a funding hole.

  

  Secondly, the $35 billion bond financing quota is for all private companies, not just for developers. Builders accounted for 15% of all private bond issuance between 2018 and 2020, before falling to around 9% in 2021, according to Nomura.

  Lastly, developers still need to pay off a large amount of maturing bonds in coming months, with about 30 billion yuan worth of onshore debt due by March. The implication is that even if they can access the bond market, the net fundraising would be limited after paying off the debt.

  All in all, the second arrow is literally more like an arrow, not a bazooka.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 23:00

• China Revises Military Doctrine To Focus On Troop Deployments Overseas
  China Revises Military Doctrine To Focus On Troop Deployments Overseas

  The Chinese People’s Liberation Army is expected to undergo continued expansion and modernization following last month’s CCP five-yearly national congress, which made key revisions to the Communist Party constitution. This included changes on the nation’s military posture.

  One of those revisions stated the need to “elevate our people’s armed forces to world-class standards” – according to an addition to the party constitution, as translated in the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post. This is being seen as aimed at expansion of deployed assets overseas, also following widespread reports within the past year that Beijing is seeking to establish a string of bases on Africa’s Atlantic coast. 

  

  The revised constitution included an official explanation published alongside it which stated “Overseas safety and security has become a major issue that we must address” – in particular citing the need for beefed-up counterterror forces to better protect against attacks on Chinese institutes and companies in foreign countries.

  According to further commentary of the changes via the SCMP:

  Drawing on examples from China’s military defeats in the 19th century, it said international politics still followed the “law of the jungle”, with the strong in charge and able to uphold their will. The impact of a lagging military on national security would be fatal, it added.

  It remains that compared to the United States or even Russia, China’s oversees military presence is tiny or almost non-existent. China has had a naval facility which opened in 2017 in Djibouti, long considered its main and lone military base abroad – not counting reports of one or possibly two outposts in Tajikistan, and the string of small bases in China’s backyard, on manmade island-bases in the South China Sea.

  But as Foreign Policy, The Economist, and other Western geopolitical-focused publications have long previewed, China has ambitions for many more, especially in Africa. “Tanzania, Cambodia, and the UAE are on China’s wish list— and now Kiribati, within striking distance of Hawaii,” an FP report stated in summer 2021.

  China’s military ambitions abroad, via The Economist

  

  This week President Xi Jinping again reaffirmed his commitment to focusing on “preparing for war” with the country’s security “increasingly unstable and uncertain,” according to his latest declaration.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 22:40

• Russia's Oil Output Set To Fall By 1.5 Million Bpd In December To 9 Million Barrels
  Russia’s Oil Output Set To Fall By 1.5 Million Bpd In December To 9 Million Barrels

  By Michael Kern of OilPrice.com

  Russia’s oil production could drop to as low as 9 million barrels per day (bpd) in December when the EU embargo on imports of Russian crude oil enters into force, Russian news agency TASS reported on Wednesday, citing analysts at the Energy Development Center. “We expect that production in December will fall by 1.5-1.7 mln barrels per day compared to the June-October average, or 14%,” according to a report from the Energy Development Center cited by TASS.

  

  The expected sharp drop in Russia’s oil production will lead to a spike in international oil prices, also considering that the OPEC+ group is reducing the target production as of November, the experts said.  

  Russia’s oil production, excluding condensate, for October came in well below its production quota for the month, at just 9.9 million bpd, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said earlier this month.

  Russia’s October production was 1.1 million bpd below its quota of 11 million bpd assigned under the OPEC+ agreement, but mostly in line with Novak’s estimates made last month. 

  For November, Russia’s oil production quota under the OPEC+ pact will drop from 11 million bpd to 10.5 million bpd.

  In October, Russian oil production, including condensate, was 1.47 million tons of oil per day, or 10.78 million bpd. The October production was slightly down from the 10.8 million bpd reported for September 

  However, the production decline could accelerate from November as the EU prepares to introduce an embargo on imports of Russian crude from December 5, Russian business daily Kommersant reported at the end of October, quoting sources familiar with the situation.

  Analysts have estimated that around 2 million bpd-3 million bpd of Russian oil and products may have to find new homes after the EU embargo enters into force. Russia has redirected a large part of its flows eastwards to Asia, but it may not be able to accommodate immediately and find willing buyers for the trade flows previously going to Europe, especially with the ban on services handling Russian oil cargoes unless the oil is sold at or below a certain price cap.  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 22:20

• The Post-Midterms State Of Marijuana Legalization In The US
  The Post-Midterms State Of Marijuana Legalization In The US

  In the 2022 midterm election, Maryland and Missouri have legalized recreational marijuana via the ballot box.

  However, as Katharina Buchholz notes, three similar referendums have been voted down in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota, CNN projects. 

  South Dakota had actually given the recreational and medical use of cannabis the green light in the 2020 elections, but the state’s Supreme Court ruled the ballot measure on recreational weed invalid for technical reasons after a complaint funded by Governor Kristi Noem. The second time around, the referendum is expected to be narrowly defeated.

  As of now, this means that recreational marijuana will be legal in 21 states and the District of Columbia.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  After successful ballot measures in the 2020 election, weed became legal in Arizona, New Jersey and Montana. During 2021 and 2022, state legislatures in New York, Virginia, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Connecticut passed bills to legalize marijuana. These recent development have brought recreational cannabis to more East Coast states after the American West had long been the hotbed of legalization efforts. Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize the drug in 2012.

  While official sales of marijuana can take a while to start as setting up a licensing system for dispensaries usually takes time, possession and consumption are expected to become legal more quickly in the states in question. There are currently 37 states that have medical marijuana laws, including all that allow recreational use.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 22:00

• Sequoia Writes Off Entire $210MM FTX Investment; Here Are All The Other Funds That Are Losing Billions In FTX
  Sequoia Writes Off Entire $210MM FTX Investment; Here Are All The Other Funds That Are Losing Billions In FTX

  (Update: 9:00pm ET): Slowly but surely, the humiliated “investors” who do zero homework and merely look at who else has coinvested before they sign the check, are coming out admitting that it’s gone… al gone.

  In a tweet late on Wednesday, venture capital giant Sequoia Capital said had written down the entire value of its stake in FTX, a little over $210 million.

  “We are in the business of taking risk,” Sequoia wrote in a message to investors seen by Bloomberg. “Some investments will surprise to the upside, and some will surprise to the downside.”

  Here is the note we sent to our LPs in GGFIII regarding FTX. pic.twitter.com/Cgp1Yxk1pz

  — Sequoia Capital (@sequoia) November 10, 2022

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

  A smaller venture fund, Multicoin, told investors Wednesday that about 10% of its assets under management were affected.

  “Unfortunately, we were not able to withdraw all of the Fund’s assets on FTX,” Multicoin wrote in a letter reviewed by Bloomberg.
  A sudden loss of confidence in FTX among customers exposed deep problems with the cryptocurrency exchange. People

  withdrew money and sold off tokens associated with the company, causing a liquidity crunch. A rival, Binance, agreed to buy FTX and then pulled out over concerns with FTX’s financial health.

  * * *

  Now that the world’s largest crypto exchange, Binance, has walked away from a bailout of world’s second-largest crypto exchange, FTX, but biggest ever crypto fraud – far bigger than MtGOX ever was, here is a list of all the “luminary” investors whose money in FTX is now gone… all gone.

  We start at the top, where we find the “who is who” of clueless momentum chasers, who over the years somehow got confused with credible, diligent investors: we are talking of course about Tiger Global, which is down 55% this year (and is about to be down a whole lot more) and of course the fund that we once dubbed the bubble era’s “short of the century“, SoftBank.

  Can’t make this up: among the January Series C investors in FTX which valued the ponzi scheme at $32BN, were Tiger Global (down 55% YTD) and Softbank

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 9, 2022

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

  One wonders how much of today’s widespread selling across various asset classes was due to Tiger Global getting margin called and dumping what it can?

  There are more funds, of course: Third Point and Altimeter Capital Management are among hedge funds that recently participated in funding rounds for Sam Bankman-Fried’s once-high-flying crypto exchange. Brevan Howard Asset Management’s Alan Howard, the family office of Paul Tudor Jones and Millennium Management founder Izzy Englander also chipped in as angel investors, alongside celebrities including Gisele Bundchen and Tom Brady.

  There were many others: FTX also attracted capital from the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, Sequoia Capital, Lightspeed Venture Partners, Iconiq Capital, Insight Partners, Thoma Bravo and Masayoshi Son’s SoftBank.

  Tiger Global and Ontario Teachers’ first invested in FTX in December 2019 in a funding round that valued the company at $8 billion, according to PitchBook data. Both topped up their wagers in October 2021, giving FTX a $25 billion valuation, and did so again in January, the data show. Some of the other firms and individuals backed FTX in July 2021, paying cash to participate in a $1 billion funding round that valued the crypto exchange at $18 billion.

  Prefer bullets? Here is a list of the most prominent investors in FTX courtesy of The Block’s Frank Chaparro:

  • BlackRock
  • Ontario Pension Fund
  • Sequoia
  • Paradigm
  • Tiger Global
  • SoftBank
  • Circle
  • Ribbit
  • Alan Howard
  • Multicoin
  • VanEck
  • Temasek

  Remarkably, as ever more clueless pedigreed investors piled up to fund this fraud of epic proportions, the valuation went super parabolic, and after two early rounds in 2019 and 2020, FTX got its first real outside funding in July 2021 when it pocketed $900MM at a valuation of $18 billion in its Series B round; this was followed by two more rounds, the most notable of which was Series C when ts valuation exploded to a staggering $32 billion. It was around this time that Scam Bankrupt-Fraud started naming sports stadiums, and imagined a world in which FTX would buy Goldman.

  The chart below is the definitive proof that even (or rather especially) the smartest investor do no homework before allocating huge amounts of capital.

  

  All that seems so long ago now that regulators are investigating whether FTX properly handled customer funds – translation: the firm probably used client funds from its exchange to funds its trading shop, Alameda Research – and the firm’s relationship with other entities Bankman-Fried controls, and concerns raised by Binance executives during their due diligence process could torpedo the deal.

  As a result of FTX collapse, all of the abovenamed investors, among others, are set to lose all of their invested cash, especially with news such as this hitting the tape:

  • *BANKMAN-FRIED TOLD INVESTORS FTX HAS SHORTFALL OF UP TO $8 BLN

  Still, while billions will be lost, nobody will be crushed as much as Bankman-Fried himself, whose personal wealth has collapsed from $16 billion to what may now be a negative number when accounting for his personal debt. Of course, it’s all downhill from there especially once SBF is thrown in prison from stealing billions in client funds in his exchange and using them not even to buy yachts but to make catastrophically bad investments.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 21:44

• Video Games May Be Beneficial For The Developing Brain
  Video Games May Be Beneficial For The Developing Brain

  Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClearScience.com,

  Video games are often maligned by parents and the media, but a recently published study of 2,217 nine- and ten-year-olds found that kids who played at least 21 hours of video games per week performed better on tests of cognitive performance involving response inhibition and working memory than kids who didn’t play video games at all.

  The research, spearheaded by scientists in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Vermont, is published in the journal JAMA Network Open.

  

  Video games are everywhere

  In the span of three decades, video games have grown from rare to ubiquitous in modern society. No longer relegated to the realm of nerdom, nearly three-quarters of children aged 2 to 17 play them, whether on computers, consoles, or smartphones, leaving parents to wonder, “How much is the right amount?”

  The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends that children over two play no more than one hour of video games on school days and no more than two hours on non-school days.

  More broadly, scientists have explored whether gaming is associated with changes to behavior and cognitive function in kids. Prior research has linked heavy gaming with slightly increased rates of aggression, depression, and violence. At the same time, however, frequent gamers do tend to outperform their peers on various measures of cognitive ability. Research on both behavior and cognitive ability has tended to suffer from small sample sizes, however.

  The new study did not. Thousands of kids, enrolled in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, were separated into two groups: those who played at least 21 hours of video games per week (well over AAP recommendations) and those who played none at all. Participants were challenged with a Stop-Signal Task (SST) — designed to measure inhibition control — in which they were told to work on a simple, rapid-fire task on a computer until a “stop” signal was given. They were also given an N-Back task — a test of working memory — in which they were asked to rapidly recall something that they were previously presented. Both cognitive assessments were completed while subjects sat in an fMRI brain scanner.

  The gamers outperformed the non-gamers by about 5% to 10% on both tasks. Moreover, their brains showed higher activity in regions associated with attention and memory and in frontal brain regions linked to more cognitively demanding tasks.

  While the gamers and non-gamers did not differ on age, BMI, or IQ, the gamers were disproportionately male and had less combined parental income. The income disparity actually adds to the robustness of the finding. Higher parental income is often sharply linked with all sorts of improved child outcomes, from health to behavior to intelligence, so the fact that child gamers from poorer homes tended to cognitively outperform non-gamers from richer ones is certainly interesting.

  Is Tetris the same as Grand Theft Auto?

  The researchers caution that not all video games are likely to be equally beneficial: a violent, first-person shooter is undeniably different than an educational, strategy, or puzzle-solving game, for example. Their study did not tease out which games participants were actually playing. Moreover, they cautioned that the study was merely a snapshot in time, assessing correlation, not causation.

  However, future data releases from the ABCD study group as the participants age should allow the scientists to detect changes in cognitive ability. Will gamers continue to outperform their non-gaming peers, perhaps growing their advantage? Time will tell.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 21:40

• CPI Preview: Inflation Is Cooling But Will It Be Enough
  CPI Preview: Inflation Is Cooling But Will It Be Enough

  As discussed earlier, most banks agree that while the midterms are important over the medium and long run, Thursday’s CPI print will be the most important factor to shape the expectations for December FOMC and the market’s near term reaction. Here, courtesy of Newsquawk, is what to look for.

  • Analysts expect headline consumer prices to pick up by 0.6% M/M in October, accelerating from the 0.4% M/M rate in September while the core measure is seen cooling to 0.5% M/M, lower than the 0.6% M/M in September, but a still elevated level vs historical levels.
  • On an annual basis, headline CPI is expected to rise 7.9%, down from 8.2% last month; core CPI sill also slow to 6.5% from 6.6%.
  • The data will be framed in the context of how much progress the Fed is making towards lowering inflation. After the November FOMC meeting, Fed Chair Powell said it was “very premature” to consider pausing or ending the rate hiking cycle, noting that inflation remains well above the Fed’s longer-run goals, with price pressures evident across goods and services. Although longer-term inflation expectations still appear well-anchored, the Fed wants to see inflation coming down decisively, and is prepared to stay the course until the job is done.

  As a reminder, the message from Powell last week was that the Fed is strongly committed to its inflation target of 2%. Powell did, however, allude to a potentially slower pace of rate hikes in December – the statement said the Fed will consider the “cumulative tightening of monetary policy, the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, and economic and financial developments” when determining the pace of future rate increases. Analysts rationalised that with rates in restrictive territory, the Fed can downshift to a slower pace of normalization to assess the impact of the 375bps worth of rate tightening unleashed since March.

  Currently, the market is split in its views about whether the Fed will implement a 50bps or 75bps rate hike in December.

  

  Accordingly, the market seems to be of the view that if inflation metrics move lower (and traders are keeping an eye on aggregate inflation data, including CPI, PCE, wages metrics within jobs data, consumer inflation expectations via surveys, etc), this gives the Fed cover to downshift to the lower increment. However, if inflation data does not cooperate, then the Fed will prefer the larger sized hike, and potentially an even a higher terminal rate (Powell suggested that the eventual peak Fed Funds Rate Target is above the 4.6% pencilled in within the September projections; money markets see the peak at 5.00-5.25% in Q2 2023).

  Shifting away from the consensus, we next focus on what Goldman’s economists expect from tomorrow’s print. As discussed in the preview from Jan Hatzius (available to pro subs), Goldman expects a below-consensus 0.44% increase in core CPI in October (vs. 0.5% consensus and 0.6% prior), which would lower the year-on-year rate to 6.46% (vs. 6.5% consensus and 6.6% prior).

  The bank expects moderate increases in both food and energy prices to raise headline CPI by 0.49% (vs. 0.6% consensus and 0.4% prior), which would lower the year-on-year rate to 7.8% (vs. 7.9% consensus and 8.2% prior).

  

  The bank’s research team also highlights 3 key component-level trends this month:

  1) Expect CPI used car prices to catch down (-2.5% in October) to auction price data, which have now plunged substantially from their peak, and just tumbled at the 3rd fastest pace on record.

  

  

  2) The small but volatile health insurance component should finally swing from providing a large boost over the past twelve months to providing a large drag over the next twelve months (-3% in October) with the incorporation of new data on health insurer profit margins. The reason is that the CPI incorporates source data on health insurer profitability once per year and feeds them through for the next twelve months. Last year, roughly stable premiums coupled with reduced health care use amidst Covid fears caused profit margins to rise, leading to a year of very strong health insurance inflation (+2.1% in September; +28.2% year-on-year). Now, the rebound in health care use has caused profit margins to fall, which should lead to a year of very negative health insurance inflation (-3% in October; -28% next twelve months). That would cause the contribution to the core from this small component to fall by 65bp over the next year.

  

  3) Goldman also expects shelter inflation to run hot (rent +0.78%, OER + 0.75%), even though as we discussed extensively, real-time alternative web-based measures of new tenant rent growth have slowed—because continuing tenant rent levels still have a long way to catch up to new tenant market rates. In other words, rent inflation will keep coming in hot even as prices slump outside of excel models.

  

  Elsewhere, Goldman also expects a 2% pullback in airfares based on timely data and also expects another large increase in the car insurance category (+1.6%), as carriers push through price increases to offset higher repair and replacement costs.

  Going forward, the bank expects monthly core CPI inflation to remain in the 0.3-0.4% range for the next couple of months before edging down to 0.2-0.3% next year. Goldman expects year-over-year core CPI inflation of 6.2% in December 2022, 3.3% in December 2023, and 2.7% in December 2024. The deceleration we expect in 2023 is driven more by goods than services categories. Of course, a sharp recession will unleash deflation much sooner.

  

  Shifting from Goldman to JPM, this is what its head economist Mike Feroli said in his preview:

  We estimate that the consumer price index (CPI) rose 0.6% in October. Even with this strong increase expected for the month, we think year-ago headline inflation will moderate, from 8.2% in September to a still-robust 7.9% in October. The headline strength should come in part from energy prices, for which we forecast a jump in October following a run of three straight monthly declines. We think that food prices continued to climb into October, but we expect additional moderation in this CPI aggregate (following a very strong run), with the food CPI up 0.6% in the month. Away from food and energy, we forecast that the core CPI rose 0.38% in October, with this measure coming in 6.4%oya (down from 6.6% in September).

  We think that continued firmness in the CPI’s rent measures will drive the expected gain in the core aggregate in October. While we think rental inflation will moderate eventually, we don’t see this happening at this point in time, and we forecast that tenants’ rent rose 0.83% in October while owners’ equivalent rent increased 0.76%.These gains would be a little softer than the reported September changes but still quite firm.

  Away from rent, we expect softer changes in many of the other main CPI components. Auto industry figures point to recent declines in related prices (particularly for used vehicles) and we look for new vehicle prices to be down 0.1% in the October CPI while used vehicle prices fell 2.2%. We also think that airfares declined in October, which would help push the broader public transportation price index down 2.2%. Apparel prices came down a bit in September and we forecast another modest decline in October, with prices down 0.2%. We also think that communication prices will keep trending lower, with a 0.1% move down reported for October.

  We also expect a noticeable downshift in medical care inflation in the CPI, with the BLS set to incorporate an annual update to source data used to estimate health insurance prices. We think overall medical care prices edged up just 0.1% in October, with a near-4% drop in health insurance prices being offset by gains in other related prices on net. This would represent a big shift from the past 12 months, which had monthly gains in medical care prices averaging 0.5% with health insurance prices up about 2% per month. We also look for a fairly modest gain in lodging prices in October, with a 0.3% increase expected to offset a portion of September’s 1.0% decline.

  Turning to the market, in terms of the S&P’s reaction function to the headline CPI YoY print here is framework Goldman’s John Flood is using using:

  • >8.2% S&P loses 3+%
  • 8 – 8.2% S&P loses 1-2%
  • 7.8 – 7.9% S&P gains 0 – 1%
  • <7.8% S&P gains 2+%

  Finally, as discussed earlier, JPM was much more hyperbolic in its CPI market scenario analysis:

  • CPI 8.4% or higher: this would be a move back to July levels of inflation, which we may see on a MoM basis but think Equity investors care most about the Headline YoY level. This would represent the largest differential between actual and estimated in this cycle. SPX would plunge 4.5% – 6%.  Probability 5%
  • 8.1%  – 8.3%: there have been 4x misses of 20bps or more and the SPX fell 1.6%, 2.9%, 40bps, and 4.3% which is a down 2.3% average. The 40bps outlier came when the SPX was ~3820 the day before the print. In the other 3 cases, the SPX was between 3930 and 4000. SPX would drop 2% – 3%. Probability 30%
  • 7.9% – 8.0%: I think bonds, and thus stocks, take this as a small positive since it meets expectations and does not reprice yields higher. Given that we are at the bottom of JPM’s Cash Trading team’s range (3700 – 3900), we may see some covering leading to an uptick in stocks. SPX would rise 1% – 1.5%. Probability 40%
  • 7.7% – 7.9%: this could be similar to the August 10 print which had a dovish beat by 20bps and triggered a 2.1% rally in SPX, 2.8% in NDX, and 2.9% in RTY. Cyclicals, Value Shorts, Momentum Shorts, and ARKK the best performers that day. Given the increased bearishness, the magnitude of move could be larger. SPX higher 2.5% – 3.5%. Probability 20%
  • 7.6% or below: a stepdown in inflation of this magnitude likely pulls the 10Y yield below 4% (currently 4.158%) and triggers a sharp rally in stocks. This may also reset the yield curve lower with terminal rate expectations falling under 5%. SPX higher 5% – 6%. Probability 5%.

  Looking at historical data the past year has seen a decidedly negative reaction to CPI on the day of the report, however when CPI came in below expectations, the SPX is up 0.8%, but down -1.2% when the CPI comes in hotter than expected.

  

  And while there have been decidedly few CPI misses in the past year, any time they do happen they lead to a powerful 5-day rally, certainly more powerful than the drop when CPI comes in hot.

  

  As always,all full reports discussed above are available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 21:30

• The Deep State Is What Disables Democracy
  The Deep State Is What Disables Democracy

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  The idea of democracy as it emerged gradually out of the Enlightenment, and drawing on ancient forms in Greece and Rome, is that the people govern themselves. People serve as the main determinants of the rules, laws, and legislation under which they live. They even set the rules concerning what people are allowed to do to themselves and each other using government: such is the point of a constitution.

  In a representative democracy, we elect leaders who represent our interests in the halls of government. Crucially, the main point is not the election or even the right of masses of people to vote. Those are means to an end. The end is self-government, government by and for the people, which came to be seen in republican theory as a crucial feature of freedom itself.

  Many totalitarian societies have figured out over time how to appear to be democratic without actually being so. When I was growing up, we used to laugh about how the Soviet people had a vote. What possibly could that mean or why would it matter in the slightest if the vote only ends up changing the face and name of the marionette on the balcony reading prepared propaganda?

  We as Americans sneered at such a fake democracy. It exists in name only over there, whereas here we have the real thing!

  Or so we thought. Every American must absolutely learn the lesson of these last 31 months.

  They locked us in their homes, closed our churches and schools and businesses, restricted travel, segregated whole cities based on whether a person had taken a medicine like some kind of dystopian movement, wrecked the entire economy, and separated families by force.

  Not one person in this entire country voted for a single one of these things to happen. It was never on the ballot. And for the most part, the elected leaders in this country were not the main actors in this. They gave approval to be sure but mainly because most of them are deeply ignorant, easily led, and deeply scared.

  The main actors were people who were never elected. They were appointed bureaucrats. Most of them cannot be fired. They have permanent jobs with high income and benefits. They have vast power, more power it seems than the politicians and certainly more power than you. Indeed they have awesome power over you. And over everything, to the point that they can say whether you can go to church or not or whether your children can play with friends.

  Not even the courts can act fast enough to control them and stop them from exercising total power over our lives.

  

  The Deep State has learned that it can announce or wholly fabricate a national emergency and practically put the entire country on a wartime footing wherever it wants. We can tolerate this no longer.

  This permanent and unelected class of rules is called the administrative state, or, more colloquially, the Deep State. It exists at the federal level, the state level, and at the city level. In the COVID crisis, they all worked together out of their own interests. They showed their face and their power. We had never experienced anything like this.

  Their power is not new. It’s been growing for more than 100 years. What was new was the ferocity of the attack and the brazenness of imposition. They went on TV to brag about what they were doing and shame dissidents. Media companies and Big Tech did their best to give them cover and block voices that made rational points.

  In effect, this country became a multivariate dictatorship but the people doing the dictating were mostly not the politicians we elected, though they went along with the whole caper. It was this permanent class of rulers, managers, and specialists who were in charge—people who have never faced the voters and cannot be fired by anyone no matter what.

  This is not a just system. It wrecked this country. We pay the price every day now: rent, gas, groceries, bills, and now job loss. All of this wreckage you see today traces to what they did. It’s why your child is behind in language, math, and reading skills. It’s why your grandmother died alone and no one could attend her funeral. It could be why your friend’s husband died suddenly. It’s why your brother has a crisis-level addiction to liquor, weed, and pills.

  The administrative state waged a war on the country for longer than two years. No politician in the country had the power to stop it. Once Trump greenlighted this mess in March 2020, he was effectively unseated from power and became like the marionettes in foreign countries about whom we used to laugh: talking a good game but ultimately powerless in the face of the real power behind the scenes.

  Now let’s talk about the Red Wave. It is a means, not an end. The question now is: what is to be done. I strongly suggest that all new officeholders take a gander at the Federal Register and search for agencies. What you find is a list of 434 of them. Print it out. Using your brain and a red pen, strike out those that are nonessential—same as these people did with millions of workers.

  Let go of the idea that these agencies can be cut. They need to be abolished. When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he didn’t reduce the hours of the employees who were just taking up space. No, he immediately sent them packing. That day. No more email access. No more Slack access. Gone. Now. The new Congress needs to do this to, let’s say, half of the 434 agencies. Bring down the number to 200. That should be the goal.

  The private sector has gone through massive cutbacks and families too. Government must do the same. And not just for financial and economic reasons. It needs to be done to restore government by the people. Then we need serious changes in the employment status of any federal bureaucrat who remains. If the person is involved in any aspect of policy-making, that person needs to be reclassified as an at-will employee, same as exists in the private sector.

  This is just the beginning. There is another layer of the Deep State that is not employed by government. It lives in the private sector that is well-connected. Think of a person like Scott Gottlieb. You have seen him on TV for 30 months, pontificating about the need to lock down and get the jab. He is a former commissioner of the FDA. He now works for a fancy think tank in Washington, D.C. that is funded by industry and foundations. He also sits on the Pfizer board, which must pay pretty well, so he is, in effect, a lobbyist for Big Pharma who only pretends to be an independent intellectual.

  When Jared Kushner needed advice on how much Trump should lock down the country, his first call was to Gottlieb. Gottlieb told him to be more stringent than Trump wants. That was his one piece of advice: take away as many rights and liberties as you can get away with.

  How does Gottlieb or Bill Gates fit into this deep state structure? They are essential to it. But no one elected them and they don’t even work for government. This is an enormously complicated problem but the solution must be to break up these networks of influence and control. That’s what must happen if we are to restore democracy.

  I just watched a clip of an interview with Gates in which he says that if government rounds you up for quarantine in a stadium, you should have no choice but to go. And so too if government says you have to take this shot, you have no choice. “People act as if they have a choice but they do not,” he says.

  No system of self-government, of government by the people, can exist with this sort of person exercising such power.

  Dealing with the problem of the Deep State has to be the major priority of the new officeholders. It is not enough just to get elected and then celebrate. It means nothing unless there is some agenda, some point, some purpose, some drive, some plan. I’m not really seeing much evidence yet that there is one. We need some focus here now. We might not have another chance.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 21:00

• From Riches To Rags: Peloton Co-Founder Starts A Rug Company
  From Riches To Rags: Peloton Co-Founder Starts A Rug Company

  After Peloton’s former CEO and co-founder, John Foley, made a series of demand miscalculations for Peloton bikes during the pandemic and eventually resigned as shares in the company cratered, he’s back in the spotlight with a new venture: direct-to-consumer rug business. 

  Foley’s new company is called “Ernesta.” According to Forbes, he started the custom rug company with two other co-founders from Peloton. 

  

  Transitioning from slapping an iPad on a bike or treadmill to selling custom rugs seems like an unlikely path for the former billionaire. But maybe after borrowing millions of dollars worth of stock collateralized with Peloton shares and receiving repeated margin calls from Goldman Sachs, the rug business is his best bet to make a rebound. 

  On Monday, Ernesta announced $25 million in venture capital funding. The company is stacked with ex-Peloton managers and is hoping to take a slice of the high-end rug market. 

  Foley told Forbes the company “plans to sell 50 different styles of machine-made, custom-cut rugs in five colors each.” 

  “With Peloton, we didn’t know if it would be a success or not, but I knew that working with good people was a valuable way to spend my time.

  “Rugs might seem like a potentially uninteresting category, but there’s probably at least one in your house. They’re ubiquitous, and people don’t spend a lot of time worrying about them,” Peloton and Ernesta co-founder Hisao Kushi told Forbes. 

  Custom Market Insights released a report in July that showed more than 100 million rugs are sold in the US yearly. The rug market is expected to expand from $18 billion this year to $25 billion by 2030. Foley said for Ernesta to be successful, it needs to capture only a fraction of such volume. 

  “I want to show discipline, I want to show profitability and have a real focus on unit economics,” Foley said

  “Ernesta won’t attempt to vertically integrate its supply chain. Instead, the company will work with business-to-business partners in Georgia to source rolls of carpet in bulk, then cut them to order in a New Jersey warehouse to ship either directly or through logistics partners,” Forbes said. 

  At least Foley can now sell Peloton customers a fancy rug for their bike. What a dramatic shift for the former billionaire … from bikes to rugs. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 20:40

• Dershowitz Accuser Says She 'May Have Made A Mistake' As Defamation Suit Is Settled
  Dershowitz Accuser Says She ‘May Have Made A Mistake’ As Defamation Suit Is Settled

  The woman at the center of sexual abuse accusations against former Jeffrey Epstein lawyer Alan Dershowitz has ‘corrected the record,’ and now says she may have been mistaken.

  

  In addition to dropping her defamation lawsuit against Dershowitz, accuser Virginia Giuffre, formerly Virginia Roberts, made the following statement:

  “I have long believed that I was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein to Alan Dershowitz. However, I was very young at the time, it was a very stressful and traumatic environment, and Mr. Dershowitz has from the beginning consistently denied these allegations,” she said. “I now recognize I may have made a mistake in identifying Mr. Dershowitz.”

  According to both parties, there were no payments involved in the settlement, which also included other related lawsuits.

  Dershowitz notably represented Epstein in his earliest criminal case.

  Giuffre, meanwhile, said that both Epstein and his ‘madam’ Ghislaine Maxwell raped her. She reached a settlement with Epstein in 2009 after he pleaded guilty in Florida to procuring a prostitute under the age of 18.

  Later, Giuffre said Dershowitz raped her six times in three states, as well as the US Virgin Islands at Epstein’s property.

  Dershowitz has maintained his innocence the entire time.

  “As I have said from the beginning, I never had sex with Ms. Giuffre,” he said, adding “I have nevertheless come to believe that at the time she accused me she believed what she said. Ms. Giuffre is to be commended for her courage in now stating publicly that she may have been mistaken about me.”

  At the Epoch Times notes, The settlement also involved Dershowitz’s countersuit against Giuffre, a defamation suit from lawyer David Boies against Dershowitz, and a countersuit from Dershowitz against Boies.

  “I agree with Mr. Dershowitz and Ms. Giuffre that the time has come to end this litigation and move on,” Boies said in a statement. “I know that Alan Dershowitz has suffered greatly from the allegation of sexual abuse—an allegation that he has consistently, and vehemently, denied.”

  Boies had said in a complaint that Dershowitz was trying to “distract attention from his own misconduct” when he launched “a campaign to attack and vilify each of the lawyers who have represented his victims,” including Giuffre.

  Dershowitz, meanwhile, now says his claims that Boies engaged in an extortion plot and tried to induce perjury “were mistaken.”

  Giuffre also accused Prince Andrew of raping her. She had produced a photograph showing her with the prince and Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking and sentenced more recently to 20 years in prison.

  Giuffre’s lawsuit against Prince Andrew was settled in February. The details were not disclosed.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 20:20

• World's Top Chipmaker To Build Another US Plant In Arizona
  World’s Top Chipmaker To Build Another US Plant In Arizona

  Currently, US semiconductors are a measly 10% of global production. Most chips are produced in Asia, particularly South Korea and Taiwan, and the Biden administration has pushed the Chips and Science Act to boost development and production domestically. 

  The CHIPS Act earmarks $52 billion to revert a decades-long trend of US production shifting abroad to low-cost labor regions. There was evidence some of this production is being reshored, according to a WSJ report, revealing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., the world’s largest contract chipmaker, is laying the groundwork for a second US factory in Arizona. 

  People familiar with the plans told WSJ that TSMC would soon announce one of the most advanced semiconductor plants just north of Phoenix, Arizona, next to another one of its chip factories. They said the investment in the new plant could be upwards of $12 billion, similar to what was committed in 2020 to build the factory beside it. 

  

  TSMC is making a big bet on the revival of US semiconductor production after increasing US-China tensions led Washington to pass the CHIPS Act to spur domestic semiconductor manufacturing. 

  “TSMC’s new facility would manufacture so-called 3-nanometer transistors, some of the tiniest and most lightning-fast currently possible,” the people said. 

  In a statement to WSJ on Wednesday, TSMC confirmed it was constructing a building to “potentially” house a second chip plant at its site in Arizona. The statement said it would add more advanced chip capacity there, though a final decision has yet to be announced. 

  The Biden administration’s move to rebuild semiconductor production in the US comes after a massive chip shortage in Asia that caused supply chain snarls for manufacturers of automobiles, electronics, and defense systems. The expansion signifies that reshoring supply chains from China and surrounding countries will ensure secured chip production during wartime. 

  TSMC, whose production plants are based primarily in Taiwan, has begun to diversify over the past year due to invasion threats by China.

  In August, TSMC Chair Mark Liu told CNN that if China were to invade Taiwan and seize the world’s most advanced chip factories, it would cause devastating supply chain disruptions worldwide. 

  Apart from domestic initiatives, the Biden administration has slapped China with export restrictions on advanced chips and curbed the sale of chipmaking equipment. The restrictions attempt to slow advancements in China while buying the US time to rebuild its chip production base.  

  Intel Corp. and memory maker Micron Technology Inc. are also investing in new US chipmaking factories as global supply chains are rejiggered due to national security threats.  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 20:00

• Doug Casey On The WEF's Plan For Mankind And What Comes Next
  Doug Casey On The WEF’s Plan For Mankind And What Comes Next

  Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

  International Man: The World Economic Forum (WEF) describes its mission as the “international organization for public-private cooperation.”

  What do you make of the WEF and the power it wields?

  

  Doug Casey: “International organization for public-private cooperation” is a code phrase for economic fascism – which is to say, the hand-in-glove melding of the political power of the State with the economic power of corporations.

  Things like the WEF, and other NGOs (non-governmental organizations), institutes, and think tanks, have proliferated in recent years. They’re almost all destructive parasites on productive society.

  Almost all of them are leftist, statist, and collectivist in orientation. They’re typically populated by intellectuals and academics and funded by tax-exempt foundations, usually set up by elderly do-gooders interested in leaving a “legacy.”

  The WEF is by far the most successful of the breed. Instead of just cadging donations so intellectuals could hang around and seem prestigious, in 1971, Klaus Schwab formed a club where the rich and powerful could discuss ideas with other members of the overlord class. Political and financial types could find a philosophical home, disguising the quest for money and power with a patina of benevolence. It’s become an amazingly large and powerful organization. They have roughly 800 full-time employees, most of them very highly paid. They have an annual budget of over $300 million. Their balance sheet indicates that the WEF is worth over $1 billion, funded by major corporations who give it millions of dollars, as do various governments. Most of the world’s political leaders and corporations are members.

  Schwab was very clever to have put together an organization where the richest, most powerful, and most influential people in the world are charged huge amounts to be introduced to each other and talk about how they can become even richer, more powerful, and more influential.

  It seems clear that members of the WEF have to toe the party line or be disinvited. Nobody wants to be excommunicated from the WEF or cut off from association with other rich and powerful people. It’s safe to say that WEF members share a common philosophy, one that’s in line with Schwab’s weltanschauung.

  FWIW, I think it’s wrong for public corporations to make political, charitable, or indeed any kind of contributions. A corporation’s raison d’etre is to generate money for its shareholders, not allow management to play big shot. Managements often like to give away shareholders’ money; it costs them nothing, but they reap the prestige of giving. Better that the money be distributed to shareholders so they can dispose of it as they wish. If that were the case, outfits like the WEF would have a lot less money and power. And wouldn’t be in a position to promote the pernicious ideas it does.

  For instance, it would appear that Klaus Schwab actually originated, or at least popularized, the term “stakeholder.” Stakeholderism believes that business is obligated to treat employees, customers, local residents, and anyone who claims to be affected by business as if they had some right to what a company produces. People who identify as stakeholders easily develop into mooches and leeches. Schwab was also an early supporter of the ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) movements. And political correctness in general.

  With as much money, power, and influence as the WEF has, it’s easy for them to groom up-and-comers. They created several sub-organizations for people who are under 40 years old—where they can reinforce their beliefs that the world ought to go in a certain way—under the direction of WEF-type people.

  Schwab has to be complimented for having built the WEF from nothing and making himself one of the most powerful people in the world. But the WEF is a dangerous and despicable organization. It’s basically what’s known as a self-licking ice cream cone—it serves no useful purpose but to perpetuate itself and its members.

  International Man: Yuval Noah Harari is a key adviser to the WEF.

  He has risen to fame as reviewers and editors have anointed him as a public intellectual.

  What’s your take on the rise of Harari?

  Doug Casey: Harari is a perfect example of how, when an organization like the WEF gets in the back of somebody, they can make him rich, famous, and influential. These people all feed each other and scratch each other’s backs.

  Harari apparently came from a perfectly average middle-class Israeli family, but I would think that he’s got to be worth at least $50 million, just based upon sales of 30 million copies of his books. He appears to be an ideal court intellectual, living quietly with his husband in a modest suburb of Tel Aviv, promoting the party line.

  International Man: Harari has made several disturbing statements, including:

  “Covid is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimize, total biometric surveillance.

  We want to stop this pandemic. We need not just to monitor people, we need to monitor what is happening under their skin.

  Governments want to know not just where we go or who we meet. Above all, they want to know what is happening under our skin.”

  What do you think about this?

  Doug Casey: Well, he really wants to transform the world, and it’s kind of clever the way he proposes to do it.

  His book Sapiens, which I read about 10 years ago, is a competent enough summation of how humans evolved over the course of the Pleistocene during the last 2.5 million years. It doesn’t make any cosmic breakthroughs but tells a basically correct story. He explains how technology started to take on a life of its own and how we changed the world. And how technology’s now changing us at the rate of Moore’s Law. Fair enough.

  The problem lies in his projections of how and where humans will evolve over the years to come. In particular, who will guide that evolution. And if things continue advancing at the rate that they are, it’s likely that machines will integrate with humans.

  I see no problem with that. If you voluntarily want to replace body parts with mechanical parts—a new knee, a new heart, be a $6 Million Man—that’s wonderful. Taking it one step further, if you can put a chip in your brain and instantly access all the knowledge on the Internet without going through a computer, that could be even more wonderful, except for the fact the Social Credit System and hackers will have access to your chip.

  The problem is that the WEF people think that they know what’s best for the rest of humanity. And they feel it’s for the good of all that they be closely monitored, controlled, and guided. They’ve made statements to the effect that most people are “useless eaters,” which is probably true at this point. Or it will be once everybody gets a Guaranteed Annual Income—enough to keep them sated with avocado toast and vanilla lattes while they watch cat videos at the local Starbucks. They’d really like to do without superfluous humans and just have the elite calling the shots. Humans that remain would amount to serfs. The WEF have said, “You’ll own nothing and be happy.” They’re very bold.

  It’s very disturbing how they talk about guiding the advance to the next stage of human evolution. As pessimistic as I am about the current state of the world and where it’s going, I still believe in The Ascent of Man— but I believe it can only happen if individual liberty is maximized. From the point of view of personal freedom, Harari is actually talking about regressing to feudal times. Albeit a kinder and gentler version, where wise solons like Klaus and Yuval are in charge.

  As far as I can tell, his values are antithetical to those of Western Civilization. But he’s an effective mouthpiece to convince the hoi polloi that their leaders have their best interests at heart. And I suppose they do. At least the way a farmer has the best interests of his dairy—or beef—cattle at heart.

  International Man: Harari has often described a high-tech totalitarian future where a small elite with access to the latest technology evolves into different beings. At the same time, drugs and video games pacify the masses until their eventual extinction.

  What are your thoughts about this dystopian future? Is it inevitable?

  Doug Casey: Harari projects a certain inevitability to the evolution of technology, and he may actually be right.

  I don’t mind change. Rapid technological progress has been accelerating for the last 10,000 years and, with a little luck, will go hyperbolic with the evolution of nanotechnology, computers, biotech, space exploration, robotics, and artificial intelligence. These are all good things.

  The question is whether these things will be imposed upon humanity or will they be something that individuals can adopt or not as they choose? To me, this is the essential ethical and moral question.

  Harari, and for that matter, the rest of these WEF people, never examine any ethical or moral issues.

  For instance, Harari is very big on transgenderism, which he seems to want to make into a political hobby horse—where it’s not just accepted as a psychological aberration, but is almost imposed on society, whether you like it or not.

  He’s a vegan. I have no problem with being a vegan. It’s just that he wants to impose his views of the correct way to deal with animals (absolutely including humans) on everybody else. He’s certain that he knows what’s best for everybody else.

  I’ve long believed in the arrival of the Singularity, which Ray Kurzweil has discussed in detail. I think it’s a good thing. Technological progress has always been a good thing—whether we’re talking about the invention of gunpowder that allowed the average man to overthrow his medieval rulers, or the printing press, that allowed peasants to access the knowledge of the ruling classes.

  But the problem is that the bad guys usually get control of technology first. The powers-that-be use tech to impose their will upon the little people until the cat gets out of the bag.

  I’m all for the rapid evolution of technology, even though it’s very dangerous because the power-mongers, the bad guys, and the minions of the State usually get it first.

  On the bright side, I suspect that under the influence of Schwab and his muchacho de mantequilla Harari, the WEF will collapse. The snakes in the snake pit will eventually turn on each other. Optimism is warranted because stupid ideas have always come and gone throughout history. Evil is usually vanquished over the long run.

  The WEF is promoting destructive ideas in a dangerous time. If you value free thought, free minds, and free markets, recognize the WEF as an enemy.

  *  *  *

  Sociopaths are drawn to the government and international organizations like the World Economic Forum. They seek power and control over others through coercion, taxation and more. Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the course of these trends in motion. The best you can and should do is to stay informed so that you can protect yourself in the best way possible, and even profit from the situation. New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released a guide that will show you exactly how. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 19:40

• Pennsylvania Reelects Dead Democrat
  Pennsylvania Reelects Dead Democrat

  A Pennsylvania state representative who died in October was reelected during yesterday’s midterm elections, according to the Pennsylvania House Democratic Caucus.

  

  Anthony “Tony” DeLuca, 85, died Oct. 9 “after a brief battle with lymphoma, a disease he twice previously beat,” the Caucus said in a statement.

  “While we’re incredibly saddened by the loss of Representative Tony DeLuca, we are proud to see the voters continue to show their confidence in him and his commitment to Democratic values by re-electing him posthumously. A special election will follow soon,” said PA House Democrats in a tweet, Fox News reports.

  Some folks commenting that the voters here were oblivious. Some certainly were. But for others, they likely preferred the idea of a special election over electing the third-party candidate on the ballot

  — Charlie Wolfson (@chwolfson) November 9, 2022

  Challenger Queonia “Zarah” Livingston, who is living, ran a far-left campaign, with her top three priorities listed on her website as; environmental justice, ending the war on drugs and reducing gun violence.

  DeLuca was a resident of Penn Hills for over 60 years. He got his start in politics serving on the Penn Hills Government Study Commission, then five years as a Penn Hills Councilman, followed by two years as Penn Hills Deputy Mayor before running for his legislative seat and defeating the Republican incumbent. -Fox News

  DeLuca had four children, nine grandchildren and three great-grandchildren.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 19:20

• Global Energy Driven Inflation May Ease As China Sees Lower Growth
  Global Energy Driven Inflation May Ease As China Sees Lower Growth

  By Simon Watkins of OIlPrice.com

  The key driver of the rising inflation causing economic mayhem across the developed world remains historically elevated oil and gas prices that have been in play since the prospect of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine first came into view, which was in September last year, when the oil price was around US$65 per barrel (pb) of Brent. This rise, when combined with the huge rise in global liquidity caused by the various long-running quantitative easing programs that followed the Great Financial Crisis, have led Western government to embark on a series of dramatic increases in interest rates aimed at capping inflation but which, in themselves, may cause long-lasting economic recessions. One major factor that may serve to mitigate against this, by acting as a drag on oil and gas prices, is the economic outlook of China, which surpassed the U.S. as the largest annual gross crude oil importer in the world in 2017.

  

  Part of the problem for China’s economy has been the exceptionally negative effects of its ‘zero-Covid’ policy. This policy, personally championed by President Xi Jinping, is based on ultra-tight lockdowns that are introduced across entire cities immediately that a relatively miniscule number of Covid-19 cases are identified. December 2021 had seen a refinement of the zero-Covid strategy to one incorporating the idea of ‘dynamic clearing’, which provided local governments more flexibility in imposing restrictions, allowing daily increases in symptomatic cases to be capped at around 200 on a national basis. It was thought that this number might be increased, given that in the new outbreaks in March this year alone, 184,000 individuals with possible Covid symptoms had been put under medical observation in isolation in the first two weeks of those outbreaks. 

  Optimism arose from comments made by several Chinese agencies about a possible softening up of the zero-Covid rules, and then came the publication in the middle of April of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC) guide that outlined measures for quarantining at home. These would have alleviated the economy-paralysing effects of people having to quarantine at centralised state-run facilities, even if suffering from very mild symptoms or none, having tested positive for Covid-19. These hopes were dashed, though, as, when asked for further clarification of these home-quarantining procedures, the CCDC simply reiterated the previous rules. President Xi then personally reiterated that: “We must adhere to scientific precision, to dynamic zero-Covid…Persistence is victory.” As it now stands, China still does not have an effective vaccine against Covid-19, nor does it have an effective post-infection anti-viral, and it still refuses to buy in such supplies from non-domestic suppliers, despite repeated offers from all major producing countries to make such supplies available to it. 

  The clean sweep of support that President Xi secured at the recent 20th Party Congress to be re-elected as General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party for a third term almost certainly means that this zero-Covid policy will not change at all. “China’s commitment to its dynamic clearing COVID strategy remains the strongest headwind to growth, and official statements before and during the Party Congress trumpeted the policy as the most appropriate for the country,” Eugenia Fabon Victorino, head of Asia Strategy for SEB, told OilPrice.com last week. “In 2020, China’s economy managed a swift recovery from the first wave of infections as mobility restrictions succeeded in capping transmissions to a limited number of regions, but the increasingly contagious viral strains have led to a substantial rise in regions reporting daily new cases of COVID,” she added. Indeed, as of just over a week ago, 26 out of 31 regions had seen severe outbreaks that threaten to spear to China’s key commercial cities.

  Another part of the problem for China is the increasingly perilous position of the country’s property sector and, by extension, of its huge hidden debt burden. The collapse of major Chinese real estate developer, Evergrande, earlier this year, under the weight of over US$300 billion in liabilities, heightened concerns that contagion might spread beyond the property sector, crushing demand in China’s offshore bond markets. As highlighted by OilPrice.com at the time, and well before that by then-Fitch analyst, Charlene Chu, China had long been hiding a mountain of debt, used in part to finance its extraordinary economic growth for the 20 or so years since the 1990s. Combined with the corollary bubbles in China’s housing and other asset markets that have been inflating over the past few years, as analysed in depth in my new book on the global oil markets, the situation in China right now is very similar to the one in the West in 2007/08 to which nobody paid attention until there started to be bankruptcies, which then snowballed into the full-blown Great Financial Crisis. “Before the Congress, Beijing announced yet another raft of policy adjustments to boost housing demand,” said SEB’s Victorino. “However, cash-strapped developers continue to default on offshore bond maturities- in fact, the issuer-based offshore default rate among real estate names continues to climb, to 20.4 percent as of September, from 5.2 percent at the end of 2021,” she added.  

  In terms of specific negative ramifications for China’s economic growth, the key Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) for factory activity fell unexpectedly in October, to 49.2, a decrease of 0.9 from the previous month, and indicative of an outright contraction. In line with this, China’s crude oil imports for the first three quarters of the year fell 4.3 percent year-on-year to mark the first annual decline for the period since at least 2014. As at the end of the first half of this year, then, the economic outlook for China was already deteriorating more than had previously been expected, with SEB’s Victorino and TS Lombard’s head of China and Asia research, Rory Green, having already downgraded their GDP growth estimates for China earlier in the year, to just 3.5 percent in SEB’s case, and only 2.5 percent in TS Lombard’s.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 19:00

• Midterms And Markets: The Good News And The Bad News
  Midterms And Markets: The Good News And The Bad News

  While stocks pummeled today on a toxic cocktail of bad news including the collapse of FTX, and the lack of a red wave, Deutsche Bank had some good news for investors who are now shaking ahead of tomorrow’s CPI print which could deliver the knock out blow should it come in hot.

  So here is the good news: as DB strategist Jim Reid notes, in all 19 post WWII midterm cycles, the S&P 500 has always been higher 12 months after the elections were out of the way. You can see it here.

  

  Additionally, in Reid’s Nov 8 Chart of the Day, he shows the performance of the S&P 500 through the four year election cycle with Y1 Q1 referring to the inauguration quarter of the new President and midterms being Y2 Q4. As one can see, the three quarters from midterms onwards are historically amongst the strongest quarters however far you go back. Indeed since 1949 they ARE the strongest three. Will history repeat itself? It may well do in the short -term as uncertainty lifts.

  

  However before investors dump all their money in the stock market in hopes of a guaranteed 12 month return, here is the bad news in the form of a follow up analysis from Reid why we should be very careful about this analysis around midterms and positive markets in the subsequent 12 months.

  The chart below shows the same 4-year presidential cycle as the one shown above, but instead of equity returns this time Deutsche shows the percentage of time in each quarter since 1949 that the US economy has been in recession. For example, Y1 Q1 has seen a recession within it just over 15% of the time over the last 73 years.

  The real jaw dropper though is that over this period a recession has not started in year 3 of the election cycle. There have been legacy recessions that ended in Y3 Q1 but for the other Y3 quarters the graph shows a stunning zero percent. Given that equities tend to bottom on average mid-way through a recession one can see that history would suggest Y3 of the presidential cycle has always had a clear run in a way no other year has.

  The obvious next question is whether there is a reason why Y3 has not seen a recession start during it since 1949. At a push an incumbent president might be more minded to allow a recession in Y1 and Y2 of the presidency to save bullets for the re-election campaign/legacy in Y4 (unless, of course, one is terminally confused about everything like Biden and his puppetmasters). Therefore recession risk might be front loaded in an election cycle (it could also all be completely random).

  

  If the argument on lack of front-loaded stimulus above has any grounding, you can’t say it about this presidential cycle as the Biden Y1 saw the culmination of the largest stimulus package seen in history with no bullets left to fire now. So much so that the hiking cycle this year has been by far the most aggressive seen in any Y2 of the cycle.

  Which is why this time can be a lot different to history. So, in conclusion, Jim Reid says that “the midterms and subsequent positive equity performance charts that you’re seeing from me and others have to be put in context. Unless of course you think the lack of a Y3 recession through history can be easily explained and is likely to repeat in 2023. If so, please let me know ASAP before I finish my 2023 outlook.”

  More in the full reports available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 18:40

• India Pledges To Buy More Russian Oil, Mulls Joint Weapons Production
  India Pledges To Buy More Russian Oil, Mulls Joint Weapons Production

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute, 

  Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar says his country has no plans to stop importing Russian energy. The statement was made as Western countries plan to roll out price caps on Moscow’s oil exports next month. 

  Jaishankar traveled to Russia to meet his counterpart Sergey Lavrov on Tuesday. At a joint press conference, the Indian diplomat stressed the importance of the New Delhi-Moscow relationship, saying “Russia has been a steady and time-tested partner” and that “any objective evaluation of our relationship over many decades would confirm that it has actually served both our countries very, very well.”

  

  Since President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February, Washington has led a sanctions campaign aimed at crushing the Russian economy. However, so far, the economic war has largely backfired.

  Rising energy prices in much of the West have led to protests against the sanctions in Europe. Meanwhile, the Russian economy has weathered the Western isolation by selling more oil to China, India and Turkey, despite pressure from the United States to sever their ties with Moscow. Prior to the war, New Delhi imported just 2% of its oil from Moscow. By September, that number had jumped to 23%. 

  US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen devised a scheme to cut Russia’s energy exports by enforcing a price cap on Moscow’s oil. The US announced the cap will take effect December 5 but did not set the value. The price ceiling requires Russia to agree to sell its oil at below market value, though the Kremlin has warned that any country attempting to enforce the measure will simply be cut off from Russian oil. 

  Jaishankar indicated that New Delhi will not institute the price cap and will continue buying Russian oil at the previous rates:

  “As the world’s third-largest consumer of oil and gas, a consumer where the levels of income are not very high, it is our fundamental obligation to ensure that the Indian consumer has the best possible access on the most advantageous terms to international markets,” he said, adding “we have seen that the India-Russia relationship has worked to advantage. If it works to my advantage, I would like to keep that going.”

  Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says he discussed the joint production of modern weapons with his Indian counterpart during their fifth meeting this year. https://t.co/poEmVppFED

  — DW News (@dwnews) November 8, 2022

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

  For his part, Lavrov discussed new potential arms agreements between New Delhi and Moscow, noting that the two officials “discussed in detail the state and prospects of military-technical cooperation, including joint production of modern arms.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 18:20

• Beijing Insists On Zero-COVID Policy But Blames Local Governments For Excessive Measures
  Beijing Insists On Zero-COVID Policy But Blames Local Governments For Excessive Measures

  Authored by Mary Hong via The Epoch Times,

  In a press conference on Friday, the Chinese Health Commission insisted the country’s zero-COVID policy is an effective and economic measure for pandemic containment.

  The officials also blamed local governments such as Zhengzhou for unscientific measures that hurt the economy and frustrated the public.

  On Nov. 5, the Health Commission emphasized sticking with the policy to prevent imported cases and recurrence of the domestic cases, and claimed the policy is the “accurate” way to deal with the pandemic.

  

  Blaming Local Governments

  In answering press questions on complaints posed by the populace during the implementation of the zero-COVID policy, the officials named Zhengzhou, in central China Henan Province, as the city that received the most criticism for its arbitrary travel restrictions and lockdowns.

  Consequently, Zhengzhou officials held a press conference on Nov. 6, apologizing to the public and promising to rectify its measures in containing the virus.

  The manufacturing sector in China has seen the disastrous impact of the arbitrary lockdown imposed by the authorities.

  

  A resident undergoes a nucleic acid test for COVID-19 in Anyang in central China’s Henan Province on Jan. 26, 2022. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

  On Nov. 2, Zhengzhou imposed a seven-day lockdown for the industrial park where the manufacturer Foxconn is housed.

  Since September, Zhengzhou has been one of the epicenters of viral infection. Positive cases were also reported in the Foxconn factory starting in October.

  Recently, a large number of Foxconn employees fled the factory for fear of infection and a shortage of food and medicine on the factory premises due to the lockdown.

  The Zhengzhou Foxconn location is Apple’s largest iPhone assembly factory in the world.

  According to the 2020 China Top 500 Foreign Trade Research Report by the Statistical Society for Foreign Economic Relations & Trade of China, Zhengzhou Foxconn contributed to 82 percent of Zhengzhou’s total export value in 2019; Zhengzhou Foxconn’s total export volume reached $31.6 billion, the largest contributor to Chinese foreign trade export in 2019; and the import and export volume was second only to two state-owned enterprises, China Petrochemical Corporation and China National Petroleum Corporation.

  On Nov. 6, Apple released a statement saying that the primary iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max assembly facility located in Zhengzhou is currently “operating at significantly reduced capacity.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Why Society Needs Conspiracy Theories & Conspiracy Theorists
  Why Society Needs Conspiracy Theories & Conspiracy Theorists

  Authored by Dan Fournier via Substack,

  “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.”

  – Matthew 10:26

  As this will be a comprehensive article, I’ve decided to split it up into the following sections:

  • Introduction

  • How did the term come about & become a tool for defamation?

  • A German journalist spills the beans

  • Same Playbook, Different War

  • The Council on Foreign Relations conspiracy

  • Conspiracy Theories that turned out to be true

  • Notable Unresolved Conspiracies

  • Conspiracies to Watch

  • Mini-Guide to Investigating Conspiracies

  • Conclusion

  

  Wernher von Braun walking along the lunar surface on an Apollo set replica during the Atlanta Southeastern Fair, September 5, 1969, credited to United Press International (UPI), image source

  Introduction

  It seems like you can’t catch a news headline or social media post these days without coming across the terms conspiracy theory and conspiracy theorist, or phrases like ‘spreading conspiracies’. One has to wonder: why are they so frequently employed?

  In my most recent published work, I referenced an article from Canada’s National Post which ran with the headline ‘CBSA says it’s investigating border officer spreading COVID conspiracies online.’

  The problem with these kinds of articles is that they are too often merely used as hit pieces to ridicule, degrade, and discredit any individual or group that goes against a certain narrative or disagrees with an author’s (or their publication’s partisanship or funders’) views.

  Moreover, their authors very seldom make specific references or claims as to why they label their targets when using such over-used and over-abused disparaging rhetoric. When this is the case, it leads me to believe that the overall purpose of their pieces is to disparage their targets more than anything else.

  Another recent example of this involves that from the article entitled ‘Network of Syria conspiracy theorists identified – study’ written by Mark Townsend from The Guardian (UK). In the article, the author claimed “journalist Aaron Maté at the Grayzone is said by the report to have overtaken Beeley as the most prolific spreader of disinformation among the 28 conspiracy theorists identified.” Maté had to refute the claim made against him which also involved contacting Townsend by phone. His counter article and the phone conversation appear on his Substack page (see ‘NATO-backed network of Syria dirty war propagandists identified)’ and is definitely an interesting case on how these ploys take place.

  Countless other instances could be cited, but suffice it to say that there is no shortage of them.

  But what is perhaps even more laughable with this phenomenon is the fact that these authors wantonly use these terms without even knowing their true meanings and where they actually originate from.

  Before looking into these, though, we must first and foremost examine the meaning of the word ‘conspiracy’ itself. Oxford defines it as:

  a secret plan by a group of people to do something harmful or illegal

  Conspiracies have been an integral part of humanity ever since people have bonded together in groups for a better chance at survival.

  Lord knows that history is riddled with an abundant supply of conspiracies and we will look at some notable examples later on.

  How did the term come about & become a tool for defamation?

  Though the term ‘conspiracy theorist’ itself dates as far back as the 19th century, it became much more prominent in the years following the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy.

  Moreover, it’s really in the 1960s where it became more abundant and has taken on a negative connotation. This is in large part because of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States of America.

  The usage of ‘conspiracy theorist’ was principally brought about to discredit any person or outfit that questioned the findings of the Warren Commission regarding the official narrative of the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy.

  

  The assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Image source: https://allthatsinteresting.com/famous-assassinations

  As to not be labelled a conspiracy theorist myself, here is some tangible evidence to support my claim that the CIA has been complicit with regards to the usage of the term as a means to disparage and discredit individuals with opposing views to an official narrative. An official DISPATCH (document number 1035-60) dated January 1, 1967 which was declassified and released following a FOIA request got published on the Mary Ferrell Foundation (MFF) website – one which contains nearly 2 million pages of documents, government reports, as well as other materials. The first page of the dispatch appears as follows:

  

  COUNTERING CRITICISM OF THE WARREN REPORT, NARA Record Number: 104-10009-10022 from the Mary Ferrell Foundation, Dispatch 1035-960, Source: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=53510#relPageId=2

  Firstly, we can notice the term ‘PSYCH’ in the upper-left hand corner of the document which indicates that this relates to Psychological Operations. We can see from the first paragraph that their main concern is about speculation regarding the assassination of President Kennedy and how various writers are questioning the findings of the Warren Commission report. The end of section 2 on the first page states:

  “The aim of this dispatch is to provide material for countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, …”

  Scrolling down to the second page under section 3 a. appears the following [emphasis added]:

  “To discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hand of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.”

  And shortly after under section 3 b., it continues:

  “To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”

  So, there you have it in black and white. The CIA specifically directs the use of their elite contacts which include politicians and editors – presumably of major newspapers and most likely of major broadcasters. Tactics suggested include writing feature articles (to counter the official narrative), writing book reviews – presumably negative ones, and further labelling dissenters as ‘Communist propagandists’ – a term that had much more of an accentuated defamatory effect back then than it does today.

  This raises the obvious question of why the CIA was so seriously concerned about media coverage with regards to the assassination. What’s it to them? Did they have something hide? Where they pressed to do so by the Lyndon Johnson administration? If so, why?

  To dig deeper about what they actually stated in their dispatch, we can ask: who are these “elite contacts” and “propaganda assets” they are referring to?

  American investigative journalist and author Carl Bernstein – famous for his work with Bob Woodward on the Watergate scandal – wrote a rather extensive (25,000-word) exposé entitled ‘THE CIA AND THE MEDIA: How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up’ that was published in Rolling Stone magazine on October 20, 1977, just over a decade after the infamous CIA dispatch was issued. Early on in the mammoth article, Bernstein lists categories in which the Agency (the CIA) partnered with journalists and the press. Two such instances appear as follows:

  “- Editors, publishers and broadcast network executives. The CIAs relationship with most news executives differed fundamentally from those with working reporters and stringers, who were much more subject to direction from the Agency. A few executives—Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times among them—signed secrecy agreements.”

  “- Columnists and commentators. There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources. They are referred to at the Agency as “known assets” and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects. Three of the most widely read columnists who maintained such ties with the Agency are C.L. Sulzberger of the New York Times, Joseph Alsop, and the late Stewart Alsop, whose column appeared in the New York Herald‑Tribune, the Saturday Evening Post and Newsweek. CIA files contain reports of specific tasks all three undertook.”

  The CIA specifically refers to these widely read columnists as “known assets” they can count upon to perform undercover tasks. They also maintain ‘signed secrecy agreements’ with executives from the New York Times. Lovely!

  Bernstein then lists many well-known newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters used by the CIA and notes their most cherished ones as follows [emphasis added]:

  “By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.”

  Still today, these three media outlets are giants in the publishing, broadcasting, and entertainment industries. And who really knows the extent to which the CIA and other US government agencies still maintain relationships with their editorial and journalistic staff, and possibly many others in the United States and across the world. It would certainly come as no surprise if they did.

  War – and how it is covered by media – is a major recurring theme in all of this and it is no secret that the CIA has left its dirty footprints over many of them since its inception in 1947. This has been highly documented and revealed by whistleblower Kevin Shipp, a former CIA officer, intelligence and counter terrorism expert who held several high-level positions in the organization.

  Finally, the CIA’s reach beyond American borders goes without saying.

  A German journalist spills the beans

  “I was bribed by billionaires. I was bribed by the Americans not to report exactly the truth,” stated Udo Ulfkotte back in a 2014 interview with RT (original report); the late editor and journalist of Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung was quite outspoken in this particular interview.

  

  Screenshot of the 2014 RT interview with German journalist Udo Ulfkotte

  Ulfkotte explained how the CIA and other US agencies bought journalists across all major German newspapers. He starts the interview with the following revelation [emphasis added]:

  “I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years. And I was educated to lie, to betray, and not to tell the truth to the public. But, seeing right now within the last months how the German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia. This is a point of no return and I’m going to stand up and say it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia, and it is not right what my colleagues do and have done in the past because they are bribed to betray the people, not only in Germany, all over Europe.”

  It’s funny how you could almost replace this assertion (from back in 2014) in the context of today’s 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, or as some would call it, a proxy war between NATO/Western Europe/United States and Russia.

  He continued:

  “I was supported by the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA. Why? Because I should be pro- American. I’m fed up with it. I don’t want to do it anymore.”

  ‘Non-official cover’ is a term the German journalist used to describe how he (and other journalists) were essentially working for or helping the intelligence agency, though not in an official capacity, conveniently leaving room for plausible deniability.

  Ulfkotte goes on to explain how the journalists are rewarded by the CIA.

  Statements like these really makes one wonder about the extent to which media outlets all around the world have been infiltrated not only by the CIA, but also by other powerful entities.

  But wait, Ulfkotte dives deeper into other supranational influences that help shape media organizations and their prevailing narratives [emphasis added]:

  “We are still kind of a colony of the Americans. And being a colony, it is very easy to approach young journalists through, what is very important here is, transatlantic organizations. All journalists from really respected and recommended big German newspapers, magazines, radio stations, TV stations, they are all members or guests of those big transatlantic organizations. And in these transatlantic organizations, you are approached to be pro-American.”

  Ulfkotte then emphasizes that this phenomenon is even more the case with British journalists due to their special relationship with the US, and the French, to a lesser extent.

  One need not look far to see what he is talking about with regards to these transatlantic organizations than observe the writings and actions of outfits such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Atlantic Council think tank, both focused on American imperialism and interests. While the later is essentially a mouthpiece for NATO, the former holds an unfathomable grasp on Western media.

  Examining the historical and current membership into the Council on Foreign Relations is quite revealing, to say the least. Or, perhaps more fittingly: the elephant in the room. Moreover, the think tank holds tremendous influence through its network of elites and media pundits who are central in shaping U.S. foreign policy and public discourse.

  Back in 2017, an infographic emerged showing the extent of this network and how it possibly ties to the Bilderberger Group and the Trilateral Commission:

  

  Infographic showing the network of members of the CFR, full-resolution image: https://swprs.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/cfr-media-network-hdv-spr.png

  Comparing current members with past ones, we can easily validate the authenticity of this elitist ilk and deduce that it is highly organized, highly interconnected, and what amounts to a highly influential network of thought leaders & shapers.

  Another infographic from Swiss Policy Research – an independent, nonpartisan and non-profit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda – shows the transatlantic network the German media is subject to:

  

  Swiss Policy Research – Media in Germany: The transatlantic network, full-resolution image: https://i0.wp.com/swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/netzwerk-medien-deutschland-spr-mt.png?ssl=1

  The data contained in these infographics validates German journalist Udo Ulfkotte’s claims to this effect.

  The infiltration of media, be it by the CIA, other intelligence agencies, or think-tanks such as the Council on Foreign Relations or the Atlantic Council, is unmistakably a conspiracy in that their stealthily coordinated efforts control narratives the masses, including government officials, are exposed to on a daily basis.

  Same Playbook, Different War

  With the current war in the Ukraine, we can easily notice how the stances held by these transatlantic institutions are mostly one-sided. Here’s a recent tweet from the Atlantic Council regarding the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war:

  

  Tweet from the Atlantic Council, Sept. 15, 2022, Source

  The related article begins [emphasis added]:

  “Ukraine’s stunning counteroffensive success in the Kharkiv region has provided conclusive proof that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are more than capable of defeating Russia on the battlefield. Now is the time to end the war by providing Ukraine with everything necessary to consolidate these gains and secure a decisive victory.”

  “Victory requires a coordinated, multifaceted, and long-term approach with economic, diplomatic, humanitarian, and logistical support all needed in order to bolster the Ukrainian transition to NATO-standard weaponry. Above all, this means a full commitment by Ukraine’s partners to increase arms supplies to the country.”

  As you can see, they don’t hide which side they are representing while blatantly calling for NATO and partners to increase arms supplies and weaponry. Accordingly, if this is not an advertisement to further bolster the Military/Security Complex’s coffers, then I don’t know what else to say. That would be for another article altogether that would require its own investigation.

  Another recent tweet and article written by the CFR’s own President, Richard Haass, a Rhodes Scholar, from the Council on Foreign Relations rings the same bell:

  

  Tweet from the Council on Foreign Relations, also from Sept. 15, 2022, Source

  In it, the CFR President states [emphasis added]:

  “The West, for its part, should continue to provide Ukraine with the quality and quantity of military and economic support it requires. There are strong strategic reasons for doing so, including to deter future aggression by Russia, China, or anyone else.”

  The only difference is that this one makes a specific reference to China – the current frontrunner to be the next boogeyman-du-jour in our Orwellian perpetual state of war which assures gargantuan profits for the Military/Security Complex. But again, I digress, for this is yet for another behemoth of an article that would require an entire team of reporters.

  The extent to which this war has also been propagated on social media is, in itself, a whole other can of worms. Armies of bots, pundits and propagandists (from both sides of the conflict) along with the divided masses all contribute to the digital fog of war in the halls, hyperbolic and echo chambers of platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube.

  The Council on Foreign Relations conspiracy

  In a book aptly titled ‘None Dare Call It Conspiracy’ by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham published in 1971, the first paragraph of the introduction – written by former U.S. congressman John G. Schmitz reads as follows:

  “The story you are about to read is true. The names have not been changed to protect the guilty. This book may have the effect of changing your life. After reading this book you will never look at national and world events in the same way again.”

  I feel the same way, though I would also highly recommend the book The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin which focuses on the secretive events that lead to the formation of the private corporation knowns as the US Federal Reserve which has also changed the way I personally view the word.

  Griffin holds the distinguished honorary title of Conspiracy Theorist by the editors of Wikipedia and others. So, he must be doing something right. His claims about how the North American medical establishment essentially got usurped by billionaire interests certainly added credence to this title.

  Speaking of billionaires, a few passages from the book ‘None Dare Call It Conspiracy’ really stand out:

  “The American subsidiary of this conspiracy is called the Council on Foreign Relations and was started by and is still controlled by Leftist international bankers.”

  “According to his grandson John, Jacob Schiff (above), long-time associate of the Rothschilds, financed the Communist Revolution in Russia to the tune of $20 million. According to a report on file with the State Department, his firm, Kuhn loeb and Co. bankrolled the first five year plan for Stalin. Schiff’s partner and relative, Paul Warburg, engineered the establishment of the Federal Reserve System while on the Kuhn Loeb payroll. Schiff’s descendants are active in the Council on Foreign Relations today.”

  And under an old photograph of a building in New York city appears [emphasis added]:

  “Home of the Council on Foreign Relations on 68th St. in New York The admitted goal of the CFR is to abolish the Constitution and replace our ones [sic] independent Republic with a World Government. CFR members have controlled, the last six administrations. Richard Nixon has been a member and has appointed at least 100 CFR members to high positions in his administration.”

  And later on in the book:

  “The C.F.R. has come to be known as “The Establishment,” “the invisible government” and “the Rockefeller foreign office.” This semi-secret organization unquestionably has become the most influential group in America.”

  It’s most interesting to see how these billionaire actors also coincidentally have had a hand in the formation of the U.S. Federal Reserve. Perhaps, G. Edward Griffin was onto something after all.

  A more recent (1988) book provides similar allegations with regards to the CFR by providing a deep dive into the historical roots, connections, and linkages to the war machine of the notorious organization. Its title is ‘The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations And The American Decline’ by author James Perloff.

  I will leave it up to the reader to investigate more into this alleged conspiracy, for such an endeavor demands significant time, scrutiny, and attention.

  Conspiracy Theories that turned out to be true

  Though many conspiracies have been proven true over the years, I will merely showcase a few which relate to two recurring themes of this article, namely that of war and media corruption.

  Operation Mockingbird, 1950s+

  In light of the revelations listed earlier in this article, it is perhaps most fitting that we exhibit this particular proven conspiracy, for its overarching implications run far and wide – even in 2022 and beyond.

  In a nutshell, Operation Mockingbird was a large-scale clandestine program of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to manipulate news media for propaganda purposes.

  According to The Black Vault – an online archive that houses over 3 million pages of government documents, Operation Mockingbird was said to be initially organized by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles, later led by Frank Wisner after Dulles became the head of the CIA; and the organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA’s views, including worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns.

  In 1974, The New York Times had published an article by investigative journalist Seymour Hirsh who claimed that the CIA had violated its charter

  In the mid-1970s, the U.S. Congress had become concerned over abuses of the CIA, NSA, and FBI and called a committee (the Church Committee) to look over it.

  As per Everipedia, the final report of the Church Committee covered CIA ties with both foreign and domestic news media. Specifically with regards to the foreign news media, the report concluded that:

  “The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.”

  And for domestic media, the report emphasizes the following:

  “Approximately 50 of the [Agency] assets are individual American journalists or employees of U.S. media organizations. Of these, fewer than half are “accredited” by U.S. media organizations … The remaining individuals are non-accredited freelance contributors and media representatives abroad … More than a dozen United States news organizations and commercial publishing houses formerly provided cover for CIA agents abroad. A few of these organizations were unaware that they provided this cover.”

  Apart from the staggering revelations outlined in the two passages above, the term ‘cover’ is of particular interest. German journalist Udo Ulfkotte, mentioned earlier in this article, stated that him and other fellow German journalists were basically operating as ‘non-official cover’, or in a ‘non-official capacity’ for the CIA. In other words, the CIA employed this pretext to cloak itself and adduce plausible deniability.

  Looking at the headlines and overt propaganda coming out of the European mainstream press over the last several years leaves us with little doubt that this operation (or a new version of it) is still alive and kicking.

  Operation Northwoods (re Cuban Missile Crisis) in 1962

  Operation Northwoods was a proposed ‘false flag’ (i.e., a covert/secretive plot intended to deceive) operation against Cuba originating from the U.S. Dept. of Defense calling upon the CIA and other U.S. government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets in Guantanamo (Cuba) and blame them on the Cuban government which would serve as a justification for war against the Caribbean island nation.

  The gist of the proposed operation was to hoodwink President John F. Kennedy to declare war against Cuba in the midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

  For those with a penchant for gripping movie dramas, the 2000 movie Thirteen Days starring Kevin Costner and Bruce Greenwood (as President Kennedy) serves as an absorbing illustration in which the Democrat president was placed in a mental crucible and tested to his limits.

  The declassified document (memorandum for the Secretary of Defense) from 13 March 1962 titled ‘Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)’ lays it bare for all to see.

  Documentarians Aaron and Melissa Dykes produced a top-notch work on this planned conspiracy.

  There are many reasons why I like Truthstream Media’s documentaries. Not only do they produce extremely well-researched works, but they also present them in a clear manner; and sometimes, such as with this particular work, they offer advice to their viewers on how to better educate themselves about world events. Near the start of this documentary, Melissa Dykes states [emphasis added]:

  “We thought we would look at this document for Operation Northwoods, it was declassified, because the problem with people forgetting history or failing to research history or failing to look into history is they forget these things ever happened. And history continues to repeat and people act like they have no idea why.”

  On that, I have to totally agree with Melissa Dykes. In today’s fast-pace society, people are more inclined to play with TikTok on their phones or watch movies than to read books – especially those related to history. It’s one of the main factors that has led to the lack of critical thought and discernment in society.

  

  Simple explanation of a ‘false flag’ operation. Source: https://www.falseflag.info/about/

  Gulf of Tonkin Incident (Vietnam), 1964

  Everipedia – a blockchain-based online encyclopedia (a better source of information than Wikipedia, in my opinion) prefaces the incident as follows [emphasis added]:

  “The Gulf of Tonkin incident (Vietnamese: Sự kiện Vịnh Bắc Bộ), also known as the Maddox, was an international confrontation that led to the United States engaging more directly in the Vietnam War. It involved one real and one falsely claimed confrontation between ships of North Vietnam and the United States in the waters of the Gulf of Tonkin. The original American report blamed North Vietnam for both incidents, but the Pentagon Papers, the memoirs of Robert McNamara, and NSA publications from 2005, proved material misrepresentation by the US government to justify a war against Vietnam.”

  Among all wars fought by Americans, the Vietnam War ranked 4th just after the first two world wars and the U.S. Civil war. It’s economic and human costs epitomized human folly.  

  What is equally nefarious is the deceptive means by which this false flag event, or conspiracy, came about.

  Notable Unresolved Conspiracies

  While there are too many to even contemplate, let us have a look at some of the more controversial ones that still have an impact on society and our way of life.

  September 11 attacks

  Perhaps one of the biggest and most contentious ones is that of the events that relate to what happened on September 11, 2001.

  So much has transpired in the 21 years that have lapsed since the collapse of the World-Trade Center towers in New York City.

  Though a formal investigation has been conducted and published on these events, so many unanswered questions remain as to who exactly was behind it.

  We often hear some talking about this tragic event insisting that it was an ‘inside job’ (i.e., done by powers within the U.S. Government). And for this, they are immediately labelled conspiracy theorists. Actually, in this rare case I agree with the employment of the defamatory designation. For, with an event as complex as this one, one can readily make such a claim; but to back it up with convincing evidence would require an extraordinary enterprise.

  What is perhaps more useful here, though, would be to ask anew some of the most important and unaddressed questions relating to this event. For these questions which are listed below, links are provided for additional context/reference. A good refresher video (WTC7 and 9/11 Truth 14 Years Later: “People Still Want the Truth”) was published by documentarians of Truthstream Media.

  • How is it possible that WTC Tower 7, the 47-story building which was only affected by minor fires, collapse straight down in a free fall defying known laws of physics?

  • Why was the collapse of WTC Tower 7 reported by the BBC 20 minutes before it actually came down?

  • How come no large pieces of aircraft wreckage from United Airlines flight 93 were ever found at the alleged crash site in Stonycreek Township (Shanksville), Pennsylvania?

  • How come no large pieces of aircraft wreckage from American Airlines flight 77 were ever found on the ground near the West wall of the Pentagon?

  • Why was all the rubble and steel (evidence) from the site so swiftly collected (over the objections by fire marshals) and shipped overseas?

  • How was the Patriot Act (effective October 26, 2001) – a fairly long and complex legal document – drafted, reviewed, introduced, and enacted in merely 6 weeks?

  Of course, there are countless other unanswered questions. Perhaps the grander question is: will there ever be a fuller, more transparent official investigation surrounding these attacks?

  Who really killed JFK?

  Despite the findings of the Warren Commission, it remains to be solved as to whom exactly assassinated U.S. President John F. Kennedy since it is proven that a single gunman could not have acted alone per the additional evidence confirmed after the commission’s report.

  Many intelligence documents remained classified – even after 60 years since this tragic event took place in Dallas, Texas.

  Over the years, many have contributed to the investigation that never seems to end. Investigator Jim Garrison was perhaps the most prominent amongst them.

  Moon Landing Controversy

  

  Wernher von Braun at the lunar landing scene on an Apollo set replica during the Atlanta Southeastern Fair, credited to United Press International (UPI), image source

  The picture above (and the cover picture for this article) may seem as a conspiracy theory in itself, for it is difficult to authenticate and locate the original photograph from UPI. However, it is one that has been properly credited and attributed to the UPI. Accordingly, the cover photograph for this article can be viewed with its original header: 

  

  Image source

  And the Jacksonville Daily Journal published the photograph in its September 30, 1960 edition:

  

  Image source

  For those unfamiliar with Werner Von Braun, he was a brilliant aerospace engineer – the brains behind the development of the Saturn rockets used in the Apollo launches.

  Over the past several decades, there has been a lot of debate regarding many aspects of the moon missions. A tremendous amount of money, blood, sweat, and tears have flowed into the Apollo program and other related projects.

  Much pressure had been placed on the U.S. Government to ensure success – especially amidst the backdrop of the Space Race and larger Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union.

  Over the course of this colossal undertaking, it became apparent that some serious problems and challenges needed to be overcome. Many were overcome, but other major problems persisted.

  A three and a half hour 2017 documentary entitled American Moon (available on YouTube, Brighteon, and Odysee) outlined many of these problems along with a significant amount of anomalies – particularly in the Apollo moon missions. In the lengthy film, they disprove not only the debunkers (those who disprove the deniers) but also some of the deniers themselves regarding their false or flawed claims.

  American Moon is meticulously well documented with original (official) NASA photographs, films, interviews, technical documents, and so forth, and presented in a clear and understandable way for the average Jane or Joe.  

  Over 40 extremely well-formulated questions are presented and addressed to NASA itself as well as the greater debunker community. I have yet to locate a source which addresses all these key points; and this, despite nearly five years having elapsed since the documentary film came out.

  I certainly invite the reader to spend the three and a half hours to view this film; for, after doing so, you will never see the moon landing in the same light.

  I will only cite a few of the key questions that were put forward in this film.

  The first one relates to one of the most critical aspects of space flight, namely that of the dangers of radiation that are present beyond our planet, namely the Van Allen radiation belts. The belts protect our planet from harmful radiation originating from the sun and outer space.

  

  Van Allen radiation belts, source: NASA

  Here’s a simplified image to get a better idea of the range of these belts from Earth:

  

  Screenshot from American Moon (at the 01:00:20 mark)

  The problem, here, as pointed out in the film, is that modern scientists, including NASA Orion engineer Kelly Smith for that matter, have explained that no human could penetrate either of the two (inner & outer) belts without being exposed to high-energy radiation and cosmic rays which would biologically cause serious damage, if not death. In the March 1959 edition of Scientific American, the following was noted:

  “The discovery [of the Van Allen radiation belts] is of course troubling to astronauts; somehow the human body will have to be shielded from this radiation, even on a rapid transit through the region.”

  More recently, NASA Orion engineer Kelly Smith stated the following when talking about the Van Allen radiation belts [emphasis added]:

  “We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space.”

  In American Moon (around the 01:11:20 mark), NASA astronaut and commander Terry Virts says the following [emphasis added]:

  “The plan that NASA has is to built a rocket called SOS which is a heavy-lift rocket; it’s something much bigger than what we have today. And it will be able to launch the Orion capsule with humans on board … to destinations beyond earth orbit. Right now, we can only fly in earth orbit. That’s the farthest that we can go. This new system that we’re building is gonna allow us to go beyond and hopefully take humans into the solar system to explore. So, the moon, Mars, asteroids, there’s a lot of destinations that we could go to…”

  Further in the film, Apollo 12 astronaut Alan Bean responded the following when asked about whether he had suffered any ill effects from having passed through the Van Allen belts:

  “No. Now, I’m not sure we went far enough out to encounter the Van Allen radiation belts. Maybe we did.”

  One would think that as a crew member from Apollo 12 – the second mission to land on the moon – he would know about the location and existence of these belts through which he passed through.

  Strange.

  Very strange.

  What is also rather puzzling is the fact that NASA admits they lost the telemetry data related to the Apollo 11 moon mission.

  The Chief Flight Director for the Gemini and Apollo programs Gene Krantz (who was portrayed by Ed Harris in the 1995 film Apollo 13) admitted that NASA had lost the original tapes containing the telemetry data (alternate video link here). When asked by documentary filmmaker Aron Ranen about the tapes, Krantz stated the following:

  “I haven’t seen anything that indicates the telemetry data is even in existence. And, as I said, even if we had it, we don’t have the machines to play it back.”

  Ranen, the creator of the 2005 film Did We Go? then went to NASA’s Goodard Space Center and spoke with archivist Dr. David Williams who further asserted:

  “We’ve been unable to track it down. We don’t know where this telemetry data ended up. And we don’t know what path it may have taken. So, unfortunately I’m afraid I can’t give you much of a clue as to where this data ended up and whether it still exists or not.”

  So, let’s be clear folks here for a minute. The data that recorded what was perhaps the single most important event in human history has completely disappeared. Really? No backup copies have been made? And it would be “impossible” to re-create machines to play it back on?

  Absurd.

  While it is certainly possible that these tapes have indeed disappeared, the whole affair is rather questionable and pitiful, to say the least.

  The American Moon documentary further outlines anomalies related to the lunar module (LEM), telecommunications (between the earth and the moon), photographs & photography, cameras, videos, shadows, cosmic radiation, extreme temperatures, and more.  

  A large part of the documentary focuses on photographs taken and published by NASA. The producer of the documentary hired several top photographers in the world (who worked in the field during that period) to examine and analyze the official photos taken on the surface of the moon.

  These photography experts all pointed out many impossibilities found in them.

  For the most part, they disproved that the photographs could have been taken on the surface of the moon if the only main source of light was emanating from the Sun; they decisively contend that the photographs were produced on a set with artificial lighting. This segment is presented with meticulous detail and analysis which makes it extremely difficult to refute the assertions from the experts.

  A common counter-argument that people have regarding those who claim the moon landings were faked is how could thousands of people be on board with such a hoax without there being any whistleblowers. Firstly, there have been numerous credible whistleblowers who have come out and I will reference one below.

  As for the “thousands of employees” conundrum, the answer is quite simple. These thousands of employees would simply not be aware that this subset (i.e., the moon landings) of the Apollo missions were being deceptively presented. This was the case with the Manhattan Project whereby thousands of people worked on the development of the first atomic bomb without knowing about its ultimate goal. The project was carefully structured for secrecy by means of compartmentalization. Put simply, under compartmentalization, people work in their own respective groups (or, compartments) on specific tasks and are not privy to a lot of data or information about the overall project.

  Accordingly, it would not have been that difficult to structure the NASA project in such a way.

  In an April 12, 2020 confession, Gene Gilmore (born Eugene Reuben Akers), now deceased, appeared in a video (alternate links here, here, and here) disclosed what his father (Cyrus Eugene Akers who was stationed in Cannon Air Force Base in New Mexico in 1968) had previously confessed to him on his death bed.

  Mr. Akers senior was in the Military Police for over 20 years and on his death bed in 2002 he made a recording of what he had witnessed.

  Gene’s father told him about project ‘Slam Dunk’ whereby there were two large hangars (at the Cannon Air Force Base) that were connected, dump trucks had delivered sand and stone, and cement powder that was applied on top of all that material to make it look like a lunar landscape.

  The surprised son continued listening to his father state that in front of the airplane hangars was pull framing with large canvas tents that were concealing the inside of the staging area. Inside the staging area, on flat bed trucks was created the lunar lander that was assembled, reassembled back inside the hangars. All of the walls were painted flat black as were the ceilings.

  Cyrus Eugene Akers was sworn to secrecy by the National Security Agency (NSA).

  Gene then recalled that when his father saw the moon landing on television, he cried.

  He said that what he witnessed on TV is exactly what they recorded in that hangar.

  Mr. Akers continued his death bed confession to his son stating that there were 3 guards at the entrance of the hangar and there was a list of 15 people who could enter, no one else was allowed by order of President [Lyndon] Johnson. Gene Gilmore then stated that he had given the list to Bart Sibrel.

  Gene Gilmore then enumerates the specific names of list of 15 people who had special access to the hangars which include President Johnson, Neil Armstrong, Edwin [Buzz] Alden, Werner Von Braun, Gene Krantz, James Webb, Dr. James Van Allen, among others.

  Gilmore continues on with what his father had confided in him. President Johnson was there only for the first day of filming. The filming lasted for 3 days. And then, everything was dismantled to bring the hangars back to their original states.

  Gilmore then states that since 2002, he verified a lot of the information his father had given him – including records from Cannon Air Force base that confirmed the presence of President Johnson and the astronauts at that time as well as the lunar lander. Apparently though, this information was subsequently removed from Cannon’s website.

  Lastly, Gene affirms that his father stated had to tell somebody about the incident before he died because it was too important; but he also warned him not to ever tell anybody.

  Regarding the authenticity of these testimonies, there is always the possibility that they are not entirely truthful. But people seldom lie during death bed confessions. They usually want to get truth off their chests before they meet their maker. The fact that Gene Gilmore instructed Bart Sibrel to only publish his confession after his death also adds credibility to his testimony.

  As recent as Sept. 22, 2022, Lead Stories published a fact check rebuke regarding this confession video. In it, they stated that they had contacted NASA regarding the video and posted their spokesperson’s reply in the article:

  “There is a significant amount of evidence to support NASA landed 12 astronauts on the moon from 1969 to 1972. We collected 842 pounds of moon rocks that have been studied by scientists worldwide for decades. From these rocks, we’ve learned that the moon was once part of the Earth, the moon is about 4.5 billion years old, and that most of the moon’s craters are caused by impact, not volcanism.”

  Anyone with half a brain could tell that this reply is totally unconvincing. Why mention moon rocks? It’s as if the spokesperson thinks this provides tangible evidence of the moon landings. One would also think that NASA would have come up with a much more thoughtful and convincing argument than the absurdity stated above.

  I digress.

  The conclusion of the American Moon documentary shows part of the Apollo 11 astronauts post moon mission press conference. They point out that the three astronauts were totally unenthusiastic.

  They were there to talk about the single most important feat accomplished by human beings and these men could barely crack a smile or convey their joy and enthusiasm about their monumental achievement. This goes without saying that it is all, indeed and utterly, extremely bizarre.

  Moreover, the very apparent levels of stress shown by the astronauts as per their body language at the beginning of the press conference is somewhat mind boggling. Keep in mind that these astronauts are test pilots who have experience handling extremely stressful situations, not to mention having [purportedly] flown an extremely dangerous mission to the moon. So, relatively speaking, simply talking to the public and press about their monumental achievement should not have been so challenging and stressful for these men. Rather, it should have been a cause for celebration and pride. What is the average person to make of this?

  American Moon ends with video clips of Bart Sibrel confronting each of the three Apollo 11 astronauts (Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins) asking them to swear on the Bible that they walked on the moon. All three men displayed very uncomfortable stances and refused. Sibrel even offered $5,000 in cash to charity should Neil Armstrong agree, but he still refused. Buzz Aldrin actually punched Sibrel in the face when the interrogator persisted in his questioning. Even though Sibrel’s approach wasn’t particularly friendly, it remains odd that none of them agreed to do so.  

  As more and more inconsistencies surface regarding the Apollo moon missions along with mounting evidence which contradicts the official narrative, it is probably just a matter of time before NASA becomes obligated to admit what really happened in July of 1969. Undoubtedly, there is a lot at stake.

  Will history books need to be re-written?

  Time will tell.

  Conspiracies to Watch

  As practically all of the conspiracies stated below are highly controversial and subjective in nature, I will merely provide a short summary of each along with key links that provide some initial background information – selected specifically to exhibit why they are considered conspiratorial. Ultimately, it is really up to the readers to investigate them and draw their own conclusions as to the authenticity and legitimacy of their respective stated claims.

  Climate Change

  Though the very hot and contentious issue of ‘Climate Change’, formerly known as ‘Global Warming’, is complex and controversial, we must begin by examining its origins.

  Where did this really originate from? When was it first mentioned and put forward as an existential threat?

  Former Australian politician Ann Bressington shed a bit of light on the issue in a candid speech about Agenda 21 and the Club of Rome a few years ago. In the speech (alternate link) she stated the following [emphasis added]:

  “Ladies and gentlemen, the origins of the environmental movement as we see it began back in 1968 when the Club of Rome was formed. The Club of Rome has been described as a crisis think tank which specialises in crisis creation. The main purpose of this think tank was to formulate a crisis that would unite the world and condition us to the idea of global solutions to local problems. In a document called The First Global Revolution, … it stated: ‘In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.’ …, that’s the origin of global warming ladies and gentlemen.”

  Her statement does indeed check out. On page 115 of the 1991 book entitled The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome, you can clearly read the passage under the header ‘The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man’ [emphasis added in red]:

  

  Excerpt from page 115 of the book The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome

  The Club of Rome is still actively involved in activities related to Climate Change. And at first glance it all seems quite legitimate. But the power and influence wielded by its well-connected membership leaves much to be scrutinized.

  Moreover, while the above information doesn’t serve as a smoking gun with regards to an alleged conspiracy, it does demonstrate that powerful and deeply connected think tanks (like with the Council on Foreign Relations mentioned earlier in this article) can influence many key players, including heads of state (even former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, father of the current Prime Minister).

  Credible scientific evidence contrary to the current climate change narrative does exist, yet very seldom appears in the mainstream press, for it goes against the ascribed (and undebatable) “the science is settled” mantra.

  One of these includes the recent (August, 2022) article entitled 1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency” by The Daily Sceptic which challenges the ‘political fiction’ that humans cause most or all of climate change.

  The article also states that the scale to the opposition to the modern-day belief that the ‘science is settled’ [on Climate Change] is remarkable, even amidst the backdrop of academia which barely ever issues grants for climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. On a side note, a blunt revelation by the co-founder of The Weather Channel John Coleman offered a rather scathing (and highly entertaining) lecture towards Brian Stelter from CNN a few years back in which he stated that there was no real science behind climate change. Now, back to the article of interest from The Daily Sceptic. It makes reference to a declaration by over 1,200 scientists from all around the world who assert that there is no climate emergency. This declaration is formally known as the ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’. Here are a few key excerpts:

  “Climate policy relies on inadequate models

  Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.”

  “CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

  CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.”

  “Global warming has not increased natural disasters

  There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.”

  “Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

  There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are.”

  It should be obvious – even to a grade school student – that C02 is essential for life on earth and for the healthy functioning of our biological ecosystems. But our mainstream media and academia have been bamboozled and overtaken by powerful interest groups (as is the case in many other institutions such as those of finance and government) to pervert reality and propagate absurdities day in and day out. These compromised media outlets prefer to push the half-baked narratives from the likes of Bill Gates rather than invite real scientists that will challenge the ‘settled’ narratives and pundit talking heads.  

  To be fairer and more objective though, the onus really is on each and every one of us to properly inform ourselves about issues such as climate change. We should be open to listening to those with opposing views and seek the opinions of independents who are not subsidised or funded by special interest groups or who will somehow benefit in spewing pre-packaged, one-size fits all, narratives.

  The origins of SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19)

  No other matter has consumed the collective thought of people from around the world over the last 2+ years than the Covid-19 Pandemic.

  Early on during the pandemic, many had contended that the virus was not of natural origin but was rather one that was altered in a lab setting; and after things had gone afoul, the virus was somehow spread out of the biosafety level 4 lab known as the Wuhan Institute of Virology into the public of the Chinese metropolis, and eventually to the entire world. This was in contrast with the original claim that the virus had originated in a wet market in Wuhan whereby the virus had crossed-over to humans from bats.  

  Those who made the contention that the virus could have been engineered in a lab were immediately dismissed as conspiracy theorists.

  But as more evidence has surfaced regarding a massive coverup by the Chinese government and apparent pre-pandemic linkages between US-funded labs an the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the theory gained traction.

  Anthony Fauci who is the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the leader in the United States regarding the handling of the Covid-19 Pandemic has repeatedly lied (to US Congress) about and denied that any gain-of-function research (specifically, a bat coronavirus research project by EcoHealth Alliance) had taken place under his US government-funded National Institutes of Health (NIH) lab in Wuhan.

  Surfaced letters have shone additional light on the matter demonstrating that funding from NIH to EcoHEalth Alliance did indeed occur.

  In addition, a report from The Intercept following a FOIA request produced 900 pages of materials relating to coronavirus research in China.

  Furthermore, an email letter from Peter Daszak from EcoHealth Alliance dated April 18, 2020, surfaced whereby Daszak thanked Anthony Fauci, the head of the Covid-19 response team, for his [false] public comments regarding the origins of Covid-19.

  News aggregator ZeroHedge ran an article on August 6, 2021 whereby virologist Shi Zhengli (also known as “Bat Lady”) of the Wuhan Institute of Virology – whose lab received US funding to make coronaviruses more infectious to humans – warned that the virus will continue to mutate producing new strains.

  

  Virologist Shi Zhengli (left), also known as “bat lady” photographed with Peter Daszak (right) from EcoHealth Alliance, source: ZeroHedge and DailyMail

  China expert Matthew Tye who is fluent in Mandarin Chinese and goes by the YouTube handle Laowhy86 produced a very compelling piece (dated April 1, 2020, now with over 2.4 million views) on the source origins of SARS-CoV-2, even hypothesizing about who patient zero for this virus was; namely, Huang Yan Ling an employee of the infamous lab who went missing, along with her profile from the lab’s website.

  The World Health Organization (WHO) who is generously funded by Bill Gates – apart from sovereign nations, he is by far its top donor – is well known to have kowtowed to the Chinese government early on in the pandemic, was eventually compelled to conduct a formal investigation about the origins of the virus.

  Using relevant sources, Summit News reported that the WHO’s chief investigator, Ben Embarek (who also surmised that patient zero was likely a lab worker at the Wuhan Institute of Virology) essentially found nothing of material substance in the probe and was only permitted [by the Chinese government] to mention the possibility of a lab leak without being allowed to probe further. All of this, too, after having visited the lab for a period of only 3 hours.

  In addition, one might find it particularly inappropriate that Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance was chosen as part of the WHO’s investigatory team since he had previously worked in this same lab and given his obvious conflicts of interest in the matter at hand.

  In their defense, it is highly likely that the Chinese government had adequate time to remove any incriminating evidence that could have pointed to the gain of function research about coronaviruses and the inherent lab leak of the virus.

  As a substantial amount of time has elapsed since the Covid-19 pandemic began coupled with the concealment (deliberate or indeliberate) of critical direct and physical evidence regarding the real nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we may never know the true story surrounding its origins.

  

  Screenshot of John Hopkins University of Medicine’s Worldwide Covid-19 Dashboard, taken Sept. 27, 2022 (Total Cases: 615,673,638; Total Deaths: 6,538,656, Total Vaccine Doses Administered: 12,255,133,258)

  What remains, however, is that it is certainly worthwhile to not let this one drain down the funnel of forgotten history.

  The World Economic Forum (WEF)’s Great Reset

  Though founded in 1971, it is really in the last couple of years that this elitist organization, commonly referred to as the WEF, started to gain attention by the general public (rather than business leaders, politicians, and state leaders) around the world. This is in large part attributable to the increase in the influence and power they have gradually exerted on nations over the years, and particularly since the Covid-19 Pandemic came about.

  In 2020, the WEF embraced the opportunity that this global crisis presented and not let it “go to waste.” And thus, seized it through a series of recommendations and actions which they stated as an opportune moment to “redefine” the world – particularly the traditional economic model into one of what they call ‘stakeholder capitalism’. Hence was born their proposed ambitious action plan known as the ‘Great Reset’.

  Two books accompany this endeavor, namely, the manifesto entitled COVID-19: The Great Reset (2020) written by WEF founder Klaus Schwab, as well as the The Fourth Industrial Revolution (2016). Both serve as blueprints for what the well-connected elitist and quasi-supranational organization wish to impose on global citizens.

  The WEF’s founder Klaus Schwab has been characterised as kind of a Bond villain in the last few years – particularly over social media. A well-researched introduction about Klaus Schwab and the WEF was produced by YouTuber Sorelle Amore.

  While registered as a non-profit organization, the WEF does appear, at prima facie, to be one with benevolent intentions fostering public-private partnerships, that is not entirely the case. Many controversies have surrounded a lot of what has come out of their famous annual meetings referred to as ‘Davos’ which usually take place in the ski-resort town of Davos in Switzerland.

  For instance, many rich elites who’ve paid a hefty membership fee to join the WEF, make it to the annual event in their private jets while they call upon the masses and nation states to curve energy emissions and reduce their carbon footprints. In this year’s Davos meeting, one of their ilk, J. Michael Evans, president of the Alibaba Group, even proposed a new technology to measure one’s carbon footprint, stating [emphasis added]:

  “We’re developing, through technology, an ability for consumers to measure their own carbon footprint. What does that mean? That’s, where are they traveling, how are they traveling, what are they eating, what are they consuming on the platform? … stay tuned, we don’t have it operational yet – but this is something we’re working on.”

  While we all love the environment and want to do our part to protect it, this kind of scheme appears to be nothing less than a proposed taxation scheme targeted to partner governments eager and willing to implement it.

  Other controversial, some would say absurd, proposals have come out of their forums. Promoting the masses to eat bugs (as a high source of protein and great substitute for meat) is actually a thing now with celebrities such as Nicole Kidman helping to spark the trend stating how delicious they are. Insect processing plants, such as the cricket facility from Aspire Food Group in Ontario, are also starting to bolster this nascent industry.

  You would be stunned at witnessing the extent to which this is becoming widespread.

  Some, however, have expressed concerns about how insect-based ingredients are stealthily being added to the food we purchase and how they are not fit for human consumption and possibly even cancerous.

  

  Tweet indicating that President’s Choice (a leading food provider in Canada) is including insect components in this product, as per the label, purchased at a store in Saskatchewan.

  I suppose we are all going to have to more carefully read the ingredients lists of the foods we purchase.

  Another major concern with regards to the WEF is the amount of power and influence they hold over political officials, including heads of state.

  This became apparent in the recent riots that have occurred in the Netherlands where Dutch farmers have protested in masse against government diktats regarding reducing nitrogen (used in fertilizer) levels and possible farm land appropriation.

  Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte also received criticism regarding the coziness of his ties with the WEF’s boss, Klaus Schwab, and his agendas. In fact, Rutte was blasted in the Dutch legislature by Gideon van Meijeren (MP) for this relationship and complicity in the WEF’s Great Reset (link includes the related video). Rutte responded to the young MP that he didn’t know about the book (COVID-19: The Great Reset) and ridiculed the young MP to “not look too much into these conspiracy theories.”

  In turns out, though, that a close relationship did exist between the Netherlands Mark Rutte and the WEF. Independent information outlet LeLibrePenseur.org (French for ‘The Free thinker’), published secret letters between the two. In a report titled Fuites de Klaus Schwab : lettres secrètes entre le WEF et des membres du gouvernement hollandais dévoilées ! (Klaus Schwab leaks: secret letters between the WEF and members of the Dutch government exposed!), they showcased (what many mainstream Dutch journalists had described as conjecture) how the Rutte government had indeed been subservient to the interests and agendas of the WEF. Following a request from deputy FVD Pepijn van Houwelingen to make public the letters addressed to Dutch cabinet members, it was confirmed that their contributions had helped in the realisation of the Great Reset, essentially bypassing the will of the people through their elected officials.

  While it is not necessarily conspiratorial to create linkages with the WEF, the secretive manner in which it was done is what proves alarming.

  Regarding Canada, Klaus Schwab has repeatedly boasted on how proud he was proud of his army of Young Global Leaders, including Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Schwab even bragged about how his lieutenants had “penetrated” the Canadian cabinet stating [emphasis added]:

  “What we are very proud of now [is] the young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, …, that we penetrate the cabinets. So, yesterday I was at a reception for Prime Minister Trudeau and I know that half of his cabinet, or even more than half of his cabinet are actually young global leaders of the world.”

  That is a stunning admission from the leader of the WEF. Canadian opposition MP even inquired about this outside interference on behalf of a constituent of his during a parliamentary session, only to see the Speaker dismiss the question from the MP regarding this claim by provided a ridiculous excuse that the audio and video were “really really bad”. This was swiftly followed by an MP of the ruling party dismissing the question stating that the opposition MP was “promoting disinformation”. Really? I presume he didn’t hear the video in question that clearly stated otherwise. Regardless of the veracity of the claim itself, when an extremely powerful individual from an extremely powerful global organization such as the WEF makes a vivid assertion about who is controlling the Canadian cabinet, it should be taken seriously and further investigated.  

  At the very least, according to True North News, the Trudeau Government gave nearly $3 million to the WEF which raises a cause for suspicion regarding the relationship and its inherent motivations.

  Rigging of the Gold & Silver Markets

  At this point/stage, this is really no longer a conspiracy theory, but more of a conspiracy fact. As a financial author, I have followed the gold and silver markets on a daily basis for the past ten years and have witnessed and documented numerous cases of blatant price fixing – almost exclusively to the down side.

  The main reason for the suppression of gold and silver prices is to maintain the illusion of a strong US dollar; for, if prices of these metals get too elevated it raises alarm bells as to the weakness of an exponentially increasing money supply.

  Here is what I’m talking about:

  

  Gold smashed down more than $85 during London trading hours on November 9, 2020. Source: Kitco

  It is very typical for the price fixers (see below) to smash the gold price down (they do this by shorting large amounts of paper gold futures contracts) before the open of U.S. markets – either during Asian (Hong Kong) or London trading sessions.

  Former industry insider and highly credible Peter Hambro forthrightly explains how the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the LBMA (London Bullion Market Association) in London, and the COMEX (the largest American commodities and futures exchange) in New York are complicit in the price fixing (almost exclusively to the down side) of gold.

  Over the past several years, precious metals analyst Roman Manly has also conducted extensive and thorough investigative work about the manipulation of gold and silver prices as has the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA).

  Regarding silver, an article entitled A Silver Price Manipulation Primer by Sprott Money and precious metals writer Craig Hemke offers a good introduction about the fixing of silver prices.

  Lastly, we cannot forget the unabashedly, unfiltered, and outspoken Canadian derivatives expert Rob Kirby who passed away earlier this year (a tribute to his work can be seen via YouTube’s Liberty and Finance channel) who has extensively reported on these illegal price fixing activities on various YouTube channels such as Liberty and Finance.

  Mass Censorship & Search Manipulation

  In 2021, Twitter completely banned and censored the sitting U.S. President, Donald J. Trump – who had over 88 million followers on the platform.

  If a Big Tech outfit like Twitter can outlaw a sitting U.S. President, you can rest assured that they can basically ban and memory-hole anyone. And that, they have done so unabatedly in the past several years.

  Google (the largest search engine in the world by far) who owns a slew of other extremely popular applications used by hundreds of millions of people and media platforms such as YouTube, has been known to employ very deceptive practices over the past several years.

  Many of these involve either directly or indirectly censoring websites and completely banning countless channels – particularly conservative and alternative ones – from their YouTube platform, not to mention shadow-banning. In regards to the later, whistleblower Zack Vorhies, a former Senior Software Engineer at Google, stated that the tech giant was a “highly biased political machine”. The former insider took a cache of documents that provided rather revealing information about the inner workings of their search algorithms, establishing a “single point of truth” for news, and preventing another “Trump situation” in 2020, from ever happening again.

  More recently – and quite convincingly, Dr. Robert Epstein, a Senior Research Psychologist from the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology gave an in-depth interview with The Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek (Robert Epstein: Inside Big Tech’s Manipulation Machine and How to Stop It) revealing in a meticulously documented fashion how Google is indeed politically aligned to the left and how it manipulates the thoughts and minds of their users via “ephemeral experiences”. The April 2022 broadcast and podcast for this interview are definitely worth listening to. By listening to it, you will learn a lot about what exactly happens behind the scenes when you use Google search and its various products and services. Alternatively, you can read or consult Dr. Epstein’s full research paper entitled ‘GOOGLE’S TRIPLE THREAT, To Democracy, Our Children, and Our Minds‘ (51-page PDF) published earlier this year.

  

  Full research report by Dr. Epstein’s entitled ‘GOOGLE’S TRIPLE THREAT, To Democracy, Our Children, and Our Minds‘ (PDF)

  Slightly after the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, Dr. Epstein had surmised that search engine bias shifted 2-3 million votes in Hillary Clinton’s favor and warned that the number could increase fivefold in the 2020 contest.

  Also back in 2016, it was revealed how Google had censored information about Hillary Clinton’s wrongdoings in their search results compared to other major search engines.

  Whether the call for censoring and shielding Big Tech from scrutiny and legal action comes under the guise of cracking down on misinformation or preserving their censorship power, it nonetheless remains clear that these media behemoths hold tremendous power on the levers of public discourse and the availability of information.

  The Biden Administration has been accused of employing an “army” of officials from multiple government agencies (specifically, the HHS, DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, the Office of the Surgeon General, the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission) to censor information using their contacts in social media. A recent lawsuit – handled by the New Civil Rights Alliance – alleges that very claim. The lawsuit’s plaintiffs’ position begins with their claim and what it seeks [emphasis added]:

  “the Plaintiffs served interrogatories and document requests upon the Government Defendants seeking the identity of federal officials who have been and are communicating with social-media platforms about disinformation, misinformation, malinformation, and/or any censorship or suppression of speech on social media, including the nature and content of those communications.”

  In a recent interview with Joe Rogan, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg also openly revealed that he followed the censorship orders from the FBI to suppress information related to Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election; all this was under the guise of “Russian Disinformation” and the net effect was that Facebook ended up ranking the information further down their newsfeed which could certainly be seen as election interference and/or political partisanship.  

  I have mentioned in my initial post on Substack, that I espouse the notion that, in essence, there really is no such thing as misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation (or even ‘fake news’ for that matter) – for, it is ALL INFORMATION. If the public is not able to firstly access information and then analyse and discern it for themselves (even with regards to the complex issues of our day), then perhaps we have a bigger problem. Namely, that of a dumbed-down populous unable to critically think for themselves without been spoon fed pre-determined, unquestionable, narratives by “authority” figures.

  in a recent interview, author, journalist, senior editor for The New American, and Epoch Times contributor Alex Newman offers are rather insightful view of not just the current state of censorship, but also the worrying trend of the dumbing-down of population through our degrading school system. As one who has worked in the education sector for 35 years, I can certainly agree with his concern that our youth are not adequately being taught critical-thinking skills in our public school system.

  In Canada, the controversial Bill C-11 (an Act to amend the Broadcasting Act) has been passed by Parliament and is awaiting a second reading in the Senate. Though Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that it would help “oppressed communities” and “strengthen trusted news sources in Canada”, many others contend that if passed as law, it will favor government-approved news organizations who are already (and will continue to) receive nearly hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money, with the CBC reportedly receiving 1.4 billion in 2021 according to the National Post. Dr. Michael Geist, a law professor and Research Chair (in Internet and E-commerce Law) at the University of Ottawa categorized the government’s defence of the bill as “cartoonishly misleading”. The main concern is that this bill could silence freedom-loving content creators, reports mrcTV. Canadian journalist Dan Dicks from Pressfortruth.ca and social media personality Viva Frei (David Freiheit) have criticized the bill (and even its predecessor bill C-10). It remains to be seen if the bill will pass the Senate to become law.

  2020 Election in the United States

  The 2020 Election was one of the most controversial elections in American history. Coverage about the election varied greatly among major networks and news outlets in the country.

  In my opinion, I have found The Epoch Times coverage of the election to be most accurate and independent.

  All publications have bias in their reporting; that is inevitable due also, in large part, to opinion pieces which in today’s polarized society carry a lot of weight. That being said, I still believe that articles from The Epoch Times have been more objective than many others.

  One of their seasoned contributors, Sharyl Atkinson – an investigative journalist who has reported nationally for CBS News, PBS, CNN – ran an viewpoint article on Dec. 22, 2020 titled 2020 Election Screaming Red Flags That Deserved Criminal Inquiry. Though it was an opinion piece, she provided a fair analysis whereby she pointed out the many claims of election irregularities and fraud and how they should have been taken more seriously and investigated upon by government officials and law enforcement agencies. And since they haven’t been taken seriously, the integrity of the election results comes under great scrutiny. Her piece then lists eight examples of “screaming red flags” that should have prompted thorough criminal inquiries.

  Prior to the election, The Epoch Times had unveiled a very comprehensive exposé titled Spygate: The Inside Story Behind the Alleged Plot to Take Down Trump that was very well sourced and referenced. The investigatory work outlined in great detail the concerted plot whereby key members of the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice (DOJ), and officials from the U.S. State Department set up and accused President Trump of colluding with the Russians.

  Various official inquiries such as the very long and costly Special Counsel investigation of 2017-2019 (headed by the very corrupt and compromised Robert Mueller, former Director of the FBI) proved that no foul play had ever occurred between Trump and the Russians.

  What is stated in the previous paragraph is important, for it adds veracity to the claims made about election fraud to the detriment of the incumbent Trump. Why? Because it affirms the motivation by those in power to use the same type of unlawful activities (and collusive partners) to falsify and skew election data.

  Such manipulation of the data, demonstrable by statistical anomalies, (particularly with mail-in ballots) certainly became obvious and apparent during the morning hours following election day when, miraculously, Joe Biden’s numbers soared in key states where Trump was leading. Many outlets had cried afoul to this apparent fraud. Even the head of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) Trey Trainor at the time said he believed there was widespread election fraud.

  In addition, the manner in which Big Tech platforms have shown favoritism – before, during, and after the election – is also to be considered in the disputed election results. It is no secret that Google has not been shy about supporting Democratic candidates such as Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden in the past several years; this has been highly documented – with some examples detailed in this work (above). Twitter has also blatantly censored and terminated accounts belonging to conservatives; a case in point here includes them suspending 2020 election audit accounts for multiple states.

  Dominion Voting Systems were used in many states for the election. And much controversy arose surrounding their reliability and accuracy in counting votes, along with hacking (including foreign) vulnerabilities. The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) has pointed out that these could affect voting in multiple states. The state of Pennsylvania is suing Dominion Voting Systems alleging “severe issues” with voting data discovered after the 2020 election. And, more recently, the Biden administration is urging a court not to release a sealed report on Dominion Voting Systems. 

  Lastly, the fact that Joe Biden supposedly received 80 million votes – the most votes won by any presidential candidate in US history (which shatters the 69.5 million votes Barack Obama had received in 2008) – remains highly questionable. Even prior to election night, Biden himself was nowhere nearly as popular as his predecessor, Barack Obama. Perhaps there was a larger portion of the population that went out to vote and wanted to vote for the Democratic party regardless of its leader.

  While there still are ongoing investigations at the state level regarding these voting irregularities, it is highly doubtful that much will come out of them. The whole affair has been greatly politicized which taints the judicial review process and proper accounting of votes for the highly-disputed 2020 election.  

  Aerosol Spraying (Geoengineering)

  Of the many alleged conspiracies worth keeping an eye on, Aerosol Spraying (sometimes referred to as ‘Aerial Discharges’ or ‘chemtrails’) – which fits under the larger umbrella of geoengineering – is one of the most troubling and worrisome ones.

  For those not familiar with the subject, geoengineering generally involves modifying the weather for various purposes such as in climate engineering (e.g., cloud seeding to induce rain over drought-stricken areas) or as weather warfare for military purposes – which dates all the way back to the Eisenhower administration in the United States.

  For at least the past two decades, Dane Wigington has been on a crusade to alert the world about this troubling phenomenon due to its extensive use of harmful chemicals. His website GeoengineeringWatch.org contains a substantial amount of credible evidence regarding the dangerous effects that geoengineering practices have on our climate, environment, and populations. Whistleblower testimonies, government reports, and other evidence presented on the site – including numerous photographs and videos – prove that a lot of activities surrounding geoengineering is intended for nefarious and harmful purposes.

  This is not conspiracy theory, but rather indications of a conspiracy to harm populations through weather modification and jet sprayings – sometimes inadequately referred to as ‘chemtrails’.

  I myself have witnessed this phenomenon of jet sprayings over my region in the province of Quebec since my return to Canada in November of 2021. I never saw these spraying prior to the year 2008 before my departure from the country. Since my return, I’ve been witnessing massive spraying occurring over the skies of my region to the tune of three to five times a week, on average. And each day of spraying emanates from around a dozen or more flight by high-altitude aircraft.

  I’ve personally written to my city, the local airport authority in the city, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Transport Canada and none of them have provided concrete answers to my inquiries and to the nature of this phenomenon in general.

  Both my city and Environment and Climate Change Canada have replied to me that these sprayings are merely commercial passenger aircraft exhaust trails, i.e., condensation trails. Anyone who has taken a high-school level physics course will be able to debunk this ludicrous claim that these sprayings – that stretch over kilometers far and wide and that last hours – are due to condensation vapor trails.

  I had asked Environment and Climate Change Canada if these sprayings could be attributed to weather modification programs, and they replied me that none were in effect in the province of Quebec, but that there was one in effect in the province of Alberta. So, if these are not intended for weather modification purposes, then what are they for?

  My subsequent (and very polite, respectful) email inquiries to these Canadian agencies have been mostly ignored. This leaves me to conclude that they are not being forthcoming about the origins of these sprayings and thus appear to be hiding the facts surrounding them.

  

  Aerosol sprayings over the greater City of Sherbrooke (Quebec) area on January 30, 2022

  In addition, for this year alone, I have seen many photographs and videos shared online of these sprayings posted by many Canadians located in different provinces.

  In Canada there have been court cases filed regarding aerosol sprayings. Mass sprayings in the Calgary, Alberta region have lead to a mass-tort case that was filed in Federal Court (see related court documents) in 2016 along with a related appeal in 2018 also at the federal level. The appeal further alleges:

  “the ongoing dispersal into Canadian airspace of aerosols that are harmful to the Canadian public and that is polluting to the Canadian environment, and in respect of which aspects of the scientific community have only relatively recently evaluated in the scientific peer-reviewed literature.”

  The court case mentioned above appears to still be ongoing.

  What is particularly worrisome about these aerosol sprayings is that we don’t know exactly what chemicals are being used and dispersed over our skies.

  The team at GeoengineeringWatch.org has produced many excellent explanatory videos and documentaries, along with a cache of documents to inform the public of what these sprayings are really about and what chemicals are found in them. I highly recommend their introductory video Hacking The Planet: The Climate Engineering Reality.

  Evidence collected by GeoengineeringWatch.org has shown that chemicals and metals used in aerosol sprayings have included aluminum, barium, strontium, graphene, among others.

  

  Home page for GeoengineeringWatch.org

  What is also particularly troubling is that many of these metals and chemicals make their way to ground level from high altitude in the form of nanoparticles – which if breathed in, are tiny enough to penetrate the blood-brain barrier. They are especially harmful to elderly and infant populations whose brains are still in development. In this respect, I highly recommend the work of neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock who describes the harmful effects these chemicals have on the brain.  

  There is also a lot of evidence that suggests that geoengineering is used to modify the climate and could thus be a significant contributor to climate change, increasingly unstable weather systems, and droughts.   

  Lastly, what I find particularly disappointing as a Canadian is the position, albeit one from several years ago, whereby our very famous David Suzuki – one who I admired very much growing up and watching his show The Nature of Things – pretty much described the phenomenon as conspiracy theory posited by “wacky science deniers” in an article entitled David Suzuki on Chemtrails, Conspiracies fuel climate change denial and belief in chemtrails. There are many false assertions in this poorly formulated article, but here are the key ones [emphasis added]:

  “I recently wrote about geoengineering as a strategy to deal with climate change and carbon dioxide emissions. That drew comments from people who confuse this scientific process with the unscientific theory of “chemtrails””.

  Suzuki’s statement bolded above makes no sense. A theory is a theory. There is nothing unscientific about a theory. A theory is a hypothesis assumed for the sake of investigation which is formulated before science is conducted to verify it.

  He continues with the following later in his article:

  “I’m a scientist, so I look at credible science – and there is none for the existence of chemtrails.”

  “They’re condensation trails, formed when hot, humid air from jet exhaust mixes with colder low-vapour-pressure air.”

  Condensation trails? Condensation trails do not drag on over several kilometers and remain suspended for hours at a time; rather, they usually dissolve within several seconds, or a few minutes at the most.

  As for “credible evidence”, these aerosol sprayings have been highly documented over the past several years.

  So, these are the main arguments and explanations from one of Canada’s most renowned scientists?

  Really?

  Sorry Mr. Suzuki, I respectfully disagree with this very perplexing assertion, for it doesn’t hold water! (pun intended)

  And many of the 297 comments generated from this article are in disagreement with Mr. Suzuki’s assessment.

  Author note: I have contacted Mr. Suzuki by email to provide him with an opportunity to re-assert or update his assertions (especially since several years have elapsed since the article was written) but have not received a reply from him as of publishing time.

  Back to the condensation trails, I have personally filmed and photographed many instances of real condensation trails from commercial airliners including those at high altitude; and for these, the trails completely disappear within no more than a minute or so.

  I even have some that show these alongside other – likely non-commercial – aircraft which produce aerosol sprayings that last for kilometers and persist for much longer periods. And this, of course, under the exact same weather conditions.

  Also, I would invite the skeptics to try to find any photographs or videos prior to the 1960s that have these kinds of criss-cross patterns and lengthy and abnormal cloud dispersions over several kilometers in the sky. There are none that I know of; but if any are found, let me know. The oldest ones that I’ve been able to find appeared in a few episodes of the TV series Little House on the Prairie which began in 1974.

  Wouldn’t a scientist who is genuinely concerned about climate change such as David Suzuki (and all others, for that matter) want to consider all factors (including aerosol dispersions) which may contribute to the degradation of our natural environment?

  Questions that remain regarding this inadequately addressed phenomenon include:

  • What is the purpose of these aerosol sprayings?

  • Who is authorizing them?

  • Who is paying for them?

  • What substances (including chemicals) are they spraying?

  • Why aren’t Environment and Climate Change Canada and Transport Canada providing answers to these questions?

  Mini-Guide to Investigating Conspiracies

  “An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.” – Thomas Jefferson

  Actually, the header for this section is a bit of a misnomer, for it will comprise a broader range of tools and techniques that will enable individuals to do a better job at discerning and validating information.

  The internet is a vast ocean of information and knowledge. There is a lot to take in and it can all be quite overwhelming – especially when social media is included in the mix.

  Many labels such as ‘fake news’, misinformation, and disinformation have been thrown left and right to hastily characterize the validity of information provided by certain parties.

  Of course, this is very subjective and is influenced by many factors such as different kinds of biases, political affiliations, financial interests, and the like. One must judge what one reads based on its own merits without relying on these labels. In other words, begin by removing any of these labels or preconceived assumptions and tackle the information itself.

  I would recommend reading news and information from different sources – whether it be from mainstream media, alternative media, and everywhere in between. Each article or piece of information is unique, was written by an individual (or a few individuals) and should be treated and evaluated as such. Put another way, each article is like an antique. An antique collector will inspect and examine each piece on its own characteristics and merits. Depending on the qualities and flaws observed, the collector will be able to make an objective evaluation for authentication purposes (i.e., Is it real or fake?) We should use the same approach when encountering a piece of information – particularly if it is of a complex, controversial, or disputable nature.

  Another thing we can do is be wary of buzzwords. By buzzwords, I mean words or phrases like ‘right-wing’, ‘left-wing’, ‘conspiracy theorist’, ‘conservative’, ‘liberal’, ‘MAGA Republican’, ‘anti-vaxxer’, ‘so-called’, ‘quasi’, and ‘pseudo’. Buzzwords are similar to labels and are often used by writers or TV personalities to indirectly (or subliminally) convey a pre-conceived notion about the subject matter of the information piece. Also be aware that buzzwords’ meanings can vary from one geographical region to another, similar to slang. The idea here is to detect their usage and become cognizant that they may be used to sway the reader’s opinion in a certain direction. So, look out for these – especially when reading headlines to articles or social media posts.

  In today’s very polarized and divided society filled with identity politics, blame and labels will be readily cast upon those who don’t “toe the line” (i.e., go along with a certain narrative, or accept the authority or views of a particular group, sometimes under pressure from that group). We’ve seen a heck of a lot of this in the past couple of years with the Covid-19 Pandemic. Prime examples include the likes of “trust the science”, or “he’s an anti-vaxxer”. For the later, the danger here is that such condescending comments or labels assigned to specific people or groups can not only be harmful, but will too often lead to incorrect assumptions about the target. For instance, if someone refuses to take the Covid-19 vaccine, that doesn’t necessarily mean she’s an anti-vaxxer; perhaps, she is willing to take other vaccines, but just not the Covid-19 one. In another prime example we often hear the label “climate change denier” (as with the David Suzuki article referenced earlier) when someone doesn’t (either fully or in part) adhere to the notion of climate change. As this particular topic is very broad and complex, labelling one in such a derogatory fashion proves itself as quite foolish. Writers, TV personalities, news pundits, and social media figures may often attack a person when they cannot invalidate or counter the substance or merits of their claims. Some are very adept at it too which takes the victim by surprise and makes them appear stupid or weak. The trick here, is to not take it personal and let it get to you. Rather, either ignore them, or turn the situation around and ask them to elaborate on the merits of why they disagree with your claim or stance, pressing for facts and evidence to substantiate their assertions.   

  A great question to ask is ‘Cui bono?’ which is Latin for ‘who benefits?’ The phrase originates from the very famous Roman statesman Cicero. Cicero was a brilliant orator, lawyer, philosopher, and politician who lived during the boisterous early years of the Roman Empire when wars, politics, greed, and power dominated the social and political landscapes (as they still do today). One needed to be quite astute in assessing others’ motives based solely on their words and actions. Cicero would often ask this question, cui bono, to better understand the real motivation behind individuals’ or groups’ true intentions. We should do the same, as it seems everyone is out for something to gain. Put simply, we should take some time to question the possible motivations behind what we see, hear, or read.

  

  The Death of Caesar, 1874 steel engraving by J.C. Armytage after J.L. Gérome

  In similar fashion, we should also follow the money. This is particularly useful when looking at information related to the financial markets as well as political and geopolitical happenings. Similar to the previous tool, it guides us towards the underlying motivation(s) – most often of a financial nature – behind what someone is saying or doing. They may be saying one thing, but doing another through their actions, whether they are investments, supporting political candidates or causes, donating to charity, etc.

  Individuals who have received a classical education often fare much better in how they process information and interact with other people. There are key reasons for this. The first is that in this type of education system, students go through a three-step learning process, or system, which stretches from elementary school to middle-school to high-school. These three learning anchors are: grammar, logic, and rhetoric. The grammar part is not of the ‘spelling & grammar’ kind; rather, it relates to how one inputs information from the outside world. The logic part refers to how one processes the information obtained. And the rhetoric part is the culmination – being able to communicate and express oneself persuasively. This third part is quite important. Many of the ills and divisions we see in society today is due to the lack of this particular ability. People are far more likely to debate with one another than to have a civil discussion about it.

  In classical education, which has its roots from the ancient Greek philosophers, students communicate using discourse (dialectic/Socratic method). In other words, they have a conversation and use logic and reason to arrive at truth. This is a much more constructive means than to debate or argue in a back-and-forth manner whereby each party wants to be right and win. If people in today’s society would be more respectful towards one another and accept differences in views and opinion, then we could find areas of common agreement and would thus have more peace and unity, as opposed to hatred and division.

  So, the moral of the story here is that we should make an effort to be polite and respectful towards the views and opinions of others, even if they vary from our own or sound crazy. In doing this, we have a much better chance of making allies and gaining the trust of others. Disagreeing with a person is much different than disagreeing with the contents of what they are saying.

  Lastly, here is one more tool that almost all those who receive a classical education learn about – logical fallacies. A logical fallacy, in its simplest form, is a flawed or weak argument or assertion. They are deceptive or false arguments that may seem stronger than they actually are due to psychological persuasion, but are proven wrong with reasoning and further examination. (source) There are many different types of logical fallacies. An example includes Blind Loyalty:

  “The dangerous fallacy that an argument or action is right simply and solely because a respected leader or source (an expert, parents, one’s own “side,” team or country, one’s boss or commanding officers) say it is right. This is over-reliance on authority, a corrupted argument from ethos that puts loyalty above truth or above one’s own reason and conscience. In this case, a person attempts to justify incorrect, stupid or criminal behavior by whining “That’s what I was told to do,” or “I was just following orders.”

  We’ve seen the Blind Loyalty fallacy a lot during the Covid-19 Pandemic. We’ve been told to ‘trust the science’, certain experts in the medical field, health organizations, and so on. Just because something comes from a given expert or an authoritative organization doesn’t necessarily mean it is correct. I remember when I came back to Quebec, Canada last November, the health pamphlets from the provincial health authority listed zero possible side-effect or risks associated with the Covid-19 vaccines. As all vaccines have inherent risks, this information provided by this respective authoritative source was not right, or completely accurate. Critical information was omitted.

  Guilt by Association is another common logical fallacy. Here, one tries to refute or condemn someone’s standpoint, arguments, or actions by evoking negative sentiments of those with whom they associate with. A classic example of this one came about during President Biden’s controversial speech he gave on Sept. 1, 2022 whereby he rendered a large portion of Americans as dangerous ‘MAGA Republicans’; in other words, he positioned many who consider themselves as Republicans to be Trump supporters and some kind of insurrectionists. In Canada, the mainstream media often associated and labelled those who supported the Freedom Convoy protest movement as far-right extremists.

  Many other logical fallacies are employed by those in the media and across social media. These are flawed arguments or assertions that you need to look out for. You need to be able to first recognize them and then you will be in a better position to defend yourself by addressing them for what they are.

  Conclusion

  So, why does society need conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists? Well, it‘s no secret that we’ve been lied to. We’ve been lied to about a lot. And we are still being lied to on a daily basis. This makes it much harder to get to the truth.

  Knowing more about how conspiracies actually work and how past ones have played out can help us to be more vigilant and question more about our perceived reality. Everything happens in the mind. The better we train our minds, the better we can sift through the rubbish and keep what’s real and authentic while discarding what is not.

  Conspiracy theorists are often labelled and demonized – usually because they have demonstrated the courage to speak out, to point out inconvenient or uncomfortable truths. They may lose the support of friends, family, and employers in the process. But they remain true to themselves and who they are at their very core. Therefore, we should encourage them and even strive to duplicate their courage and assertiveness.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/09/2022 – 00:05

• 'The Big One Is Coming': Top US Military Commander Warns American Capabilities "Sinking"
  ‘The Big One Is Coming’: Top US Military Commander Warns American Capabilities “Sinking”

  A top US military commander has warned that the power of America’s military deterrent is ‘fading’ – and that America might not be adequately prepared for a large-scale military engagement.

  “This Ukraine crisis that we’re in right now, this is just the warmup,” Navy Admiral Charles Richard, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, said at a conference last week, according to the WSJ Editorial Board.

  “The big one is coming. And it isn’t going to be very long before we’re going to get tested in ways that we haven’t been tested” for “a long time.”

  According to Richard, things are getting worse.

  “As I assess our level of deterrence against China, the ship is slowly sinking. It is sinking slowly, but it is sinking, as fundamentally they are putting capability in the field faster than we are,” he said, adding “as those curves keep going,” it won’t matter “how good our commanders are, or how good our horses are—we’re not going to have enough of them. And that is a very near-term problem.”

  Note that modifier “near-term.” This is a more urgent vulnerability than most of the political class cares to recognize.

  Adm. Richard noted that America retains an advantage in submarines—“maybe the only true asymmetric advantage we still have”—but even that may erode unless America picks up the pace “getting our maintenance problems fixed, getting new construction going.” Building three Virginia-class fast-attack submarines a year would be a good place to start. -WSJ

  Meanwhile, America was caught flat-footed last year when China tested a hypersonic missile that flew around the world. This means that Beijing can put any US city or facility at risk – perhaps without even being detected.

  

  As the Editorial Board aptly notes; How we lost the hypersonic race to China and Russia deserves hearings in Congress.

  Educating the public about U.S. military weaknesses runs the risk of encouraging adversaries to exploit them. But the greater risk today is slouching ahead in blind complacency until China invades Taiwan or takes some other action that damages U.S. interests or allies because Bejiing thinks the U.S. can do nothing about it. -WSJ

  “We used to know how to move fast, and we have lost the art of that,” said Richard, who says the military talks “about how we are going to mitigate our assumed eventual failure” to keep up when it comes to ballistic subs, bombers or long range weapons.

  “What’s it going to take? Is it money? Is it people? Do you need authorities?“

  Whatever it is, at least someone is speaking out.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 23:45

• US To Establish Another New Military Base In Northeast Syria
  US To Establish Another New Military Base In Northeast Syria

  Via The Cradle,

  The US-led international coalition forces operating in northeastern Syria intend to establish a new military base in their controlled areas in the countryside of Raqqa. Local sources said that a convoy of US forces, including several armored military vehicles, arrived in Raqqa city as part of preparations to install a new base in the area.

  On the field, the illegal troops began transferring the logistical equipment and necessary gear to the specified location, coinciding with heavy surveillance drone activity. The US army and international coalition occupy at least 28 declared military sites in Syria, distributed over three provinces, mainly Hasakah (17 sites), Deir Ezzor (nine locations), and Homs (two areas).

  

  The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) released photographs showing the construction of a new base near Al-Raqqa Bridge on the Euphrates River, south of the city. The distribution of Washington’s illegal bases resembles the cordon surrounding the sources of oil and gas located east of the Euphrates River, representing most of Syria’s underground wealth.

  The eastern countryside of Deir Ezzor hosts the most strategic military bases, including the al-Omar oil field base – one of the largest in Syria – and the Conoco gas field base, which are regularly subjected to violent shelling by armed groups affiliated with Iran.

  Nonetheless, the daily bombing prompted Washington to send massive military and logistical reinforcements aboard hundreds of trucks that crossed from Iraq into the US bases in Deir Ezzor, Hasakah, and Raqqa.

  According to the SOHR, US troops recently established another military post in Naqara village, just three kilometers from Qamishli in the northeastern province of Hasakah.

  Footage shows Deir Ezzor, Eastern Syria locals pelting US forces with rocks to make it known they’re no longer welcome in their oil-rich region, following suit of Syrian Arab Army earlier blocking U.S occupation troops from passing through a checkpoint pic.twitter.com/Tave8u5W9B

  — Mats Nilsson (@mazzenilsson) November 6, 2022

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

  The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) constantly blocks US military convoys and patrols attempting to move through their checkpoints in multiple locations across the province, forcing them to turn tail. The Syrian authorities accuse the US of smuggling its oil and selling it abroad to deprive the Syrians of it in a flagrant violation of international law.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 23:25

• 'Arctic Silk Road' Comes Alive As Russia Sends Oil To China
  ‘Arctic Silk Road’ Comes Alive As Russia Sends Oil To China

  Western energy sanctions against Russia have helped Moscow achieve the second-ever sail of a crude tanker east through the Arctic Circle toward China, a route dubbed ‘Arctic Silk Road,’ that could one day revolutionize energy trade flows from Russia to Asia because it’s about half the time versus Russia’s Baltic ports through the Suez Canal. 

  Vessel tracking data compiled by Bloomberg shows the Vasily Dinkov, a specialized ice-breaking tanker, departed from Murmansk, a city in northwestern Russia, off the Barents Sea, hauling a cargo of crude. The vessel traversed Russia’s northern coast between Oct. 27 – Nov. 4 and entered the Bering Strait, a strait between the Pacific and Arctic Oceans that separates Alaska and Russia, on Nov. 5.

  

  As of Tuesday morning, the tanker is full speed ahead off Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula. Its final destination is the Chinese port of Rizhao on Nov. 17.

  

  “The journey is the shortest passage between Europe and east Asia, taking half the time to reach China from Russia’s Baltic ports than the conventional route through the Suez Canal,” Bloomberg said. 

  Even before the war in Ukraine and the resulting sanctions on Moscow, trade flows were already in the beginning stages of shifting towards the Northern Sea Route. 

  In 2017, we noted, “transit routes through the Arctic will assume a certain level of importance vis-à-vis the global geopolitics of Russia and China.” 

  Visual Capitalist’s Nicholas LePan published a map of all the critical routes and resources in the Arctic in 2019. 

  

  In early 2020, we detailed how Russia, owner of the world’s largest fleet of icebreakers, can plow through Arctic waters, clearing the way for vessels to traverse the northern routes. 

  And last year, we cited Minister of National Resources and Environment Dmitry Kobylkin, who said cargo shipping in Russia’s northernmost territorial waters would top 80MM tons as early as 2024. 

  However, there are significant logistical hurdles that rely entirely on weather conditions. 

  Richard Matthews, head of research at E.A. Gibson Shipbrokers Ltd. in London, told Bloomberg that the Northern Sea Route is only viable in the warmer period of the year. 

  “It looks unlikely that any significant volumes could be shipped along this route until summer,” Matthews said.

  But Viktor Katona, a lead crude analyst at Kpler, said once spring arrives, the Northern Sea Route will be of “vital prevalence”: 

  “Europe is already sealed off.

  “If they’re not buying, why circumnavigate the entire universe if you can use the Northern Sea Route to get to China in 20 days?” Katona said.

  The first crude shipment across the Northern Sea Route took place in 2019. The second is currently underway. And as Western sanctions against Moscow rejigger global energy supply chains, Russia will have an advantage via the Arctic during warmer periods of the year in sending crude and crude products to Asia in an expedited fashion. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 23:05

• Court Orders Release Of 'True The Vote' Leaders From Jail
  Court Orders Release Of ‘True The Vote’ Leaders From Jail

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

  Two leaders of True the Vote organization will be released from jail after an appeals court overruled a judge’s order that they be locked up.

  

  Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips were ordered released by a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit late Nov. 6.

  “IT IS ORDERED that Petitioners’ opposed motion for release from detention is GRANTED pending further order of this court,” the panel said in the order, which was obtained by The Epoch Times.

  The panel consisted of Circuit Judges Catharina Haynes, a George W. Bush appointee; Kurt Engelhardt, a Trump appointee; and Andrew Oldham, a Trump appointee.

  Engelbrecht and Phillips were expected to be released on Nov. 7, a spokesman for True the Vote told The Epoch Times via email on Monday morning.

  “They will be released when the paperwork is complete, probably sometime this morning,” the spokesman said.

  Engelbrecht and Phillips were imprisoned on Oct. 31 after U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt, a Reagan appointee, found them in contempt of court for not revealing the identities of people who were with them when information was accessed from Konnech, a Michigan-based election management software company whose founder was recently arrested for allegedly stealing poll worker data and hosting it on servers in China.

  The order for confinement was to be in place until the defendants “fully comply” with an order that they reveal certain information, including the identities, Hoyt said.

  Engelbrecht and Phillips say they passed on information that was legally obtained from Konnech to the FBI. One of their attorneys named one of the individuals in question, Mike Hasson, during an October hearing. But they have declined to share the name of the second person. Both the individuals are FBI informants, Phillips said during one hearing.

  “Those who thought that imprisoning Gregg and I would weaken our resolve have gravely miscalculated. It is stronger than ever,” Engelbrecht said in a statement. “The right to free and fair elections without interference is more important than our own discomforts and even this detention, now reversed by a higher court.”

  “We are profoundly grateful for that. We will continue to protect and defend those who do the vital work of election integrity, and we will make sure that their findings become a matter of public record,” she added.

  The imprisonment order came after Konnech sued True the Vote and its founders for defamation.

  Hoyt entered a temporary restraining order against the defendants, ordering them to return all property and data to Konnech and identify people who were involved in accessing the company’s computers.

  In their filing for release from detention, Engelbrecht and Phillips said that Hoyt’s confinement order “represents a clear abuse of discretion and a manifest miscarriage of justice.”

  “Petitioners pray that this Court enter an Order releasing them from the district court’s draconian order of detention for refusing to identity a federal confidential informant in open court whose identity in any event has no bearing on the merits of this defamation case hinging on competing accounts of alleged historical events,” they added.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 22:45

• Lasers Can "Hack" Self-Driving LiDAR Sensors, Creating False "Blind Spots", New Study Reveals
  Lasers Can “Hack” Self-Driving LiDAR Sensors, Creating False “Blind Spots”, New Study Reveals

  In what is likely going to be another thorn in the side of Elon Musk, Tesla and Autopilot, it was revealed in a report last week that many self-driving features in vehicles can be “messed with” using lasers. 

  A brand new study that was put together and uploaded in late October, called “You Can’t See Me: Physical Removal Attacks on LiDAR-based Autonomous Vehicles Driving Frameworks” made the revelation, which was also reported on by Cosmos Magazine. 

  Researchers in the U.S. and Japan found that vehicles could be tricked into not seeing pedestrians (or other objects in their way) using lasers. These cars, which use LiDAR to sense objects around them, send out laser lights and then use the reflection back to judge how far away objects are. 

  The study revealed that a perfectly timed laser shone back into a LiDAR system can create “a blind spot large enough to hide an object like a pedestrian,” according to Cosmos. 

  The study’s abstract says: “While existing attacks on LiDAR-based autonomous driving architectures focus on lowering the confidence score of AV object detection models to induce obstacle misdetection, our research discovers how to leverage laser-based spoofing techniques to selectively remove the LiDAR point cloud data of genuine obstacles at the sensor level before being used as input to the AV perception. The ablation of this critical LiDAR information causes autonomous driving obstacle detectors to fail to identify and locate obstacles and, consequently, induces AVs to make dangerous automatic driving decisions”

  

  University of Florida cyber security researcher professor Sara Rampazzi commented: “We mimic the LIDAR reflections with our laser to make the sensor discount other reflections that are coming in from genuine obstacles.”

  “The LIDAR is still receiving genuine data from the obstacle, but the data are automatically discarded because our fake reflections are the only one perceived by the sensor,” she continued. 

  Any laser used in this manner would not only have to be perfectly timed, but would have to move with the vehicle, the report says. 

  University of Michigan computer scientist Yulong Cao, co-author of the report, said: “Revealing this liability allows us to build a more reliable system. In our paper, we demonstrate that previous defence strategies aren’t enough, and we propose modifications that should address this weakness.”

  The research will be presented at the 2023 USENIX Security Symposium, the report says. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 22:25

• Locomotive Machinists Narrowly Approve Ratification Of Labor Agreement
  Locomotive Machinists Narrowly Approve Ratification Of Labor Agreement

  By Joanna Marsh of FreightWaves

  Members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District 19 narrowly approved the ratification of a labor agreement that has been nearly three years in the making.

  Fifty-two percent voted in favor of accepting the agreement, IAM said Saturday. About 59% of IAM’s membership voted. Overall membership totals about 4,900 workers, who serve as locomotive machinists, roadway mechanists and facility maintenance personnel for the railroads.

  

  The union, which spoke to FreightWaves this week about the contract negotiation process, said it was “confident that this is the best deal for our members” while acknowledging that the contract didn’t have universal appeal. 

  “Our union recognizes that the agreement wasn’t accepted overwhelmingly, so our team will continue conversing with our members at our rail yards across the nation,” the union said in a statement Saturday. “This agreement is the first step in addressing some of the issues in our industry.”

  IAM also said leadership “worked night and day to communicate the agreement’s benefits and what would happen if it was rejected.”

  “Our fight was able to shine a light on the work-life balance issues as well as the lack of proper paid sick leave. Our union will continue to amplify the deficiencies in the carriers’ sick leave and attendance policies,” IAM said.

  The National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), the group representing the freight railroads, said it was pleased with IAM’s voting results.

  “The IAM agreement, like the agreements with six other rail unions that have already ratified, implements the recommendations of Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) No. 250, including the largest wage package in nearly five decades, maintains rail employees’ platinum-level health benefits, and adds an additional day of paid time off for IAM-represented workers,” NCCC said.

  “The successful result announced today follows an initial unsuccessful ratification attempt by the IAM last month. The ratified agreement is consistent with the framework recommended by the PEB,” NCCC continued, noting that this latest agreement followed one that was rejected by IAM’s membership in September. Representatives for IAM and the railroads went back to the negotiating table after that to com up with this latest iteration. 

  According to IAM, the revised ratified agreement will include a cap in healthcare costs and addresses issues related to single-room occupancy and travel expenses and per diem. 

  The agreement also includes plans to conduct a joint study with the railroads on overtime and overtime policies, as well as a “me-too” clause in which IAM would receive the same provisions should there be another agreement that appears to improve upon IAM’s agreement. 

  A new labor agreement for each of the 12 unions has been in the works since January 2020, but negotiations between the unions and the railroads failed to progress. In July, President Joe Biden appointed three independent experts to serve on the PEB, which conducted hearings and received testimony from stakeholders about how the unions and railroads could resolve the impasse. PEB issued its recommendations, which were meant to serve as a jumping-off point for a new contract.

  So far, seven unions have ratified their agreements, while another three still need to vote on whether to ratify their tentative agreements, according to NCCC. Two of the three include the two biggest unions representing train conductors and engineers, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division (SMART-TD). 

  Two other unions, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way-Employes Division (BMWED) and the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, recently voted to reject their tentative agreements, and so both are back at the bargaining table with the railroads.

  BMWED could initiate a work stoppage as early as Nov. 19, but that would be before BLET and SMART-TD would have completed voting on their tentative agreements, NCCC said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 22:05

• Sam Bankman "Fried" Nearly All Of His $16 Billion Fortune
  Sam Bankman “Fried” Nearly All Of His $16 Billion Fortune

  Binance’s Changpeng Zhao appears to have cast the death blow on competitor FTX and its “billionaire” founder/CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried. Bankman-Fried’s fall from grace has been one of the more stunning losses of net worth in recent history. Despite there likely being issues under the surface prior to Tuesday, a massive $6 billion in withdrawals forced the company into a liquidity crisis. Its FTT token then crashed before SBF reached out to nemisis Zhao at Binance for a bailout. 

  The situation culminated in all of crypto crashing on Tuesday – including pulling down the entire stock market at points – and Bankman Fried losing a substantial portion of his net worth, according to Bloomberg. In fact, reports say he has lost 94% of his $16 billion fortune. 

  

  His fortune was $26 billion at its peak, the report says, but the future of it all is now “in doubt”. Now, in a eulogy out Tuesday afternoon, Bloomberg says his fortune “will be annihilated at the hands of his billionaire rival”. Going down with the SBF ship are investors like Softbank’s Vision Fund (of course), Temasek and the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. which had $400 million invested in FTX at a $32 billion valuation. 

  SBF had a 53% stake in FTX that was worth about $6.2 billion prior to the week’s events. The other $7.4 billion of his fortune was tied up in Alameda Research, which now appears to be completely insolvent. Bloomberg’s prognosis was bleak, to say the least:

  “The Bloomberg wealth index assumes existing FTX investors, including Bankman-Fried, will be completely wiped out by Binance’s bailout, and that the root of the exchange’s problems stemmed from Alameda. As a result, both FTX and Alameda are given a $1 value. “

  They estimate that SBF’s remaining fortune will be about $1 billion, or a loss of 94%. We’re guessing SBF is going to need some of that remaining $1 billion for legal expenses, too. 

  Competitor Zhao – now at the top of the crypto heap, at least for the time being – had a fortune was as high as $97 billion back in January 2022. 

  Recall, we have followed the FTX/Binance story all day today – you can read our coverage and wrap up of the day’s events here. 

  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 21:45

• New York Concealed Carry Law Ruled Unconstitutional Again
  New York Concealed Carry Law Ruled Unconstitutional Again

  Submitted by Gun Owners Of America.,

  Gun Owners of America secured a historic victory in the battle for gun rights on Monday when New York Judge Glenn Suddaby issued a preliminary injunction suspending many parts of New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). 

  This victory follows Gun Owners of America & Gun Owners Foundation securing a temporary restraining order against the aforementioned CCIA in October, which a federal appeals court then blocked.

  Happy Election Day Eve, Gov. Hochul. One loss today and hopefully another tomorrow!

  Both would be a win for the Second Amendment! https://t.co/ziOroPDjw3

  — Erich Pratt (@erichmpratt) November 7, 2022

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

  This ruling enjoins many of the worst provisions of New York’s ignorantly titled “Concealed Carry Improvement Act” such as the “good moral character” clause which allowed licensing officials to not only infringe on applicants Second Amendment rights, but also their First and Fourth Amendment rights by demanding they disclose social media accounts and personal relationships. 

  Judge Suddaby also struck down many of the so-called “sensitive location” gun bans including all places of worship, buses, public parks, and many more.

  Court strikes down gun bans at:
  – “public parks, and zoos”
  – “airports”
  – “busses”
  – bars
  – “theaters”
  – “conference centers”
  – “banquet halls” pic.twitter.com/NK7PweZgc4

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) November 8, 2022

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

  The entire ‘restricted locations’ applying to private property was enjoined, as well.. This law made it so that ALL private property was considered a gun-free zone. To allow concealed carry permit holders to exercise their rights, a private property owner would have been required to prominently display a sign that guns are welcome, the complete opposite of the rest of the country. This was government overreach on private property and was rightfully struck down.

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

  GOA’s attorneys of record, Rob Olson and Stephen Stamboulieh, took on an army of anti-gun lawyers to defeat New York in an uphill court battle spanning the past few months.  

  This decision also has national repercussions. New York has been a testing ground for ways to get around the NYSRPA v. Bruen Supreme Court decision since the High Court handed it down in late June. States like New Jersey have passed similar restrictions and have closely watched GOA’s legal challenge to New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act. Some states and localities are even waiting to pass such legislation pending the outcome of GOA’s challenge.

  This victory sends a clear message to those anti-gun states that the courts will overturn unjust laws that infringe on the constitutional rights of American citizens.

  Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, had this to say:

  “Just like we warned politicians after the Bruen decision, fall in line, or we will force you to. We are excited to see Kathy Hochul finally served a plate of humble pie, and we are fully prepared to continue the fight should she again attempt to disarm the citizens of her state at a time when her party’s policies are only escalating the danger that everyday citizens face.” 

  They fail. pic.twitter.com/qKgSwRZaEN

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) November 7, 2022

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

  We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

  *   *   *

  [ZH: While Gun Owners of America rolled back most ‘sensitive place’ restrictions where people are barred from carrying concealed firearms, there are separate lawsuits concerning Times Square and subways, which weren’t included in this decision.]

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 21:25

• A Net 17 Percent Say They Will Spend Less This Holiday Season
  A Net 17 Percent Say They Will Spend Less This Holiday Season

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  17 percent believe they will spend less this year. Many are stressed over gifts and even the Christmas or Thanksgiving dinner…

  

  Graphic courtesy of Morning Consult

  A Morning Consult offers a First Look at Consumers’ 2022 Holiday Plans

  Key Takeaways 

  • Financial Service: To avoid going into debt this holiday season, consumers are being smarter about budgeting in advance and are more likely to favor a BNPL approach to cover holiday expenses over opening a new credit card. Though shoppers are feeling inflation’s pinch, spending levels will look similar to last year. 

  • Retail and E-Commerce: Consumers will be looking for the best deals and making compromises so they can keep their holiday spending in check. While that may have previously been good for Black Friday retailers, less than half of shoppers plan to to take advantage of the sale event. 

  • Travel and Hospitality: Travelers will need to make tradeoffs to combat cost concerns. Americans are looking forward to holiday travel after two years of scaled-back celebrations, but cost has replaced COVID as an influential factor. To avoid overspending, travelers plan to shorten trips, bunk with relatives and leverage points and rewards to cover costs. 

  • Food and Beverage: Purchasing holiday groceries will be a stressor for some, but most feel excited about celebrations. Despite inflation, most consumers plan on sticking to a consistent foods and drinks budget. Hosts from different generations approach their holiday celebrations differently, an important factor for brands to consider.  

  Stressed Over Groceries 

  

  Looking for Deals 

  • As a result of inflation, 82% of shoppers say they intend to look for more deals and discounts, while 72% plan to look for less expensive alternatives. 

  • Millennials, the generation most worried about their finances this holiday season, are most likely to seek these lower-cost tradeoffs.  

  56 Percent Plan to Give Gift Cards 

  

  Gift cards are practical. But cash is even more practical. 

  Regarding gift cards, I wonder “why bother?” 

  You give a gift card and get a gift card. Why not just stop the exchange and say Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays or whatever greeting you prefer?

  OK , if its a targeted gift card to a sporting goods specialty store the money goes to an designated idea. But what if the recipient would rather have something else?

  Things like Harry & David fruit baskets, Omaha Steaks, and numerous cheese shops are ridiculously expensive for what you get. 

  My suggestion, other than gifts for your kids: Just stop. And tell your kids you don’t want anything other than to see them more often if that is indeed the case. 

  Buy Now Pay Later 

  

  BNPL vs Credit Card 

  I don’t understand this pairing at all. What does difference does a new credit card vs an old one make? 

  OK. For those who carry a balance, the initial purchase on a new card does not have interest for a month.

  But if you are carrying a balance month after month, you are already spending too much. 

  Will You Spend Less or More?

  Holiday Spending Plans vs 2021
  How much do you expect to spend?

  — Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) November 6, 2022

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

  Mish Suggestions and Tips

  If you routinely carry a credit card balance, then look in the mirror and admit that you are a sucker. 

  Instead of giving or getting presents pay down your debt.

  BNPL is a trap. You pay in installments, but with few exceptions you will be paying built-in credit fees that may be even worse than credit card fees. 

  Stressed over holiday groceries? Then make lasagna or stuffed shells or something you don’t normally cook to make it special. Jumbo shells stuffed with ricotta cheese and pepperoni bits would probably look special, be very inexpensive, tasty, and provide as many leftovers as you want. 

  Slice and cook the pepperoni first and drain the grease. You can put some pepperoni inside each shell or cover the tops of the shells with pepperoni and a layer of mozzarella cheese. 

  Want another food suggestion? Try Rock Cornish hens stuffed with rice instead of a big turkey. 

  If you are stressed over groceries, then you have to be stressed over everything else as well.

  My number one stress-reducing recommendation is simple: Just stop the gifts except for the kids, and then don’t splurge.

  Other than the kids, only buy what you can afford and would have purchased anyway. Then wrap it up if you want, and give it to yourself tagged from whomever. Then you get exactly what you want, no exchanges necessary. 

  For many, exchanging gifts is a stressful waste of time, energy, and money. So stop!

  But if you can afford to exchange and it makes you happy, then go ahead. Be happy.

  *  *  *

  Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 20:45

• Citadel's Ken Griffin Touts Florida As "Great Environment And Streets Are Safe And Clean"
  Citadel’s Ken Griffin Touts Florida As “Great Environment And Streets Are Safe And Clean”

  Before we dive into the latest comments of Citadel’s billionaire founder, Ken Griffin, praising Florida for all its beauty after he moved his firm from the hellhole of Chicago. We want to remind readers about the events that led to Griffin’s decision. 

  In May, Griffin was becoming increasingly frustrated with the eruption in violent crime across Chicago and Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s inability to solve those issues. 

  At the time, he said, “We’re getting to the point that if things don’t change, we’re gone. Things aren’t changing.” 

  By June, Griffin sent a letter to Citadel employees that he had moved to Florida and that his market-making business, Citadel Securities, would also migrate to Miami. He noted in the letter that he views Florida as a better corporate environment, and though he didn’t specifically cite crime as a factor, company officials said it was a consideration.

  Later that month, Bloomberg reported the new headquarters of Citadel would be at 1201 Brickell Bay Drive. The secret deal to obtain the property closed in April and was shielded from the public by a limited liability company with a Chicago mailing address.  

  In mid-August, CNBC noted Griffin had already spent a billion dollars on Florida real estate. This includes the plot of land for the new headquarters building and a massive estate in Palm Beach. 

  

  On Monday, Griffin, now Florida’s richest man, spoke with Francis Suarez, Miami’s Republican mayor, who said the real reason he moved his market-making operation and residence to South Florida wasn’t because of taxes but the positive atmosphere, according to Bloomberg. 

  “It’s gonna get me thrown out of here, but taxes weren’t part of our decision to come to Florida.

  “When you’ve got great schools, a great environment and your streets are safe and clean, that’s when you’ve got a place you want to live in and call home.

  “There’s something very special about the government in Florida and their focus on delivering traditional values for the community,” he told Suarez in a conversation. 

  Griffin is one of the most high-profile individuals to pack up his bags and head to a conservative-friendly state after living in a progressive-run city that had social justice reforms backfire and spark even more violent crime. 

  The billionaire isn’t alone. Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of everyday Americans have made the same decision to flee imploding liberal-run cities in the last few years because of high taxes and socio-economic collapses. Many have fled to more prosperous and safer conservative-run cities. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 20:25

• Oman's Energy Minister: It's Foolish To Assume Renewables Can Meet Global Demand
  Oman’s Energy Minister: It’s Foolish To Assume Renewables Can Meet Global Demand

  Authored by Svetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  The world’s energy needs will only grow, and it would be “foolish” to think that rising demand can be met with renewables alone, Oman’s Energy Minister Salim Al-Aufi told CNBC on Tuesday.  

  Oman’s energy minister tells CNBC’s @_hadleygamble it would be “foolish” to assume that the world’s growing energy needs can be met with renewables. pic.twitter.com/BL0TUcWhFz

  — CNBC Middle East (@CNBCMiddleEast) November 8, 2022

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

  Energy needs to be affordable and this is the first pillar of energy supply when the energy transition is concerned, the minister said.  

  Oman’s official also defended, again, the OPEC+ decision to reduce the headline target oil production by 2 million barrels per day (bpd) as of this month, saying that the group is proactive in trying to balance the market.

  Al-Aufi also said that he wasn’t surprised by the U.S. blowback after the OPEC+ decision was announced.

  “It was expected,” he told CNBC.

  Referring to the energy transition and renewables, Oman, like many Middle Eastern oil and gas producers, believes that all forms of energy will be needed to meet the world’s growing energy demand in the coming years and decades.

  

  Back in September, Saudi Aramco’s chief executive Amin Nasser said that years of underinvestment, a lack of a backup plan, and alternatives not ready to step up and replace conventional energy are the real causes of this state of energy insecurity today.

  The world and policymakers need a more credible energy transition plan, which has to recognize that “supplies of ample and affordable conventional energy are still required over the long-term,” Nasser said in a speech at the Schlumberger Digital Forum 2022 in Switzerland. Aramco’s CEO reiterated the long-held view of Saudi Arabia that the world will need oil and gas for the foreseeable future and will need more investment in the industry just to keep supply steady amid declining output from maturing wells, and even more investment to boost production capacity to meet the world’s energy needs.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 20:05

• China Cancels Top EU Official's High-Profile Video Address For Ukraine War Comments
  China Cancels Top EU Official’s High-Profile Video Address For Ukraine War Comments

  European Council president Charles Michel was set to deliver an address at the opening day of the China International Import Expo (CIIE) hosted in Shanghai on Friday, but Chinese authorities have pulled the pre-recorded video address in a very brazen act of censorship of a top official and diplomat, Reuters reports.

  “As requested by the Chinese authorities, we had indeed provided a pre-recorded message which was ultimately not shown. We have addressed this through the normal diplomatic channels,” a statement from EC President Michel’s office confirmed. 

  

  The high-profile speech was likely canceled by Chinese authorities as it was expected to criticize Russia’s war in Ukraine while also provocatively urging the European Union to reduce trade dependency on China.

  What’s more is that he was expected to call on Beijing to pressure Moscow to halt the ongoing attack on Ukraine, and heap criticism of the Russia-China “no-limits” partnership declared just before the war’s start in February. 

  According to statements from diplomatic sources cited in Reuters, the rebuke of Russia was going to be scathing, at an event where President Xi Jinping is to speak as well: 

  Mr Michel’s speech included strong criticism of Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. “In Europe, we want balance in our trade relations… to avoid over-dependencies,” his speech said, reported Reuters citing the diplomats familiar with what he was to say.

  “This is also true of our trade relations with China.”

  “China has a role in using its influence to stop Russia’s brutal war… through your so-called ‘no-limits’ partnership with Russia,” Mr Michel was to say, referring to a pact announced by Mr Xi and Mr Putin in Beijing before the war began.

  “You, China, can help put an end to this.”

  Xi and Michel are expected to meet in person next week at the G-20 summit in Bali. Biden will also meet with Xi – a moment that will drive headlines, likely overshadowing everything else.

  #Chinese authorities behind a major trade expo in Shanghai pull an address by the #EU chief #CharlesMichel that was set to criticize Russia’s “illegal war” in Ukraine and call for reduced trade dependency on China, diplomats say.https://t.co/qb3TIFz2lQ

  — Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) November 8, 2022

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

  But a Sunday report in the South China Morning Post noted that “Beijing has yet to officially confirm either Xi’s attendance at the summit or a meeting with Biden, who will be in Bali from November 13 to 16.”

  If it happens, it will be the first face-to-face meeting with Xi since Biden took office in 2021. According to the US side, via US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, “There’s an awful lot of issues for us to talk to China about. Some issues are fairly contentious and some should be collaborative.” The US confirmed ongoing intense discussions and planning with the Chinese side for the meeting.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 19:46

• Election Night Results: FL "Catastrophic" For Dems, Abbot Wins TX, Vance Takes OH
  Election Night Results: FL “Catastrophic” For Dems, Abbot Wins TX, Vance Takes OH

  Polls have now closed in a number of states and while the percentage of votes counted remains low, official media sources have called a number of seats. The Senate remains a tossup, but The House is swinging increasingly likely to the Republicans.

  

  Asked about what he thinks about the number of prospects he has endorsed in tonight’s race, former President Trump remarked with a smile on his face: 

  “Well, I think if they win, I should get all the credit. If they lose, I should not be blamed at all.”

  Former President Donald Trump said if Republicans he backed win, he “should get all the credit… But it will probably be just the opposite.” Watch the interview tonight at 6p/5C — find your channel: https://t.co/ZH35VUp1Ik #Election2022 pic.twitter.com/nDTEM1uWOf

  — NewsNation (@NewsNation) November 8, 2022

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

  There were 45,920,446 early votes cast in the elections, according to the latest tally by the University of Florida’s United States Elections Project. That includes 20,487,803 in-person early votes and 25,432,643 mail ballots returned.

  If you’re looking for a Democrat bellwether, The NYC Board of Elections says about 1.4 million voters have been to a polling station, that’s down from 2.1 million voters in 2018, but there are still a few hours left to go.

  Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wins her NYC district, the AP says.

  Kemp is leading Abrams in the GA Governor race…

  

  Abbott dominated Beto in the Texas Governor race…

  

  NBC has called Ohio for JD Vance

  

  GA & PA are still too close to call…

  

   

  Something “odd” happening in PA…

  

  However, Florida is flashing a even brighter red warning signal for Democrats.

  • Fox, CNN, NBC all projecting Republican Senator Marco Rubio wins re-election in Florida.

  • CBS, NBC projecting GOP Governor Desantis Wins Re-Election in Florida.

  David Plouffe, the former Obama election chief, calls the Florida numbers tonight “catastrophic” – and hugely problematic for Democrats if this keeps up in 2024.

  “In Florida, it’s catastrophic. Obviously, we saw greater urgency in 20 in the presidential race. Let’s remember, Barack Obama won in 2012, basically tied the Cuban vote, got over 77% of Hispanic votes. The Obama coalition in Florida is gone. We have to rebuild it now,”

  The Democrats spent $70 million dollars to lose STATEWIDE by like 15 points!

  Are you claiming that when Spain drew the borders of Florida in the 1700s it was to help the GOP 300 + years later? pic.twitter.com/qlFMgNBybS

  — Andrew Follett (@AndrewCFollett) November 9, 2022

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

  In the Senate:

   

  

  Source

  In the House:

  Based on their current race projections, Decision Desk HQ says Republicans have an 86% chance of winning a U.S. House majority.

  Republicans have already flipped a seat tonight — in Guam. The island territory elected Republican James Moylan to be its non-voting delegate, according to results from the Guam Election Commission. With all 67 precincts reporting, Moylan won with 52.19% of the vote, beating Democrat Judith T. Pat, who received 47.15%. The last time Guam was represented by a Republican was 1993.

  

  Source

  As a reminder, Bill Clinton lost 54 House seats in 1994, Barack Obama lost 63 in 2010 and Rabobank forecasts Democrats to lose 75 seats in this election.

  Watch live:

  What time do polls close?

  

  *  *  *

  Well, you’ve done your patriotic duty to uphold democracy across the union and now all that is left is to sit back and watch the completely error-free results of the Midterm elections quickly roll in as the billions of dollars spent on people and machines to enhance voting integrity and accuracy are shown as being well spent.

  Of course, that’s all ridiculous as the mainstream media and Democrat apparatchiks have already set the narrative that ‘we, the people’ should not expect the results tonight (like Brazil managed?) or in fact any time soon.

  I’d like to note once again that Brazil — with a population of similar size to the US (especially with mandatory voting and a voting age of 16) — counted all votes nationwide in every race within 3 hours after the polls closed. Every race was decided that night. https://t.co/8phpLUQA6j

  — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 7, 2022

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

  Around 44 million people had cast their ballots early for the midterm elections as of November 7. Of those, roughly 20 million people voted in person nationwide, while more than 24 million returned their ballot by mail. This is around a 13 percent increase from 2018, when the last midterms were held. Then, a total of 39 million ballots were counted, according to the U.S. Elections Project.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Analysts claim that this could be interpreted as a good sign for Democrats, as in past years the party’s followers have been more likely to vote ahead. While even with these figures it is unclear what the midterm results will be, it does show that there is an increase in political engagement in several states. As The Washington Post notes, 2.5 million people had voted in person early on Friday in Georgia this year when early voting ended, far surpassing the 1.9 million who cast their ballot early in 2018.

  It is worth noting that in some states, for example in Vermont and Hawaii, early voting was much higher than in the last midterms because these states changed the law to make it easier to vote early by mail. In 2018, Hawaii moved to all mail-in, which explains the state’s high figures. Vermont in 2021 changed its law to mail out ballots to all active voters without the need to request.

  The U.S. Elections Project was last updated on 7 November, with states showing the latest available data.

  Remember this chart…

  

  As a reminder, in 2020, 42 states and Washington, D.C., had reported enough results for news organizations to project winners in the presidential race by about 3:00 a.m. Eastern.

  

  But eight states took longer. Six of them — all but Alaska and Michigan — have competitive Senate races this year that could determine the balance of power in Congress.

  

  Of course, before we get to what to watch for tonight, we can’t let the elephant in the room go.

  We have seen ‘voting issues’ across multiple states today with 20% of Maricopa County (AZ) machines non-functioning at one point.

  

  So, don’t hold your breath for any real final answers tonight. However, while there are a handful of key races to watch, we note that Axios details seven bellwethers which will help navigate the results as they drip-drip-drip in tonight to see whether Republicans are gaining a foothold in parts of the country that have long eluded them, for example, and the types of Democrats who can win even when the odds would seem to be stacked against them.

  1. The best early bellwether: Rep. Abigail Spanberger’s (D-Va.) race against Republican Yesli Vega, in the exurbs outside Washington, D.C., will offer a clear early signal of the national political mood.

  • A pragmatic Democrat with a national security background, Spanberger has condemned her party’s left wing early and often On Saturday, she was endorsed by vocal Trump critic Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.).

  • Vega reflects the under-the-radar diversity of the GOP’s recruiting class — a Latina candidate who serves as a county supervisor and has a law enforcement background.

  • Polls close in Virginia early (7 p.m. ET) and the state typically counts ballots quickly. Spanberger’s early victory in 2018 foreshadowed the Democratic wave that year. If Republicans return the favor in 2022, it would be a sign of a wave in the opposite direction.

  2. The most important county: Miami-Dade, Florida.

  • Republicans are confident that Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Marco Rubio will comfortably win their re-elections, but the bigger dynamic to follow is their margin of victory in the state’s most populous, majority-Hispanic county.

  • Miami-Dade County hasn’t voted for a Republican for president since 1988 and hasn’t backed a GOP governor since 2002 (Jeb Bush). Rubio hasn’t won an outright majority in his home county for his Senate races, either.

  • But both have a chance to win in Miami-Dade — result that would signal a GOP landslide and provide rocket fuel for a potential DeSantis presidential campaign.

  3. The Democrat best-positioned to survive a red wave: Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who is still running neck-and-neck against Republican state Sen. Tom Barrett.

  • Even as many Democratic colleagues in bluer territory look awfully vulnerable, Slotkin is holding her own in one of the most expensive House battlegrounds.

  • If Slotkin runs against the tide, she’ll credit Liz Cheney’s endorsement for pushing some suburban swing voters her way. But if Barrett defeats the two-term lawmaker, he’ll be reflective of the new MAGA-aligned Republican majority.

  4. The upset to watch: The New York governor’s race.

  • It’s hard to imagine deep-blue New York electing a Republican governor — especially one who has been closely aligned with former President Trump.

  • But Gov. Kathy Hochul’s tone-deaf reaction to voters concerned about crime is giving Republican Lee Zeldin a fighting chance.

  5. Rare Democratic bright spot: Kansas.

  • Kansas was one of the first signs of a backlash to aggressive abortion restrictions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling this past summer.

  • Even as Democrats are struggling in some deep-blue states, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly is running competitively against Republican state Attorney General Derek Schmidt, according to strategists from both parties.

  • Rep. Sharice Davids (D-Kansas), representing a suburban Kansas City district that Republicans drew to their favor in redistricting, is also in a strong position. A NYT/Siena poll this week showed Davids leading Republican Amanda Adkins by 15 points in a Biden +5 district.

  6. The races that will settle the Mitch McConnell-Rick Scott feud: Arizona and New Hampshire.

  • The cash-flush, McConnell-aligned Senate Leadership Fund decided not to spend in Arizona and pulled out of the New Hampshire race in October. The super PAC’s reason: It was more important to spend in the races that will decide the Senate majority, rather than gambling on candidates who may be general-election liabilities.

  • Scott’s allies, meanwhile, view McConnell as overly cautious and worry Republicans will miss an opportunity to take advantage of the GOP wave in two swing states, even with flawed nominees.

  • If Blake Masters and Don Bolduc win without much establishment help, they’ll likely be thorns in McConnell’s side if he becomes majority leader.

  7. Biggest demographic shift: Working-class Hispanic voters.

  • Republicans are growing bullish that they’ll make significant inroads in Hispanic-heavy parts of the country, where concerns about crime and the economy are creating a wedge against their traditional Democratic affiliation.

  • “Everyone is seeing that the Hispanic districts have been two, three, four clicks to the right compared to their historical performance,” said one GOP official tracking House races. “They’re coming in red hot Republican.”

  • The American Enterprise Institute demographics tracker finds the Democratic congressional margin among Hispanic voters 7-9 points below its 2020 level and 17-19 points below its 2018 level.

  • Key areas to watch for as a sign of the Hispanic shift right: Nevada, the Rio Grande Valley in Texas (where Republicans are hoping to sweep three majority-Hispanic districts), and Colorado’s 8th district, a newly created seat outside Denver.

  Finally, while it sounds odd, Alex Berenson makes an interesting point as to why Democrats should be hoping they get crushed.

  Tactically, they need a loss so big that Uncle Joe has no choice but to announce very quickly that he will not be running in 2024.

  They need a wide open primary that will help them find the next generation of CENTRIST Democrats.

  What they do not need, under any circumstances, is for Biden to limp along until late fall 2023 and then bow to reality, creating a giant mess that will only help those Democrats with super-high name recognition.

  A close loss will not force that reckoning. But a bad one will (I hope). And a saner Democratic Party will be good for everyone.

  Having said all that, we are left thinking, just what do liberal Democrats do, if, in a free and fair election, US voters throw them out and replace them with people our elites routinely equate with fascists and Nazis?

  …and most importantly, who (or what) will get the blame?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 19:27

• World Dollar Hegemony Is Ending (And That May Be A Good Thing)
  World Dollar Hegemony Is Ending (And That May Be A Good Thing)

  Authored by Patrick Barron via The Mises Institute,

  The end of world dollar hegemony is coming and hardly anyone in government is taking notice or even understands what this means. Since the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, the dollar has been the only currency accepted throughout the world for settlement of international trade accounts among nations.

  Prior to 1944, physical gold was used for international settlement. When an exporter in country A sold goods to an importer in country B, country B would pay with its own currency. But country A would have no interest in allowing country B’s currency to build up in its vaults beyond an amount required to settle its own importers’ needs. Thus, country A would demand that country B redeem its own currency in gold. Sometimes country B would ship physical gold to country A. Or perhaps gold held in safekeeping in a third country would be designated as now belonging to country A, a book entry transaction that is more convenient than physical movement.

  

  The Bretton Woods Agreement and Its Demise

  The Bretton Woods Agreement added the dollar as tantamount to physical gold at $35 per ounce. The reason was simple: at the end of World War II the United States had accumulated a preponderance of gold, due primarily to its role as the “arsenal of democracy.” Thus, central banks could exchange dollars for settlement rather than moving or redesignating the ownership of physical gold. The weakness of this system was that the world had to trust the USA not to create more dollars than it could redeem for gold at $35 per ounce. But central banks always had the option to demand physical gold from the USA and hence ensure that their trust in the measure of $35 per ounce was fully supported.

  After approximately twenty years of this arrangement the market became concerned that the USA was not living up to its obligations. The origin of this concern was centered in France. President Charles de Gaulle himself was a firm proponent of the classical gold standard as was his financial advisor Jacques Rueff. Starting in the late 1960s de Gaulle ordered the Bank of France to redeem 80 percent of its vast dollar reserves for gold. Other central banks followed suit, and a typical bank run developed.

  As USA gold reserves reached critically low levels, President Richard Nixon took the USA off the gold exchange standard, as the system of central bank redemption was called, in the fall of 1971. It did NOT devalue the dollar to gold, which it could have done, and promise to stop dollar expansion. Instead, the USA simply ended dollar redemption for gold, allowing the USA to create as many fiat dollars as the world market would accept.

  It turned out that the world market would accept a lot of fiat dollars. A major reason was that Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, agreed to demand payment in dollars for its oil, thus creating worldwide demand for dollars.

  The Petrodollar Era Supplants Bretton Woods, but Its End Is Nigh

  This “petrodollar” arrangement is now breaking down, due to the ever-accelerating debasement of the dollar. The cause of the debasement is the unholy alliance of the Federal Reserve, the US central bank, and the US government. The Federal Reserve creates, out of thin air, all the dollars that the government needs to maintain its massive and ever-increasing spending deficit. The monetization of these deficits has led to a loss of dollar purchasing power at an accelerating rate.

  The purpose of explaining all this is to give background to the currently developing situation. For almost eighty years the federal government has been able to spend as much as it desired, knowing that the world either would hold its dollars or that the Fed would monetize whatever the market would not accept—i.e., the Fed would buy the government’s debt itself and (figuratively) print the money it would give to the Treasury. The Fed would then hold the debt on its own balance sheet. The sheer scale of its intervention is shocking. In 2008 the Fed’s balance sheet what slightly under $0.880 trillion. Today it is $8.816 trillion. (See this graph from the Fed’s own website.)

  So, what did the federal government do with all that newly printed money? It spent it on war and welfare, of course. Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society welfare state is now firmly entrenched and constantly expanding. The American military has intervened in every corner of the world. It seems that all that is necessary for the USA to intervene militarily is for some local disputant on the other side of the world, with its own incomprehensible historical animosities, to claim that its neighbor is invading its sovereign territory and/or committing atrocities. The American people are whipped into a frenzy of righteousness and off we go to Timbuktu. The result is thousands of dead, billions squandered, and the local situation even worse than before.

  All this mayhem could only be funded by worldwide acceptance of the fiat dollar. But much of the world has had enough. There are several organizations that are cooperating to develop an alternative to the dollar for the settlement of international trade. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), and the Eurasian Economic Union have formed a working group to develop a commodity based medium of exchange to replace the dollar as the premier means for the settlement of international trade. Goldmoney’s Alasdair Macleod has written extensively about this project. More countries—especially countries currently using the dollar, such as Saudi Arabia—have announced their intensions to join the project. More, many more, will follow Saudi Arabia.

  How to convey the importance of this development to the general public? It all seems complicated and probably years away. Plus, it may not work. That is the purpose of the next part of my article.

  The Magic Checkbook

  Let’s break this down to the individual level, so that everyone can grasp its full meaning. Let us assume that you were handed a checkbook and told that you could write as many checks as you wished in any amount you desired and, most importantly, no one would refuse to take your check, and no one would cash it because the checking account has no money anyway. Whoever receives the check can only pass it along, via ordinary trade, to someone else.

  First, you can see that once this money is created by you, it will never be destroyed. It will continue to grow every time you write a new check. In other words, the money supply will grow according to your propensity to spend. Now let’s assume that when given this magic checkbook, you had been a frugal and responsible person. That’s one of the reasons that you were given it in the first place. For some time, you continued to live frugally, but over the years your self-control breaks down and you start to spend.

  To placate your conscience, you spend some of the money on others—i.e., the poor, the elderly, the disabled, etc. But eventually you succumb to ever increasing DEMANDS for money to compensate the victims of all kinds of disasters. If you don’t send money to the suffering masses, you are condemned by all.

  So, you spend. Then you decide that you should spend money on rehabilitating humanity, exploring the solar system, funding higher education. The DEMANDS for money from your magic checkbook grow and grow. If you try to moderate your spending, you threaten to damage your reputation internationally.

  Things get out of hand. But this isn’t the end of the story. The spending from the magic checkbook has created massive price increases and has funded a class of sycophants, deadbeats, and megalomaniacs. A splinter group decides to spurn accepting checks from the magic checkbook and develop a new medium of exchange. It isn’t easy, and it takes quite a while. There are advances and retrenchments, but eventually honest money reemerges. Now more and more people refuse to accept your checks from the magic checkbook.

  Rise of a Competing Reserve Currency

  This is where the world is headed, because the USA cannot force sovereign nations to accept the dollar, especially if there is another and better choice. The USA has not lived up to its responsibility to protect the purchasing power of the dollar via controlling its supply. Lord Acton’s warning is as important today as ever—i.e., “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

  The new SCO currency will supplant the dollar as the world’s premier reserve currency primarily because it will be backed to a large extent by commodities and it will not be under the control of one sovereign country but a number of sovereign countries, all dedicated to its monetary health in ensuring the free flow of international trade and payments. It will be a loss for the dollar, of course, and for the USA, but frankly, the world will benefit overall.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 19:25

• North Korea Angrily Rejects US "Rumor" It's Supplying Russian Forces
  North Korea Angrily Rejects US “Rumor” It’s Supplying Russian Forces

  North Korea on Tuesday again lashed out at the United States, vehemently rejecting accusations that Pyongyang has been supplying artillery ammunition to Russian forces for the war in Ukraine. 

  A statement in KCNA refuted the charge as “groundless” – chalking it up to Washington spreading rumors and propaganda. “Recently, the US is persistently spreading a groundless ‘rumor of arms dealings’ between the DPRK and Russia,” North Korea’s vice director of military foreign affairs of the Ministry of National Defense said.

  

  The statement added that it’s part of an ongoing US “hostile attempt to tarnish the image of the DPRK in the international arena.” Tensions surrounding the divided Korean peninsula are at boiling point over last week’s record number of missile launches out of the north, and joint US-south war drills which were deemed a provocation. 

  “We once again make clear that we have never had ‘arms dealings’ with Russia and that we have no plan to do so in the future,” the statement from Pyongyang added.

  US officials have cited intelligence reports which allege a North Korea to Russia ammo transfer is the latest sign of desperation amid depleting Russian munitions after six months of war in Ukraine.

  Last week, National Security Council official and spokesman John Kirby told CNN, “In September, the (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) publicly denied that it intended to provide ammunition to Russia.”

  “However, our information indicates that the DPRK is covertly supplying Russia’s war in Ukraine with a significant number of artillery shells, while obfuscating the real destination of the arms shipments by trying to make it appear as though they are being sent to countries in the Middle East or North Africa.”

  In the summer into early September, Western media outlets widely reported on accusations that North Korea was shipping weapons to the Russian military, including millions of rockets and artillery shells, which followed earlier unverified claims that Pyongyang said it was willing to send 100,000 of its troops to help Russia in Ukraine.

  While those allegations never saw any level of confirmation, the Pentagon and US intelligence continued harboring suspicions of large covert weapons and munitions shipments. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 19:05

• Seniors Feel Cheated As Inflation Dims Their Golden Years
  Seniors Feel Cheated As Inflation Dims Their Golden Years

  Authored by Andrew Moran and Emel Akan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  For close to 47 million Americans, it was the best of times, and it was the worst of times. Indeed, the current cost-of-living crisis devastating millions of seniors nationwide has forced many to look back at the choices they made throughout their prime working years.

  

  Did they save and invest enough? Did they clock in enough hours during their career? Could they have put more money aside for a rainy day?

  The last time inflation was this high, Dennis O’Connor, an 82-year-old retiree from Temecula, California, says he and his peers were able to weather the storm of rising prices. Today, however, they have limited options.

  “When the last events occurred 40 years ago, we were employed. The overriding concern is we cannot plan retirement a second time,” he told The Epoch Times. “When you are younger and working you can recover. Retirees will never have that option.”

  Before retirement, O’Connor served as councilman and mayor for City of Oak Forest. He also worked as a senior executive on some of California’s large infrastructure and environmental projects.

  “Like most retirees, we are from the Silent and Boomer generations, and many are children of the Greatest Generation who experienced World War II and the Great Depression,” he said.

  “We were told to save for retirement, don’t depend on Social Security as it may not be there, contribute to a company’s 401(k) or put money away,” he noted.

  Many retirees depend on a fixed income from their pension plans or Social Security checks and their investments and emergency reserves are being imbibed by inflation.

  “Like most of America’s retirees, I am frightened,” O’Connor adds, noting that many seniors have no experience dealing with inflation and recession during retirement.

  

  He’s especially worried about women from his generation.

  “They had greater challenges because of lower wages, lack of available retirement plans, and the breakdown of the family.”

  In addition, the stock and bond markets have had a rough year, and it could be a while before investors see a recovery in their portfolios. The bear market has led to investment valuations crumbling as much as 20 percent for O’Connor. His aggressive funds have tumbled between 35 and 40 percent.

  According to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, Americans lost $1.4 trillion in their 401(k) accounts and an additional $2 trillion in their individual retirement accounts (IRAs) in the first half of this year.

  Now that the specter of recession clouds over the nation, there is even more uncertainty for the markets.

  “Sadly, I and most retirees thought our futures would be comfortable, but now that is in doubt,” O’Connor said.

  A recent survey by Allianz found that more than half of Americans are being forced to reduce or stop their contributions to their retirement savings. Forty-three percent say they dipped into their savings, while 72 percent of Baby Boomers are concerned that growing living costs would affect their retirement plans.

  Back to Work

  Today’s generation of retirees is now seeing every aspect of their lives dented by broad-based and persistent inflation. Gas prices, grocery store prices, and electricity bills have all increased by double digits this year.

  KT Hundsen—she chose to use a pseudonym to protect her identity—62, lives in a suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota. She and her husband of more than three decades led responsible lives. They pay their bills at the end of every month and refrain from carrying debt. The couple paid off their mortgage last summer and saved money while never overspending.

  “We did the very best job we could to prepare for our senior years,” Hundsen told The Epoch Times.

  Her household lives on a few income streams, including Social Security, her husband’s pension, and an annuity that he withdraws a certain amount from each year. The issue is that the income has been less than they anticipated because a cost-of-living adjustment is not attached to the pension.

  Her husband, 67, retired last summer. But the inflationary economy has forced him to return to work as a janitor at church. Although he had intended to work only eight to 10 hours per week, he has doubled his hours to help cover the cost of his wife’s $600-per-month health insurance premium.

  The concept of “unretirement” has gained popularity this year. Like her husband, many older Americans are returning to the workforce or abandoning the concept of retirement altogether. According to data gathered by Bayard Advertising, a recruitment advertising agency, 64 percent of adults between 55 and 64 years of age returned to the workforce this past spring. About one-third of seniors think they will work through the age of 70 or never retire, a study by BlackRock discovered.

  While the extra money has been of tremendous help to the Hundsens, they receive some other perks from the church.

  “If they have an extra gallon of milk, he can bring it home, and then I make cheese with it,” she said.

  She also feels like she should be working, but employment prospects with her credentials are hard to find.

  Meanwhile, in response to growing food costs, Hundsen is making other changes, especially after seeing the steady rise in prices at the supermarket. She usually buys turkey meat, but it was $11.99 a pound at the deli, “so I didn’t buy it.” She is using her garden more often and putting the items in jars for canning.

  “I’m doing more of that than I have ever done before,” she said. “But there are limits to how many adjustments we can make.”

  When property taxes increase, gasoline prices go up, and other month-to-month fixed costs continually climb, everything start to add up.

  Doing Everything Right

  According to estimates from Bloomberg economists, inflation costs have added more than $5,000 a year to the typical family’s budget.

  “I feel kind of gypped because we thought we did everything right,” Hundsen said. “We weren’t extravagant. We didn’t buy too much. We drove our cars for 15 or 20 years. We didn’t do anything fancy. And, I don’t know, it’s kind of stunning.”

  “But I’m sure there are people who are much worse off than we are,” she added.

  According to Clara Del Villar, director of senior initiatives at FreedomWorks Foundation, 40 percent of Americans have no savings in their retirement.

  “So that means during these volatile times and during inflationary times, they do have to go back to work,” she told The Epoch Times. “Their skills may not be up to date. So, you do see them more in Walmart or other big box retail stores.”

  While Hundsen is hopeful conditions will get better, she is not optimistic about all the debt the U.S. government has saddled her two sons and their family with for years to come.

  “There’s no good solution. That will be painful,” Hundsen said. “It’s depressing to think, how will we ever dig ourselves out of that hole?”

  The national debt recently topped $31 trillion, while interest payments were approximately $400 billion last year. In other words, each taxpayer is on the hook for around $248,000 of the debt, and each adult is responsible for nearly $14,000 of the total interest paid.

  The Forgotten Americans

  Although their stories are all too common in this climate, O’Connor feels that retirees are the forgotten ones because their life challenges are not understood by the news commentators, editors, policymakers, and the social media crowd.

  “We have no spokesperson that understands the lack of control retirees are facing,” he said. “We have little margin for error, and how do you put a price tag on so many emotional issues?”

  

  “It is unfortunate we have media and political leaders that show little interest in our value,” O’Connor added.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 18:45

• "Monstrosities": New York Has Started Erecting Thousands Of Giant Gray 5G Towers
  “Monstrosities”: New York Has Started Erecting Thousands Of Giant Gray 5G Towers

  Look around, you can’t miss them.

  Giant ugly new 5G towers are starting to take over New York City and, despite attempting to look futuristic, many can’t help but notice just how much of an eyesore the additions to city streets have become. 

  The columns are gray and color and about 32 feet high, according to a new report by the New York Times, with some dwarfing three story buildings. And they’re popping up with little to no warning. 

  “We were shocked because we had no idea what it was,” one store owner in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn said. Marion Little, who owns Stripper Stain & Supplies, says that his customers and neighbors have asked about it. 

  He told the New York Times: “They’ve been emailing me, calling me weekends, Facebooking me, like, ‘Yo, what’s that?’ and I’m sitting there like, ‘I have no clue.’”

  

  “I wasn’t even quite sure what it was,” another resident told The Times about a tower popping up in his neighborhood. “The buses turn here. It’s going to be easy to miscalculate and hit the thing,” he said of the tower’s placement at a B26 bus stop.

  “Never have I heard one mention of residents asking for a tower to be placed where we live,” said Democratic liaison for the 57th Assembly District in Fort Greene Renee Collymore. “Before this tower came, I had fine service. What, a call dropped every now and then? So what. You keep going.”

  Another resident in Chinatown called the tower a “monstrosity,” asking “who wants to look at something like that?”

  Chelsea Formica, who lives on the Upper East Side, got a call from her husband about it while she was out: “He was like, ‘Hey, you know, they put something up outside of our window. I’m just laying here on the couch and it’s pretty big.’”

  When she returned home, she was in disbelief: “I was like, ‘Oh, my God,’ freaking out. It’s huge. It’s so big.”

  

  The towers are part of a deal that New York City has with CityBridge and LinkNYC, who is going to be installing 2,000 of the towers in the city over the next several years. Many of the towers are taking the place of where old payphones used to be. The towers have not been activated yet. 

  Other towers are going to be placed on top of traffic lights and street lamps, according to the report. 

  The Times notes that 90% of the new towers will be in “neighborhoods in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and above 96th Street in Manhattan”. They will provide residents with free access to digital calling and Wi-Fi. Carriers like AT&T and Verizon will also be able to use the towers to compliment existing infrastructure. 

  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 18:25

• China's Headlines Increase Risk Of Market Whipsaws
  China’s Headlines Increase Risk Of Market Whipsaws

  By Michael Msika, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

  There’s no way of knowing how long a full reopening of China could take, but with very few investors fully positioned for such an eventuality, a case is building for those sectors with most at stake such as miners and luxury.

  While China has denied speculation that it is set to shift away from its Covid-zero policy, some encouraging headlines out of the country have still fueled investor interest in industries that potentially have most to gain.

  The European mining sector, one of the most exposed to Chinese demand, is up 8.5% since the start of this month, outperforming the broader market. Luxury stocks have also been strong, with Kering and Swatch both showing advances of nearly 10%. What’s more, none of those industries trimmed any of their gains after China’s denial.

  According to JPMorgan strategists led by Mislav Matejka, sentiment toward the country has already hit “rock-bottom” and should improve from here. They are overweight miners, saying China’s economy is likely bottoming out and policy is set to become more stimulative. Resilient earnings, strong balance sheets and high dividends are other positives, they say.

  

  The mining sector gets about 27% of revenue from China, according to Goldman Sachs strategists, with Rio Tinto at 57%, Glencore at 40% and Anglo American at 26%. Luxury has about 26% exposure, they say.

  A basket of European stocks with the largest Chinese presence — including a bunch of miners and luxury shares, but also Volkswagen, BMW, HSBC, Infineon, ASML and Adidas — has underperformed the Stoxx 600 by nearly 10% this year, offering further catch-up potential on reopening chatter.

  

  Barclays strategists led by Emmanuel Cau are less optimistic and remain skeptical that any full reopening is near, pointing to a likely deterioration of the virus situation in winter, and health officials’ reiteration of China’s commitment to its Covid Zero policy. That said, Cau sees such a possibility as “a wild card into 2023” that investors aren’t yet positioned for.

  Chinese stocks halted a recent rally on Tuesday following a jump in Covid infections. The country reported 7,323 new local Covid cases for Monday, the highest daily number since April 30, according to data from the National Health Commission.

  On the longer term, Cau says China reopening would be positive for global growth, commodities, EU and German equities, cyclicals and value, with semiconductors, luxury, autos, chemicals and industrials the most sensitive. Positioning on cyclicals is currently very bearish, with Covid Zero “likely a key reason,” he says.

  

  Overall, a China reopening would be a boon for Europe, according to Goldman Sachs strategists, who say the Stoxx 600’s explicit sales exposure to China is about 8%, similar to that of the UK and Germany, and more than France, Italy or Spain.

  Still, any policy changes might be incremental before March and markets “may need to lower their expectations,” say Nomura economists including Ting Lu. Beijing is likely to stick to essential parts of Covid Zero for now, and a narrative shift to “living with Covid” may prove challenging, they say.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/08/2022 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• China Quietly Boost Oil Imports In Preparation For Reopening
  China Quietly Boost Oil Imports In Preparation For Reopening

  Alongside the neverending charade over when/if the Fed will pivot (it will, it just needs to really break the market and the economy first, at which point it will be too late to do anything), a similarly heated – and some would say even more important – discussion surrounds China’s decision to drop its doomed covid zero policy. Here, there has certainly been movement in recent days, with Chinese stocks soaring over the past week amid rampant speculation that Beijing is contemplating easing or rolling back its draconian covid zero restrictions.

  And even though both the local government and skeptical China watchers have repeatedly tried to shoot down any unfounded rumors (based on spurious screengrabs) that China is set to ease its anti-covid measures, a new report from Goldman’s commodity team published late on Monday (and available to pro subscribers), concludes that China has quietly if aggressively ramped up crude imports by more than 2.5m b/d in recent weeks in preparation for an eventual reopening, whose timing Goldman still views as most likely to take place some time in 2Q 2023.

  Here are some more details from the Goldman report tiled appropriately enough “China signals the beginning of the end for lockdowns”:

  • The oil market remains depleted of its main buffers: inventories and spare capacity. Concurrently, the risk of meaningful supply disruptions in Libya, Russia, Iraq, and Iran is currently elevated. As such, the risk distributions around our current oil forecasts are skewed squarely higher given spot demand continues to realize robustly.
  • Nevertheless, positioning in oil and broader commodities are barely above their 2Q20 lows, in part due to concerns on China oil demand – the final significant fundamental downside risk. We believe current lockdowns are subtracting as much as 0.9 mb/d from our Jan-22 expectations.
  • Our China economists believe recent headlines simply mark the start of an multi-month preparation period for reopening, and so have maintained their current base case of 2Q23 reopening, once the winter flu season has passed.

  

  • Nevertheless, any news around China reopening can drive rallies in oil, even if only muting uncertainty. To this end, China has already ramped up crude oil imports by more than 2.5 mb/d in recent weeks, in preparation for this event, as well as to replenish depleted inventory.

  

  Goldman also conducts an “Effective Lockdown Index”-based exercise for contextualizing what a more rapid reopening may mean for demand and prices.

  

  Not surprisingly, it finds that each 5% increase in the China ELI is worth c.0.2 mb/d of oil demand…

  

  … and that a bull-case early reopening would pose $6/bbl upside risk to the bank’s current $110 Brent 2023 forecasts, while a less-likely full international reopening would amount to almost $15/bbl.

  On the other hand, maintenance of the current status quo for restrictions would instead amount to c.$12/bbl of downside to next year’s forecasts. Consistent with this, the bank also finds the oil market-implied increase in the probability of reopening next year increased by 25% last week.

  Lastly, an additional macro risk to commodity prices this year has been the dollar, which has endured one of the sharpest  appreciations in history.

  

  Goldman expects the USD TWI to depreciate by up to 3% as China reopens, as Asian economies benefit, and broader markets trade more ‘risk-on’. This could support oil prices an additional $3/bbl.

  Much more in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:55

• Victor Davis Hanson: The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon
  Victor Davis Hanson: The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

  Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their radical ideology that was finally enacted and wrecked the country…

  

  Over the last few months the four icons of the Democratic Party—Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi—have hit the campaign trail. 

  They’ve weighed in on everything from “right-wing violence” and “election denialists” to the now tired “un-American” semi-fascist MAGA voter—and had nothing much to say about inflation, the border, crime, energy, or the Afghanistan debacle. In this, they remind us just how impoverished and calcified is this left-wing pantheon. 

  So why should we take anything they say seriously, given their own records—and especially given their mastery of projecting their own shortcomings upon others as some sort of private exculpation or preemptive political strategy?

  Still Hopin’ and Changin’? 

  Barack Obama this past week has assumed the role of surrogate president. He is storming the country, while Joe Biden mopes at home or visits shrinking blue enclaves so he can claim post facto, “At least I was out there stumping.” 

  Over the last six years, we have become accustomed to Obama’s periodic getaways from one of his three estates. It is always the same. From time to time, he reenters politics to remind us that he did not just cash in on his presidency to become a multi-millionaire. Instead, he is still the Chicago “community activist” of his youth. And so, Obama will not be overshadowed by the Biden crew that is enacting all the crazy things he as president had warned were a bit much even for him. 

  At the funeral of the late John Lewis, Obama turned his eulogy into a political rant. He weighed in on the “racist” filibuster, the “Jim Crow relic” that he desperately sought in vain to use to stop the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito. 

  At campaign stops, he deplores “divisions” that he, more than any modern figure, helped create. The entire left-wing vocabulary of disparagement for the white lower-working classes (e.g., deplorables, dregs, chumps, irredeemables, etc.) got its start with Obama’s putdown of Pennsylvania voters who rejected him in the 2008 primaries as “clingers.” 

  In interviews, Obama suddenly now blasts harsh rhetoric—this from the wannabe tough guy who stole the “The Untouchables” line about bringing a knife to a gun fight. Well before crazy Maxine Waters’ calls to arms, Obama advised his supporters “get in their faces.”

  Still, on the campaign trail, Obama appears not so much animated as stale. It is as if he has been suddenly stirred from a long coma that commenced in 2008. It’s the same old, same old—sleeves rolled up. He still resorts to the scripted outbursts of mock anger. And the nerdy prep school graduate still amateurishly modulates his patois—now policy wonk, now breaking into the Southern African-American pastor accent when an audience needs more preachy authenticity. 

  He still tries to rev up his crowds with the familiar attacks: Republican demons will cut Social Security, the MAGA semi-fascists are captives of Donald Trump (as if the Democrats have not ceded their souls to woke hysterics), the Republican fanatics will all but kill women by denying abortions, and extremists unlike himself are dividing the country. 

  On and on, Obama shouts about social justice. And then he wraps up and must decide to which of his mansions he will fly home (via private jet)—Kalorama, Martha’s Vineyard, Hyde Park, or soon the Waimanalo estate.

  Obama offers no solutions much less hints at his own culpability in his sermons. There is nothing about the open border he helped birth. Nothing about Biden’s failed energy policies now bankrupting the middle class that were simply a reification of his energy secretary Steven Chu’s perverse wishes for European-priced gas (“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”). 

  There is nothing about Obama’s old boasts about shutting down coal plants and skyrocketing electricity (“Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”). 

  Nothing is said about the Skip Gates psychodrama and his blanket stereotyped attack on police, the tossing of his own grandmother under the racial bus, the Trayvon Martin racial editorialization, the Ferguson mythologies, and all his efforts to create a binary nation of oppressors and oppressed, as Obama himself determined who is the victim, who the victimizer.

  

  Drew Angerer/Getty Images

  The Role Model Pelosi

  After the terrible attack on her husband, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s colleagues are rightly calling for an end to extremist rhetoric. If we are to follow the Democratic clarion call, what might Pelosi herself do to help us to lower the temperature?

  Here are a few modest suggestions. 

  Contrary to press reports, conservatives deplored the attack on Paul Pelosi. They want his attacker behind bars with no bail until his trial date. And if convicted they wish him to serve a long sentence before parole is even considered. Let us dish out a proper punishment to David DePape; one that can serve as a model to all such thugs who do his kind of devilish work daily against the innocent and weak—but unlike him, are usually exempt from punishment.

  Recall that DePape should never have been in the United States. He is an illegal alien who violated his visa and should have had a warrant out for deportation, especially given his prior history of lawlessness. Would that the illegal alien who murdered innocent San Franciscan Kate Steinle had been subject to the likely punishment that now is awaiting DePape.

  So yes, we all must lower the temperature. As speaker of the House, Pelosi can do her part in quieting passions, given half the country are her fellow Americans who do not live in the darkness of lies. She might ask Joe Biden to quit calling them semi-fascists and un-American. 

  Pelosi herself should never again tear up her copy of the state of the union address on national television. In that congressional forum she was attacking the presidency, not just Donald Trump. Half the voters feel as strongly about Joe Biden as she does about Donald Trump. If, as House speaker, Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) were to follow Pelosi’s precedent and rip up the next Biden State of the Union, would Pelosi find that continuation of her precedent conducive to healing the nation’s wounds?

  Pelosi herself should not use any more violent imagery in expressing her anger at a president of the opposite party, much less threaten to use physical violence. 

  When she was asked to clarify what she meant in screaming about Trump (“I hope he comes. I want to punch him out. . . . I’ve been waiting for this . . . I’m going to punch him out, and I’m going to go to jail, and I’m going to be happy.”), she scoffed that she could not follow up on her threat only because Trump would never come to Congress to give her the opportunity. 

  Whatever one thinks of Trump, Pelosi only lowers the bar when she boasts about feloniously striking a president of the United States. 

  That Joe Biden had boasted twice about taking Trump behind the gym to beat him up, and others such as actor Robert DeNiro have echoed such threats (“I’d like to punch him in the face”) was no excuse for her reckless talk. After 2016 it was hard to calibrate all the ways the leftists had shouted ways of slaying Donald Trump—by stabbing, shooting, incineration, or decapitation.

  Pelosi should never again delay legislation aimed at protecting Supreme Court justices from the sort of violence that occurred when Justice Brett Kavanaugh was run out of a restaurant, or anti-abortion protesters swarmed his home, or a would-be assassin showed up at his house. 

  Why was Pelosi so fearful about expediting such added security? Would prompt action have empowered the factual narrative that the chief threat to Supreme Court justices now arises from radical abortion protestors?

  Pelosi might have reminded Democrats to tone down their rhetoric after the near-fatal shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.). After all, the shooter was a highly political, left-wing activist and former Bernie Sanders’ volunteer. But she did no such thing.

  She could have privately reprimanded her own daughter that it was not a funny thing to cheer on the violent attack against Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who suffered broken ribs, a collapsed lung, pneumonia, and had to undergo pulmonary surgery. 

  When the younger Pelosi used her family name to gain traction by tweeting “Rand Paul’s neighbor was right,” (if she had used her married last name would anyone have read it?), it sent the message that there was a sort of happiness on the Left that a political opponent had been a target of violence. The Left is furious at Donald Trump, Jr. for crudely mocking the Pelosi assault, but he unfortunately followed a precedent long set by others.

  

  Kyle Mazza/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

  She’s Back!

  Hillary Clinton is occasionally asked to weigh in on the midterm campaigns, but never in a swing state or hotly contested race. Her presence, like that of Joe Biden’s, would immediately lose the endorser a critical 1-2 points. 

  Clinton recently warned that the 2024 election likely will be illegitimate due to Republican instigated “voter fraud.” 

  Her outburst can be translated into something like, “The midterm left-wing wipeout may be just a preliminary to a 2024 Democratic disaster.” Hillary preempted Biden who, in his third and latest McCarthyite speech, warned that the “Mega Maga” people are planning devilry years in advance and so, like Hillary, he can now cast doubt on the legitimacy of future elections the Democrats will lose. 

  In truth, no one has done more in the last century to impugn the integrity of U.S. elections than Hillary Clinton. She has questioned the 2016, 2020, and 2024 elections, on the theory that any election Democrats might lose is an “attack on democracy.” 

  Her sins go way beyond feloniously destroying subpoenaed emails and devices or leveraging her New York senatorial run by Bill Clinton’s presidential pardons or using her office to enrich her family’s foundation as in the case of Uranium One. 

  When we return to sane times, historians will assess her 2016 efforts to destroy her opponent, his transition, and his presidency as the greatest election scandal in modern memory. She used three paywalls to hide her efforts to hire foreign national Christopher Steele (who was simultaneously working with the FBI). 

  On spec, she used her own contacts such as Charles Dolan to fabricate a phony hit dossier against her opponent and then to seed it within the media and the Obama bureaucracy to smear Trump.

  Not content with that failed and likely illegal effort, she then declared the duly elected president illegitimate and the 2016 election all but stolen. 

  Her Hollywood friends cut videos begging electors to renounce their constitutional duties, ignore their state tallies, and vote instead for Hillary. Had they gotten their way, the entire federal election system as we know it would have been destroyed.

  Then her surrogate, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, sued to overturn the election. Clinton bragged of joining #TheResistance in mock-heroic terms. As an arch-denialist, she urged Joe Biden under no circumstances to concede to Trump if he lost the 2020 vote. 

  And now she warns us of others who might emulate her own denialism? 

  What does Hillary fear in 2024? That a Trump or DeSantis will hire a Steele-like fraud to fabricate Democrat-Chinese collusion and smear a Democrat nominee? That the loser will not concede as she once urged, or the winner is illegitimate as she once insisted?

  Good Old Joe Is Just Old Joe

  Instead of a list of supposed communists, Joe Biden apparently has a roster of “election denialists” who he says are running for Senate and Congress and whom he fears will win next Tuesday. And he sets the example for others like House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—himself a 2004-05 election denialist—who now smears his opponents as Nazis who, he fears, by democratically voting Democrats out of office nationwide will “destroy democracy.” 

  What will Biden not lie about? The death of his son, the circumstances in which his first wife died in a car wreck, the fantasy congressional vote on his student-loan forgiveness scheme? The number of states (Joe says, 54, Obama used to swear there are 57)? The very century we are now in? Where he went to college? 

  Joe, our own Walter Mitty, has variously been a semi-truck driver, an arrested South-African street protestor against apartheid, a surrogate Puerto-Rican child, a black college enrollee, a Ciceronian populist orator, a coal miner’s scion, an honors student, a blue-chip collegiate athlete, a defender against inner-city Corn Poppers, and absolutely ignorant about the Biden family syndicate.

  Recall that a non compos mentis Biden was nominated solely as the thin veneer to a hard Left agenda whose avatars were unelectable. Biden was to feign being the colorless, stand-in “moderate” who would “unify” the fractured country, tone down the Trump rhetoric, and let the Trump record sort of proceed on autopilot. 

  Then when he played out that part and won, the leftist minders in this Faustian bargain took over to push through, on a one-vote senatorial margin, the most radical left-wing agenda in U.S. history. 

  Biden, however, took his role too seriously. He reverted to the mean-spirited, pre-senile blowhard Joe—the obnoxious messenger thus now making the noxious message even more toxic. 

  A retiring, silenced, good old Joe from Scranton was the script, not a doddering, incoherent, ”get off my lawn” old man shouting for the need of socialist policies that were the exact opposite of his previously supposed convictions. 

  The Left got their Biden. And yes, he turned over the reins of government to them. And yes, they got their neo-socialism for two years. And yes, they are destroying America as we knew it. But in doing this, the people had the rare occasion to see fully and experience the nihilist Left. And they are now about to express their loathing for what the Left has wrought. 

  The problem with the ossified Democratic Pantheon is that they are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their own radical ideology over the past two years that was finally enacted and wrecked the country. And all the shrieks about abortion, semi-fascists, and democracy dying cannot put back together what they shattered.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:45

• Cryptos Plunge As FTX-Binance Battle Escalates
  Cryptos Plunge As FTX-Binance Battle Escalates

  Update (1105ET): The price of FTX Token FTT just crashed over 20% after holding support at $22 since the CEO of Alameda Research (FTX hedge fund) offered to buy all Binance’s FTT holdings at that level.

  Earlier this evening, Binance founder CZ responded with a tweet that he ‘will let the market decide’…

  I didn’t say that. It was a question, not a commitment. I think we will stay in the free market.

  We still hold LUNA (now LUNC) today. 😂

  — CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) November 7, 2022

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

  And that triggered aggressive selling in FTT…

  

  This is triggering selling pressure across much of the crypto space as FTX liquidity/contagion fears spread as a bank-run of sorts occurs on assets sitting on the FTX platform.

  Get your funds out of FTX. This is financial advice.

  — Ran Neuner (@cryptomanran) November 6, 2022

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

  Solana is being hammered lower since it is part of FTX’s reserves…

  And as @DylanLeClair_ notes, FTX acts like an emerging market central bank and is selling its reserves to shore up its bad FTT currency.

  In this case, it reserve is Solana. pic.twitter.com/1PhkdO16AC

  — Jim Bianco biancoresearch.eth (@biancoresearch) November 8, 2022

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

  As we detailed below, Bankman-Fried denied CZ’s allegations: “A competitor is trying to go after us with false rumors,… FTX is fine. Assets are fine.”

  “FTX has enough to cover all client holdings.

  We don’t invest client assets (even in treasuries).

  We have been processing all withdrawals, and will continue to be.”

  Bitcoin puked below $20,000 on the back of the moves…

  

  Whether strategic or not, FTX is one of Binance’s largest competitors and in just one day, those comments and Binance’s sale of FTT holdings have started a chain of second and third order effects.

  *  *  *

  As we detailed earlier, new battle of the billionaires is brewing (if not boiling over) among the current kings of crypto as tensions between Binance founder  Zhao “CZ” Changpeng and FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried have escalated a war of words on Twitter into actions over CZ’s claims that FTX’s hedge fund’s asset base may not be all it’s cracked up to be.

  

  The drama began early Sunday morning when FTX’s FTT token suddenly plunged as rumors surfaced that a giant whale with 23 million FTT, probably Binance, might be dumping its tokens.

  

  FTT trade volume surged to its highest level in more than a year amid the wave of selling pressure…

  

  Shortly after that initial plunge, Zhao said his company would liquidate its entire FTT holdings in the coming months, on fears that the token might collapse in the same manner as Terra (LUNA) in May 2021.

  Liquidating our FTT is just post-exit risk management, learning from LUNA. We gave support before, but we won’t pretend to make love after divorce. We are not against anyone. But we won’t support people who lobby against other industry players behind their backs. Onwards.

  — CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) November 6, 2022

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

  Binance was an early investor in FTX.

  Zhao referenced “recent revelations that have came to light,” but did not elaborate publicly.

  As part of Binance’s exit from FTX equity last year, Binance received roughly $2.1 billion USD equivalent in cash (BUSD and FTT). Due to recent revelations that have came to light, we have decided to liquidate any remaining FTT on our books. 1/4

  — CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) November 6, 2022

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

  However, his actions come shortly after a Nov 2nd article on CoinDesk that said much the balance sheet of Bankman-Fried’s trading house Alameda Research is comprised of the FTT token.

  Cointelegraph reports that, according to the CoinDesk report, Alameda Research had $14.6 billion on its balance sheet as of June 30, with FTT being the largest holding at $5.8 billion, making up 88% of its net equity. In addition, the firm held $1.2 billion in Solana, $3.37 billion in unidentified cryptocurrency, $2 billion in “equity securities” and other assets.

  On the other hand, Alameda Research reportedly had liabilities worth $8 billion, including $2.2 billion worth of loans collateralized by FTT.

  That, coupled with the firm’s alleged exposure to illiquid altcoins, prompted some analysts to predict its insolvency in the future. 

  “Alameda will never be able to cash in a significant portion of FTT to pay back its debts,” wrote Mike Burgersburg, an independent market analyst, for the Dirty Bubble Media Substack, noting:

  “There are few buyers, and the largest buyer appears to be the very company which Alameda is most closely tied to […] the fair market value of their FTT in the event of large sales would rapidly approach $0.”

  Bankman-Fried responded in a brief tweet thread, saying: “A competitor is trying to go after us with false rumors,… FTX is fine. Assets are fine.”

  1) A competitor is trying to go after us with false rumors.

  FTX is fine. Assets are fine.

  Details:

  — SBF (@SBF_FTX) November 7, 2022

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

  He went on to note that:

  “FTX has enough to cover all client holdings.

  We don’t invest client assets (even in treasuries).

  We have been processing all withdrawals, and will continue to be.

  It’s heavily regulated, even when that slows us down.  We have GAAP audits, with > $1b excess cash.  We have a long history of safeguarding client assets, and that remains true today.

  Concluding with an ‘oilve branch’ perhaps:

  “I’d love it, @cz_binance, if we could work together for the ecosystem.”

  Notably, as Decrypt reports, Zhao’s actions (and the Alameda leaks) follow weeks of criticism directed at FTX’s founder and Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried for regulatory proposals he put forth in a blog post which recommended restrictions regarding DeFi. He has since committed to revising his regulatory position.

  While it’s fun to watch billionaire whiz-kids slinging mud at each other, the collateral damage (quite literallY) could be significant for the rest of the crypto universe.

  “Overall, FTT is a relatively illiquid token on open markets, so Binance’s plans to liquidate all FTT tokens they hold is quite a significant market event,”  Clara Medalie, head of research at analytics firm Kaiko, said.

  “Alameda will likely dedicate considerable resources to ensure the price of FTT doesn’t crash.”

  In fact, Alameda’s CEO tweeted that her trading firm’s financial condition is stronger than what was reflected by the balance sheet CoinDesk wrote about. She also offered, in a reply to the Binance CEO’s post, to buy his firm’s FTT token holdings for $22 each.

  @cz_binance if you’re looking to minimize the market impact on your FTT sales, Alameda will happily buy it all from you today at $22!

  — Caroline (@carolinecapital) November 6, 2022

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

  Nothing to worry about at all…

  In light of all the Binance vs FTX/Alameda rumors, a quick look at the latter’s “management team”https://t.co/8m1O5aBgyH

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 7, 2022

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

  Nevertheless, the FTX outflows continue…

  Quite the capital flight from FTX amidst Alameda worries. pic.twitter.com/kd8U6HDG0s

  — Dylan LeClair 🟠 (@DylanLeClair_) November 7, 2022

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

  Overall, as Kaiko concludes, it is clear that FTT market makers are working overtime to maintain the price of FTT, which is down 3% over the past day along with most other cryptocurrencies. Despite a massive surge in selling pressure, there is barely a dent in market depth and only a slight increase in price slippage. Ultimately it may be in all parties’ best interest to engage in an OTC transaction as suggested by Caroline Ellison to limit price impacts, especially considering Binance, FTX, and Alameda all risk large losses should FTTs price fall significantly.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:25

• Trump Says "Big Announcement" Coming On Nov. 15 Amid Expectations Of Presidential Bid
  Trump Says “Big Announcement” Coming On Nov. 15 Amid Expectations Of Presidential Bid

  Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

  Former President Donald Trump teased confirmation of his anticipated 2024 president bid to supporters on Monday, revealing he will make a “big announcement” on Nov. 15.

  

  Trump was in Dayton, Ohio, on Nov. 7, holding a campaign rally for local Republican candidates, particularly J.D. Vance who is seeking the state’s Senate seat. He told supporters that the midterms are a “country-saving election.”

  “Two years ago, we were a great nation and we will be a great nation again,” Trump said.

  “The first step to saving America is winning an epic victory for Republicans tomorrow.”

  Near the end of the rally, Trump hinted that he will seek another bid for the White House in 2024.

  “I’m going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15, at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida,” Trump said, without elaborating.

  He added, “We want nothing to detract from the importance of tomorrow.

  BREAKING: President Donald J. Trump “I’m going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15th at Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, FL.” pic.twitter.com/EvOn45Hq41

  — RSBN 🇺🇸 (@RSBNetwork) November 8, 2022

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

  Trump has been hinting that he will make another run for president for months.

  At an Iowa rally on Nov. 3, Trump dropped a strong hint that he would seek reelection.

  “And now, in order to make to make our country successful, and safe, and glorious, I will very, very, very, probably do it again, okay?” Trump said. “Very, very, very probably.”

  The crowd at the rally cheered in response, erupting in chants of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”

  “That’s nice, well, get ready, that’s all I’m telling you, very soon,” Trump said. “Get ready.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:20

• Are Republicans More Conservative Than Democrats Are Liberal?
  Are Republicans More Conservative Than Democrats Are Liberal?

  The 2022 midterm election is once again characterized by extreme polarization between the parties. As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, despite moderate positions gaining slightly this year, an annual survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs shows that moderates are in the minority in both parties the United States.

  In July, 42 percent of self-described Democrats said they were moderates or conservatives, opposite 58 percent who considered themselves liberals. The gap is even bigger in the Republican Party, where 77 percent identified as conservatives and only 23 percent said of themselves that they were moderates or liberals. According to this survey, this makes Republicans in fact a whole lot more conservative than Democrats are liberal.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  A height of polarization was reached last year, when 80 percent of Republicans said they were conservatives and the number of liberal Democrats rose to 60 percent. Diving deeper into the data shows that 13 percent of Republicans described themselves as “extremely conservative” in 2022 as opposed to 9 percent of Democrats who considered themselves “extremely liberal”.

  However, considering all respondents across both parties, self-described moderates are the biggest group in the U.S. at 36 percent, followed very closely by 35 percent of conservatives.

  Time will tell if the upcoming election will mirror voter preferences and favor conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats over of middle-of-the road winners. According to FiveThirtyEight, 70 percent of GOP candidates who have said they believed the 2020 elected was rigged are expected or likely to win their races, compared to other Republicans whose odds were put at only 37 percent by the website. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:00

• FBI Announces "Enhanced" Firearm Background Checks For Young Adults To Start Next Week
  FBI Announces “Enhanced” Firearm Background Checks For Young Adults To Start Next Week

  Submitted by Gun Owners for America.,

  The FBI, through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has announced that a mandatory wait period for 18–20-year-old legal adults, as enacted by the gun control known as Cornyn-Murphy or the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, will go into effect November 14, 2022.

  

  Gun Owners of America reported on this issue in October 2022, when the FBI launched their Enhanced Background Checks for 18–20-year-olds in the state of Maine.

  Those under the age of 21 will receive an initial delay that could last about two weeks. This delay is supposedly to allow the FBI to contact local law enforcement and check with state databases to enhance the background check system’s effectiveness. This is nothing but a way to make it more difficult for young adults to own firearms. It’s a mandatory wait period that anti-gunners have now added to a background check system that is broken well beyond repair.

  Parents might not want their children to receive mental healthcare as minors, if it might create an administrative record resulting in the loss or delay of their child’s constitutional rights when they turn 18. Those 17 and under who hunt, play shooting sports, or who wish to own firearms for self-defense as adults may choose to avoid essential mental healthcare in order to retain their right to own and operate firearms. If someone under 18 wants to legally buy a hunting shotgun or a target rifle on their 18th birthday, they may use the consequences of the law as an excuse to not get the mental health care they need. 

  The “enhanced background check” is in fact a mandatory delay or wait period on the purchasing of a firearm for those under 21 years old. Mandatory waiting periods put Americans’ constitutional rights on hold when they may be in the middle of a dangerous situation, whether that be a threat from someone they know, a dangerous period of rioting and looting, or any number of scenarios. Further, allowing local law enforcement tips and hearsay to result in the denial of a constitutional right would truly constitute an arbitrary and unconstitutional gun ban.

  The “enhanced background checks” will include “checks with state databases and local law enforcement.” Since Congress admits that such an enhancement is truly necessary for one category of adults, then will they soon find themselves answering why these delays and “enhancements” do not apply to all other law-abiding people? Further, allowing local law enforcement tips and hearsay to result in the denial of a constitutional right will truly constitute an arbitrary and unconstitutional gun ban.  

  For an example on how firearm purchase delays can be deadly, look no further than the case of Carol Browne of New Jersey. Carol Browne was stabbed to death by a former boyfriend. She had applied for a permit to purchase a pistol on April 21st, 2015, and was murdered on June 3rd, 43 days later, still waiting for approval. New Jersey State law requires that a Firearms Purchaser ID card be issued within 30 days, but often the wait is much longer. Carol’s killer didn’t need a gun, but Carol sure did. And she could still be alive today if arrogant officials had not denied her the right to protect herself.

  Hot take 👏

  If 18-20 year-olds can be trusted to have weapons in the military, they should be able to buy those same weapons as civilians. The Second Amendment is an inherent right—not one to be borrowed from the government. pic.twitter.com/8KjQJQVqUq

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) November 7, 2022

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

  * * *

  We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 22:40

• The Trojan Horse Presidency
  The Trojan Horse Presidency

  Authored by Dmitri Orlov,

  The US midterm elections are nigh and, as I happen to be a good and patriotic Russian national, it behooves me to meddle in them. Election-meddling is an example of Russia’s soft power, which is much nicer than Russia’s hard power, so you should be glad that it’s still on offer.

  I am on record saying that “The United States is not a democracy and it doesn’t matter who is president” multiple times in multiple places, and I stand by that statement, which I believe to be a provable statement of fact. Statistics show that there is zero correlation between public preferences and public policy decisions but a strong correlation between business lobby group preferences and pubic policy decisions. Thus the US is not a democracy (rule by the people) but an oligopoly (rule by business groups). From this it follows that it doesn’t matter who is president because both parties of the Democrat-Republican duopoly are owned by the same set of business groups.

  And so it doesn’t matter who is president and your vote means nothing? Granted; but then does it matter WHETHER there is a president? Methinks, it does!

  What if the president is an organo-servo-robot, a senile puppet, backed up by a vice president specifically chosen for being even more feeble-minded? This is an excellent ploy for putting in power an extremist group that is only tangentially related to the usual business lobbies that determine what gets done in Washington. Don’t think of some vast and amorphous “deep state”: executing such a power grab requires tight coordination, some amount of secrecy or, at least, discretion, and, of course, vast sums of money. Think instead of a singularly well-endowed evil oligarch and his multiple minions whom he has carefully groomed and insinuated into positions of power.

  

  The overall goal of such an extremist group may well go far beyond the usual interests of business lobbies, such as preserving shareholder equity, a wider spot at the federal subsidy trough, knocking down transnational barriers to trade and movement of capital, lower business taxes and so on. These zealots may well have an altogether different view of the future in mind, in which a tiny group of ultra-rich owns everything while the rest of us own nothing but, being made tame and docile through all sorts of medical and technical manipulation, feel happy about this state of affairs… like so many animals in a menagerie… not too many animals, mind you: drastic population reduction is likely a key goal of theirs.

  What might the overall goals of this organization be? It’s not exactly a secret. Here’s a sample, taken from the “Goals 2030” document from the 2018 conference at the Complexity Institute in Santa Fe:

  • No private or personal property.

  • Guaranteed basic income for all who accept this “new normal.”

  • Cash free society; digital money (as a method of social control).

  • Hydrocarbon ratings for states and companies.

  • Tight social controls (via drones, facial recognition, etc.)

  • Rationing of all consumption, including energy and natural resources.

  • Patents on all seed stocks and restrictions on food production for personal use.

  • Almost total elimination of livestock. The remaining population to be fed a vegetarian diet augmented with artificial protein, insects, etc.

  • Population reduction through sterilization and birth control.

  • Enforced vaccination.

  • Ban on alternative forms of medicine.

  • Erasure of sexual (male/female) distinctions.

  • Child sterilization and castration (chemical and/or surgical).

  Some people may recognize in this list various items that have been on offer for some time at the Davos conference and other venues. That famously went nowhere when the perennial Davos maître d’, a Mr. Klaus, if memory serves, teleconferenced in Putin and Xi to ask them whether they’d like to go along with such a plan. The two answered that, no, they have plans of their own that serve the needs of their people. This threw a large wrench into the works.

  The plan (I am guessing) was to use the senile grandpa and his idiot sidekick as a Trojan horse to infest the White House, then use that position to destroy America, and then use America’s rotting corpse as a staging area for launching similar attacks worldwide. But if Putin and Xi, and with them 80% of the world, are having none of it, then what? Fight a war against Russia and China in tandem, and lose it? What then?

  And so they now wait for the inevitable. Russia is done chewing through the original Ukrainian military and its Soviet-era weaponry stockpile and is now halfway through chewing through any remaining Ukrainian raw recruits (old men and children, essentially), plus NATO mercenaries and NATO’s weaponry stockpile, all without breaking a sweat. It is now gradually disabling all public works throughout the Ukrainian territory, much of that work being done using a low-budget artificially intelligent flying chainsaw called Geranium 2. (We Russians like names like that. A 152mm cannon is called Hyacinth B; a 240mm self-propelled mortar is called 2S4 Tulip. Would you like to smell our flowers?)

  The lack of electricity, heat or running water gives the remaining half of the Ukrainian population a very good reason to pack their suitcases and head West. Those 15-20 million additional ornery Ukrainians demanding to be fed and housed will be sure to do wonders for Western morale. This will come at a time when Western restrictions on the import of Russian energy will begin to seriously bite. People won’t be pleased.

  Do you think the not even particularly shadowy oligarch whose minions who are currently running amok in the White House have a plan for dealing with the horrible mess they have created? No, they do not. They are freaking out. Worse yet, they are losing narrative control. The Biden presidency no longer looks real; it looks like what it actually is: a hoax. And if he isn’t real, then who are the cockroaches that have been running amok in the White House these past two years?

  At this point, only a very silly person might think that Biden, who can barely read an entire sentence from a teleprompter without stumbling at least once, keeps shaking hands with ghosts, calling out to dead people in the audience, needs multiple tries to correctly name the country on which he has spent $20 billion, was able to review, never mind write, those 100 presidential orders he has signed, 19 of them during his first week in office.

  Then who did write them and why? Wouldn’t you like to find out? I can’t tell you how to vote, but I can tell you this: in some states (not all) there is a specific way you can vote to make it more likely that we will find out who these cockroaches are. Flushing them out of their hiding places in positions of power and stepping on them would come next.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 22:00

• US Wants Official Of Ukrainian Descent As Next NATO Chief
  US Wants Official Of Ukrainian Descent As Next NATO Chief

  A person of Ukrainian descent to fill NATO’s top post? That’s what a recent New York Times report suggested could happen as it detailed “the race is on” to select NATO’s next Secretary General.

  “While the officials cautioned that these are early days, and very often the names that surface first do not survive the bargaining among NATO’s 30 members, they said one prime candidate has surfaced in Washington: Chrystia Freeland, 54, the Canadian-Ukrainian deputy prime minister and finance minister of Canada,” NY Times wrote. 

  

  Freeland has long been seen as Ukraine’s top ally within Canadian political leadership. The Times called her a “prime candidate” in the eyes of Washington insiders to replace NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

  The report described further, “Ms. Freeland, 54, a former journalist (who is married to a reporter for The New York Times), has also been Canada’s foreign minister.” And listed that “Her advantages are considerable: she speaks English, French, Italian, Ukrainian and Russian; she has run complicated ministries; she is good at news conferences and other public appearances; and she would be the first woman and first Canadian ever to run NATO.”

  Russian state media over the last few days has highlighted Freeland’s candidacy for the top NATO spot, strongly hinting that Moscow would see someone of Ukrainian descendancy in the position as somewhat of an intentional and highly symbolic provocation.

  Freeland’s maternal grandparents emigrated from Ukraine to Alberta, Canada in 1939 – though her mother later returned to the family’s homeland and was a well-known figure within the Ukrainian independence movement which sought to undermine Soviet power there.

  Chrystia Freeland is a Ukrainian Canadian so if she became head of NATO, it would be well received by Ukraine. https://t.co/lkDafTR8On

  — Isobel Koshiw (@IKoshiw) November 5, 2022

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

  Freeland herself has long been on a Kremlin blacklist, as the Washington D.C.-based think tank Wilson Center describes in a backgrounder: 

  Despite Freeland’s well established international reputation, in 2014 the Alberta-born politician found herself added to the Kremlin’s list of unwelcome visitors. Moscow has always exercised its gatekeeping abilities through territorial and border control, but how did a Canadian civil servant come to be banned from entering Russia?

  The 2014 no-entry list was generated in response to sanctions imposed by both Canada and the United States after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea. Although the list possessed symbolic implications, reminding the international community of Russia’s willingness to respond and reject the West, Freeland’s name is of particular distinction. Her presence on that list was intentional– a decision rooted deeply in Freeland’s family history and her recent past. 

  The Wilson Center profile also included…

  As an undergraduate at Harvard University, Freeland spent a semester abroad in Ukraine, advocating for political and social reform under the Soviet puppet state. As a pro-democracy agitator from 1988-1989, Freeland posed an acute threat to Soviet political order, a threat noted by the KGB. 

  In the wake of the February Russian invasion, Freeland has remained a staunch supporter of Ukraine, and also as a hawk she’s consistently pushed back against Canadian politicians and Western officials who have dared suggested any level of compromise or territorial concessions with Russia for the sake of ceasefire.

  On this front, The New York Times emphasizes, “Where any of the candidates come down on support for Ukraine in the war against Russia will be a critical factor.”

  

  However, the report further notes that it’s still early in the selection process, with others like Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas or president of Slovakia Zuzana Caputova as other top contenders. Stoltenberg’s term was recently extended to last till the end of September 2023. NYT notes that “Both Washington and Brussels want a conclusion before the next American presidential election in November 2024.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:40

• LATimes Op-Ed Says Press "Failing Americans' By Treating Both Parties Equally
  LATimes Op-Ed Says Press “Failing Americans’ By Treating Both Parties Equally

  Authored by Eric Utter via American Thinker,

  History professor Robert S. McElvaine recently wrote an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times in which he stated that journalists are “failing Americans” by insisting on treating both political parties equally.  Yes, as we know, there is nothing more dangerous to a representative republic than a free and objective press.

  

  McElvaine claimed that the United States is in “the final stages of the most critical election for the survival of the American experiment since 1864” and added that journalists bear responsibility for protecting America’s future from “right-wing” extremists.

  He wrote: “America’s future hangs on the defeat of the right-wing extremist authoritarians who have seized the name of Lincoln’s party.  If we lose, news corporations and journalists with a misplaced sense of ‘balance,’ ‘neutrality’ and ‘nonpartisanship’ will bear a considerable share of the blame.”  Down with balance, neutrality, and nonpartisanship!  Screw objectivity!  To hell with equal treatment, justice, fairness, equality, and equity when it comes to “journalists'” duty to the people!  The people don’t know how to think, so the media must tell them what to think…or democracy is doomed!  Mass indoctrination is the last, best hope for democracy!

  McElvaine further ostracized reporters for not adequately attacking conservatives for pushing ideas that are “increasingly reminiscent” of Hitler’s rise to power.  Um, “professor,” if anyone is implicitly threatening to round political opponents up and send them to prison or concentration/labor/re-education camps, it’s far left Democrats.  In fact, they’ve already done that.

  Yet the Nutty Professor soldiered on, saying: “In the final days of this election season, Americans must recognize that the existential struggle we are engaged in now is not just a game.  If the enemies of democracy prevail and take control of either house of Congress in the midterms, there will be no ‘wait till next year.’  They would probably refuse to accept the election of a Democratic president in 2024.  The game would be over, if not permanently, at least for many years.”  Projection!  Democrats refused to accept the election of a Republican president in 2000 and in 2016.

  Bizarrely, McElvaine’s op-ed appeared shortly after a study by the Media Research Center found that Republicans overwhelmingly received more negative coverage from the press than Democrat candidates did in the months leading up to the midterm elections.

  Democrats have spent much of the past few weeks telling us all that democracy will die unless we vote as they tell us to.  

  Oddly, they suddenly now believe there are objective truths.  Two of them, in fact.  One, that MAGA Republicans are evil.  And two, that the rest of us are too stupid to realize this if the news media’s reports are unbiased.

  We get to pick “our truth” when it comes to, say, what sex or gender we claim to be.  But not if we believe it’s problematic to allow an experimental mRNA vaccine/gene therapy into our body — or if we believe that voting for Republicans is in the best interest of ourselves and our nation.  I mean, the “my truth” thing can go only so far, right? 

  Anybody else see a problem with this?  McElvaine’s op-ed is advocating for outright discrimination against one of the two major political parties — including its adherents, who constitute nearly half of the electorate — in the interest of democracy!

  The vast majority of so-called journalists, like the vast majority of so-called professors, are “failing Americans” by trying to convince them that they give a rat’s rear end about democracy…when all they really care about is their own primacy.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:20

• North Korea: Record Number Of Missile Tests Was 'Practice' To Attack US, South
  North Korea: Record Number Of Missile Tests Was ‘Practice’ To Attack US, South

  North Korea last week fired a missile that crossed over the south’s disputed maritime border for the first time since the division of the Korean peninsula in 1948. On Monday the south’s navy announced it has  “recovered what is presumed to be the debris of the North’s short-range ballistic missile.”

  Also unprecedented is that the missile landed a mere 50 miles from the South Korean coastal city of Ulsa, Yonhap said, coming amid a record number of missile launches within a 24-hour timeframe last Wednesday.

  

  Pyongyang was reacting to a week of the largest-ever joint US-South Korean military drills, which had a large aerial component of over 200 combined aircraft. The exercises ended on Saturday, and also came as Seoul as well as Washington intelligence officials have been warning allies to expect Kim Jong-Un to conduct a nuclear test at any time.

  On Monday North Korea itself explained the ramped up launches for the first time, directing its rhetoric in the form of new threat aimed at the United States. Pyongyang says the military was “simulating the attack” on US and South Korean targets as a result of the provocative six days of drills. 

  “As part of the countermeasures to smash the continued frenzy of war provocations of the enemy, our army launched to the east sea the super-large multiple launch rocket system, five tactical ballistic missiles of different kinds and 46 long-range missiles of multiple launch rocket system,” state-run KCNA news agency reported of the North Korean military statement.

  Pyongyang further claimed it launched a “special functional warhead paralyzing the operation command system of the enemy” along with the “mobilization of 500 fighters” – in reference to fighter jets. Pentagon officials remain skeptical of this claim of the north deploying 500 jet fighters. 

  US and South Korean officials say they haven’t seen evidence of this “special” warhead that the KCNA statement referenced. The north has vowed to keep up the pressure…

  “The recent corresponding military operations by the Korean People’s Army are a clear answer of (North Korea) that the more persistently the enemies’ provocative military moves continue, the more thoroughly and mercilessly the KPA will counter them,” the General Staff of North Korea’s military said in a statement carried by state media.

  The region has been put on edge over the rapidly increased numbers of tests, especially US-ally Japan: 

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Meanwhile, a joint US-South Korea military statement last week warned as follows in response to Pyongyang’s posturing and rhetroic: “Any nuclear attack against the United States or its allies and partners, including the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons, is unacceptable and will result in the end of the Kim regime.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:00

• Trump Changes Tune, Tells Florida Supporters To Vote For DeSantis
  Trump Changes Tune, Tells Florida Supporters To Vote For DeSantis

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

  After calling Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis “Ron DeSanctimonious” on Saturday night, former President Donald Trump called on his Miami supporters to vote for the Florida GOP governor during the 2022 midterms.

  “With thousands of proud, hard-working American patriots, incredible people–just two days from now, the people of Florida are going to reelect the wonderful, the great, a friend of mine, Marco Rubio to the United States Senate, and you’re going to reelect Ron DeSantis as your governor of the state,” he said at an event while stumping for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). 

  “And you’re going to elect an incredible slate of true MAGA warriors to Congress.”

  

  Trump drew headlines when he made the quip about DeSantis at a rally for Dr. Mehmet Oz and Doug Mastriano, Republicans who are campaigning for Pennsylvania’s Senate and gubernatorial seats, respectively. DeSantis and his campaign have not responded to Trump’s comment on Saturday.

  DeSantis is facing off against former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a Democrat, and Rubio, meanwhile, faces Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.).  Recent polls have shown DeSantis is ahead of Crist and have shown that Rubio leads Demings.

  Trump and DeSantis are both widely considered to be the top contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, although DeSantis has not made any indication on whether he intends to run during the 2024 contest. When asked about running for president, DeSantis has consistently said he’s campaigning to keep his position as Florida’s governor.

  His comments Saturday came as he was talking about polling for possible 2024 GOP candidates, which have shown Trump with a significant lead.

  “We’re winning big in the Republican Party for the nomination like nobody’s ever seen before. There it is, Trump at 71 percent, Ron DeSanctimonious at 10 percent,” Trump said in Pennsylvania. “Mike Pence at seven, oh, Mike is doing better than I thought. Liz Cheney there’s no way she’s at 4 percent. There’s no way. There’s no way. But we’re at 71 to 10 to 7 to 4.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:40

• Philly Home Depot Workers Reject Union In Lopsided Vote
  Philly Home Depot Workers Reject Union In Lopsided Vote

  Workers at a Philadelphia Home Depot store on Saturday night overwhelmingly shot down a drive to unionize the location. It would have become the first fully-unionized Home Depot store. 

  No votes outnumbered yes votes by more than a three-to-one margin. The final tally came in at 165 to 51, according to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which supervised the vote. 

  “We’re happy that the associates at this store voted to continue working directly with the company,” Home Depot spokeswoman Margaret Smith told WHYY. “That connection is important to our culture, and we will continue listening to our associates and making The Home Depot a great place to work and grow.”

  The vote was initiated by a September petition that had 106 signatures out of 266 employees at the Roosevelt Boulevard Home Depot in Northeast Philly. Organizers have filed a complaint with the NLRB alleging that Home Depot managers interfered with their efforts. 

  

  The Philly Home Depot union push is part of a broader union-organizing surge: Over the first half of 2022, 1,411 American workplaces filed union-organizing petitions with the National Labor Relations Board—the highest mark since 2015. 

  However, the blowout loss is the latest splash of cold water on union activists who’ve been targeting big-chain retailers across the country with mixed success. Last month, employees at an upstate New York Amazon warehouse killed an Amazon Labor Union (ALU) drive by a 2-to-1 margin.

  In April, the ALU scored a headline-making victory, when workers at a Staten Island Amazon processing facility voted to unionize, in a vote where yes votes prevailed 2,654 to 2,131. More than 8,300 were eligible to vote.

  

  Amazon filed an objection to the vote, alleging that the NLRB’s Brooklyn office violated labor law by appearing to support the unionization push. In September, the NLRB declared that Amazon “had not met its burden” of establishing that the NLRB had engaged in “objectionable conduct.”  

  The labor skirmishes are getting spicy: Earlier this month, Apple decided to withhold an increase in benefits from employees at its sole unionized store, which is in Towson, Maryland.

  Starbucks has fired similar benefit-withholding shots across the bow of unionization forces, triggering NLRB accusations of unlawful practices. The coffee seller has been perhaps the most visible target of successful retail-unionization attempts, with some 250 stores voting to unionize over the past year.  

   

  Meanwhile, back in Philly, Politico reports the Home Depot story has a strange-bedfellow angle: 

  One top Home Depot executive who works on employment practices at the company is Derek Bottoms, the husband of Keisha Lance Bottoms, director of the Office of Public Engagement in the White House and the former Atlanta mayor, Daniel Lippman reports. 

  The Northeast Philly Home Depot workers clearly saw that unionization has downsides. That’s clear on a macro scale too: Since the start of the pandemic, right-to-work states have added 1.3 million jobs, while union-friendly, non-right-to-work states have lost 1.1 million. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:20

• Delaware Professor: Doubting Fetterman's Fitness Is Embracing Eugenics
  Delaware Professor: Doubting Fetterman’s Fitness Is Embracing Eugenics

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  On the eve of the midterm elections with Pennsylvania’s Senate race viewed as a dead heat, Democratic candidate John Fetterman declared “I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade.” It was obviously a jarring moment for his pro-choice crowd particularly after calling for the codification of Roe. It was an all-too-familiar moment for the candidate who suffered a serious stroke that has impaired his communication and processing skills. However, as we previously discussed, many on the left have swatted back questions concerning Fetterman’s fitness as “ableism.” Now, the Washington Post has run a long column from University of Delaware Professor Jaipreet Virdi declaring that it is not just embracing ableism but eugenics to question Fetterman’s fitness.

  

  Professor Virdi is an associate professor at the University of Delaware who describes herself as “Deaf & forever a radical.”  She is a prominent and influential voice against discrimination against the deaf.

  There were parts of her column that I thought raised valuable and probative insights, including Virdi’s observation that “disabled people are the ‘original life hackers,’ people who adapt to their circumstances and find their way through the disabled world, by creating new objects and paths that allow them full participation.” She is also right that we need to reevaluate how our expectations might be barriers to those with disabilities. However, she engages in her own sweeping generalizations of those who raise these concerns and tells them that they must “jettison[] eugenics-influenced ideas about disability.”

  Virdi frames her analysis by insisting that Fetterman is just given to “verbal stumbles and pauses.”  The problem is that we do not know if there is more serious cognitive damage. Fetterman has refused to release his medical records despite requests from the media, including newspapers that support him.

  Moreover, Fetterman had this stroke before the primary vote but he and his staff kept the serious impact of the stroke a secret. After he received the nomination, they then largely prevented the media or voters from questioning him and sharply limited his public appearances. They would only agree to one debate and insisted that it occur relatively late in the election after hundreds of thousands voted.

  In other words, we still do not know the extent to which Fetterman can process information and communicate. His sole debate was widely viewed as alarming.

  However, it is the escalation of the rhetoric that is most notable about the Washington Post column. Professor Virdi explains that the doubts raised over Fetterman are reflective of our history with eugenics and view that certain groups are “socially deficient.”

  “As far as eugenicists were concerned, science said that “moral” flaws were hereditary and threatened the health of the nation. This meant that the solution to social problems such as crime, promiscuity and poverty aimed at the institutionalization and sterilization of the “morally degenerate”. As [Sir Francis ] Galton envisioned, human improvement was only possible through consistent, scientific intervention brought about by eugenics: ‘What nature does blindly, slowly, and recklessly, man can do proactively, swiftly, and kindly.’”

  Professor Virdi ties such doubts over the fitness of disabled people to past efforts of sterilization and the view that “controlling human reproduction through better breeding was a must.” She warns the such “at its core, eugenics simply applied a scientific gloss to existing racial, class, and gender prejudices. Immigrants, people with disabilities, and racial and ethnic minorities were among those identified as socially ‘disabled.’”

  As I wrote in the earlier column, there is no reason why a senator cannot be fully effective despite a disability, including the use of such devices as readers.  The problem in Pennsylvania is that the Fetterman campaign has actively prevented efforts to determine if there are more serious cognitive difficulties for Fetterman in processing information.

  In the end, the Fetterman strategy worked in sheltering the candidate from further questioning or debates. The best way to dispel such questions would have been greater interaction with the candidate to show that this was limited, as Professor Virdi suggests, to mere “verbal stumbles and pauses.”  As it stands, voters will largely vote without such information and any doubts are the result of the concerted effort to leave these questions answered.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:00

• Chinese Exports And Imports Unexpectedly Contract For The First Time Since May 2020
  Chinese Exports And Imports Unexpectedly Contract For The First Time Since May 2020

  As markets debate whether the Fed will follow other central banks with a (soft) pivot, the global economy is going from bad to worse: overnight, the latest Chinese customs data showed that China exports as well as imports unexpectedly contracted simultaneously for the first time since May 2020 as elevated inflation and rising interest rates hurt global demand.

  Chinese exports declined (-0.3% y/y) in October (vs exp +4.5%), the first drop since May 2020 on Covid outbreaks and weak external demand, following a +5.7% increase in September while the implied sequential export growth dropped to -3.8% m/m in October (vs. +0.5% in September).

  Imports fell (-0.7% y/y) following a +0.3% gain in the previous month, while sequentially imports fell 3.5% mom sa non-annualized in October (vs. -1.0% in September).  Import value declined sequentially on the lower prices of metal ores and weaker imports of tech-related products, such as computers and LCD panels. The trade surplus was well below consensus from weaker exports, though the level was slightly higher than September.

  The overall trade surplus slightly widened to a near +$85.15 billion (up from $84.74 billion in September, but below the forecast of $95.97 billion).

  

  According to Goldman, the export weakness broadened across destinations and products. Import of energy goods accelerated somewhat despite a weak import print. Other than weaker DM demand on tighter financial conditions and the ongoing European energy crisis, the contraction of exports partially came from port operation disruptions due to Covid outbreaks.

  Some more details on China’s trade data from Goldman:

  1. By major export destination, exports weakness broadened in October. The year-over-year growth of exports decelerated across most major trading partners. Among major DM countries, growth of exports to the European Union decelerated the most (-9.0% yoy in October vs. 5.6% in September). Growth of exports to United States decelerated to -12.6% yoy in October (vs. -11.6% in September). Among major EM economies, growth of exports to ASEAN decelerated to 20.3% yoy in October (vs. 29.5% in September), and the implied sequential growth turned negative.

  2. By major export category, export growth moderated across most products. The export growth of tech-related products dropped the most (cellphones and LCD panels, see Exhibit 3).

  

  Among tech-related products, exports of LCD panels declined 16.2% yoy in October (vs. -6.6% in September), and export growth of cellphones moderated to 7.0% yoy in October (vs. 23.2% in September). Among housing-related products, exports of home appliances fell 25.0% yoy in October (vs. -19.8% in September). Among Covid-related products, exports of computers declined 16.5% yoy in October (vs. -12.6% in September).

  3. Among major import categories, import growth of most energy goods remained solid in October on efforts to ensure energy security, and manufacturing related products rebounded.

  

  Among energy goods, import growth of crude oil picked up to 43.8% yoy in October (vs. +34.2% in September) with import volume up 14.1% yoy (vs. -2.0% yoy in September). Import growth of coal accelerated somewhat to 2.8% yoy in October (vs. +1.5% in September) with volume up 8.3% yoy (vs. 0.5% yoy in September). Among major metal ores, import values declined on lower prices. For instance, iron ore import value fell 26.8% yoy in October (vs. -38.8% in September) with import volume up 3.7% yoy (vs. +4.3% yoy in September). Among manufacturing related products, import growth of machine tools rebounded significantly in sequential terms (+44% mom sa non-annualized in October).

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 19:40

• Top 10 House Races To Watch On Election Night
  Top 10 House Races To Watch On Election Night

  Authored by Dan Berger via The Epoch Times,

  The House of Representatives hangs in the balance on Election Day. The Democrats currently have a 221-212 lead in Congress, with two vacancies, but Republicans appeared poised to take the chamber this year.

  

  RealClearPolitics gauges 228 seats leaning, likely, or solidly Republican, 174 similarly poised to go Democratic, and 33 as toss-ups. Most of the toss-up seats currently belong to Democrats. If Republicans win the night, as generally predicted, the big question will be how big the “red wave” will be and the size of the GOP’s majority.

  Analysts differ on the key races. This list includes some seen as bellwethers, or areas where outcomes tend to mirror broader trends. The list also includes some races where veteran lawmakers are in a tight race to defend their seats.

  Here’s a list of 10 House races to watch on Election Night on Nov. 8.

  

  North Carolina State Sen. Wiley Nickel (D) speaks to a crowd after winning the Democratic primary for the 13th congressional district of North Carolina at an election night event May 17, 2022 in Raleigh, North Carolina. (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

  North Carolina District 13

  Because it’s in the East and the polls close at 7:30 p.m., this race between Democratic State Sen. Wiley Nickel and young Trump-backed Republican newcomer Bo Hines will yield results early. And its demographics, split between North Carolina’s rural counties and Raleigh’s suburbs, make it useful in analyzing other races in similar districts.

  With rural areas across the country colored red and big cities colored blue, the battle nowadays is in the purple suburbs. During the Trump presidency, suburban voters drifted away from the Republicans. A question to be answered on Tuesday is whether Democrats, helped by issues like abortion, can keep suburbanites in their column or whether Republicans, aided by a bad economy they’ve tied to Biden administration policies, can draw them back.

  Nickel, a veteran Democratic Party politico, served as an advance man for Al Gore in the 1990s and for the White House during Barack Obama’s presidency. He ran for office unsuccessfully in his native California before moving to North Carolina and going to work as a criminal defense attorney.

  Hines, who at 25 would, if elected, become one of the youngest members of Congress, grew up in the Charlotte area. He played football for a year at North Carolina State before transferring to Yale and playing there too.

  Each candidate epitomizes what his party’s voters in North Carolina seek right now, Nickel as relatively moderate and Hines as a Trump-backed conservative.

  “It’s like two districts rolled into one,” Democratic strategist Morgan Jackson of Raleigh said of CD 13 to The Epoch Times. “It’s the closest, most swing race in North Carolina. It’s truly a jump ball.”

  

  Rep. Cindy Axne (D-Iowa) speaks during news conference discussing the “Shutdown to End All Shutdowns (SEAS) Act” in Washington on Jan. 29, 2019. (Zach Gibson/Getty Images)

  Iowa’s District 3

  This district stretches from Des Moines south and southwest toward Omaha, including Des Moines suburbs, fast-growing exurbs, and rural areas. Democratic incumbent Cindy Axne has won the seat twice without yet reaching 50 percent of the vote. Following redistricting, the area voted narrowly for Donald Trump over Joe Biden in 2020.

  It’s the second most likely tipping point after North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District, analyst Nathaniel Rakich said in a FiveThirtyEight podcast. Rakich said it’s a good seat to watch because it has two reasonably strong candidates, the incumbent Axne and Republican state Senator Zach Nunn. Campaign ads mostly feature national issues, like abortion and crime, rather than local ones.

  “It’s the epitome of an everyday-American, average-Joe Congressional district,” Rakich said on a podcast at his website. “Republicans will have to beat some tough Democratic incumbents to have a majority or at least a sizeable majority.”

  With the addition of Republican-trending rural counties, the district became easier for Republicans than in two previous races against Axne.

  

  Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) speaks at a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, on May 2, 2017. (Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images)

  New York’s 17th Congressional District

  This race features the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Sean Patrick Maloney, one of the most influential members of his party and not someone who would be expected to be in a close race in this Hudson Valley district.

  But the GOP is making a late surge in the blue state, led by gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin. His anti-crime message has resonated as New York City residents deal with a wave of sensational crimes in the streets and subways.

  Maloney is a ten-year incumbent in the neighboring 18th District but chose to run in the 17th after redistricting. He has seen his lead against Republican Michael Lawler shrink. The Cook Political Report and Real Clear Politics reclassified the race as a toss-up.

  The Democrats have had to spend more and campaign harder for what was supposed to have been a safe seat. The DCCC spent $605,000 on an ad for Maloney last month, and former President Bill Clinton came to campaign for him.

  Political science professor Shawn Donahue of the University at Buffalo told The Epoch Times this was the race he watched most closely in the state. “Maloney looks particularly vulnerable. The Republicans are throwing money” at a race in a district Joe Biden won by 10 points over Donald Trump in 2020.

  “If Maloney were to lose, he would be the biggest person to lose since Cantor.”

  Eric Cantor of Virginia’s 7th District, the House Majority Leader from 2011 to 2014, lost a primary to economics professor Dave Brat in 2014 and resigned first his leadership position and then his seat.

  “As head of the party’s campaign committee, you’d think you’d have your own race in the bag so you could concentrate on other cases around the country,” Donahue said of Maloney.

  

  Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) speaks at a press conference on July 20, 2021, in Washington, DC.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

  Ohio’s 9th Congressional District

  Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) is the longest-serving woman in House history. If she wins this election over Republican J.R. Majewski, she’ll pass the late Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) as the longest-serving woman in Congress.

  But this district in northwest Ohio, centered on Democratic stronghold Toledo, has, with redistricting, become more challenging for the party. It once stretched along the Lake Erie shoreline to include Democratic parts of the Cleveland area but has lost them while adding Republican-leaning rural areas west of Toledo. The DCCC has identified Kaptur’s seat as vulnerable.

  The Cook Political Report has it leaning Democratic. But Real Clear Politics, which calls it a toss-up, notes that in the 2020 presidential race, voters here favored Donald Trump by almost 3 points over Joe Biden. FiveThirtyEight gives Kaptur a 76 percent chance of winning. Kaptur, 76 and a close Biden ally, was first elected in 1982. Majewski, 42, is an Air Force veteran and nuclear power plant manager.

  

  John Gibbs a candidate for congress in Michigan’s 3rd Congressional district speaks at a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump near Washington, Mich., on April 2, 2022. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

  Michigan’s 3rd Congressional District

  Republican Rep. Peter Meijer lost his seat in a primary upset to John Gibbs. Gibbs had been a Trump appointee to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, although not confirmed, while Meijer, whose family owns a Michigan-based supercenter chain, was one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in the final days of his administration.

  The upset raised the chances this seat might flip to the Democrats, represented by Grand Rapids attorney Hillary Scholten. Real Clear Politics rates this race, in a district Biden carried by 11 points, as a toss-up. Cook’s has it leaning Democratic, and FiveThirtyEight gives Scholten a 57 percent chance of victory.

  Gibbs was one of the Republican candidates supported in the primaries by Democrats who pegged them as extremists and thus easier to beat in November. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent $435,000 promoting Gibbs over Meijer.

  “We thought (Gibbs) was an easier candidate, and he has proven to be because he’s a nut and he’s too conservative for Western Michigan,” DCCC Chairman Sean Patrick Maloney told CNN’s Jake Tapper, defending the party’s tactics.

  

  Monica De La Cruz, (R-Texas) believes her progressive opponent’s radical views will not sit well with traditional Hispanic voters. (Photo courtesy of Monica De La Cruz)

  Texas’ 15th Congressional District

  This race in a South Texas district traditionally voting blue is seen as a stark clash of ideology between two Hispanic women, Democrat Michelle Vallejo and Republican Monica De La Cruz.

  The district has been represented by Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, a Democrat. But after redistricting, he left it open to run in the neighboring 34th district against Republican Rep. Mayra Flores. She made history in June by winning a special election to become the first Republican to represent the area in more than a hundred years.

  Vallejo, a Columbia grad supported by progressives like Elizabeth Warren, wants to make the district more “equitable,” supports abortion, “Medicare for all,” “green energy,” and wants to offer “rights and opportunities” to illegal immigrants.

  De La Cruz, raised by a single mother, put herself through the University of Texas. She is pro-life, favors faith and family, ties Democratic policies to soaring inflation, and supports resuming President Donald Trump’s tough border policies. She’s endorsed by Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. De La Cruz ran well against Gonzalez in 2020, losing by 6,588 votes.

  Hispanics have begun moving toward Republicans recently, upsetting Democratic dependence upon them as part of their base. FiveThirtyEight analyst Galen Druke said in a podcast he’d be watching this race in an 80 percent Hispanic district to see how this trend, with national implications, is evolving.

  

  A file image of House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.) (C) and Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 25, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

  Georgia’s 2nd Congressional District

  Sanford Bishop has held this seat in southwest Georgia for 30 years since it was drawn as a black majority district. He’s stood out as a moderate who can cross the party aisle and a Democrat who can appeal to white farmers and other rural voters.

  But redistricting has helped the Republicans here, and newcomer Chris West is still in the race. Republicans hope a red wave on Election Night will help the young lawyer and real estate developer upset the Congressional veteran Bishop, the longest-serving member of the Georgia delegation. Bishop’s long record and deep roots in the district could help him hang on to win.

  Real Clear Politics rates the district a toss-up. Two most recent polls of likely voters, one by Insider Advantage and the other by Trafalgar Group, show Bishop up by 3 and 4 points, respectively, both within the margin of error. West’s campaign website says it’s the only competitive race in the Deep South.

  The district includes Columbus and Macon, small towns, farmland, and military bases like Fort Benning. Bishop’s House committee positions in agriculture, military, and veteran affairs have positioned him to serve constituents in those areas.

  Charles Bullock, a University of Georgia political science professor, told The Epoch Times that Bishop had won reelection in the past when the district’s black population dropped as low as 39 percent. It stands after redistricting at 49 percent.

  Marci McCarthy, chairman of the DeKalb County Republican Party in the Atlanta metro area, said lst week that black voters in the state’s rural areas had not had a strong turnout in early voting up to that point.

  

  Lori Chavez-Deremer, former mayor of Happy Valley, Oregon, is the Republican nominee to represent Oregon’s 5th Congressional District. (Photo courtesy of Lori Chavez-Deremer)

  Oregon’s 5th Congressional District

  For a redrawn district stretching from Portland’s southern suburbs further south and inland, this race might serve as a referendum on the Portland metro area’s progressive politics.

  It’s now an open seat after a moderate Democrat incumbent, Kurt Schrader, lost the primary to progressive candidate Jamie McLeod-Skinner. While Schrader was endorsed by Joe Biden, the very progressive Elizabeth Warren endorsed McLeod-Skinner. The civil servant faces Lori Chavez-Deremer, a Republican and former mayor of the Portland suburb Happy Valley.

  RealClearPolitics rates the race a toss-up. The Cook Political Report classifies it as leaning Republican. Joe Biden won the district by 9 points in 2020.

  Redistricting eliminated coastal areas that favored Schrader. It hasn’t necessarily made the district easier for a Republican, one of Chavez-Deremer’s campaign leaders, Ben Roche, told The Epoch Times. But the political climate on crime, energy, and education may favor Republicans.

  Chavez-Deremer has campaigned as a moderate, someone who, as mayor, worked with both parties to fix civic problems. Roche said that Portland’s suburbs like Happy Valley have seen growing crime attributed to homeless drug addicts from Portland, a trend fed by the city’s progressive policies on homelessness and criminal justice. Portland was a center of BLM disorders in 2020 and of calls to defund the police.

  

  This undated photo provided by the Christy Smith For Congress campaign shows candidate Christy Smith. (Christy Smith For Congress via AP)

  California’s 27th District

  This district in Los Angeles County has become more difficult for the GOP through redistricting, losing the conservative Simi Valley. The 25th District has covered the area, and Republican Mike Garcia holds that seat. But the new 27th trends Democratic by almost 13 points.

  Garcia will be in his third race against the same opponent, Christy Smith, whom he defeated in 2020’s general election by only 333 votes.

  “It would be a stretch seat for Republicans normally,” the only seat the party holds in Los Angeles County, said FiveThirtyEight editor Maya Sweedler in a podcast where she picked it as a seat of crucial interest. “But if Garcia is running hot on election night, it will be notable for Republicans. I’m curious if Garcia can hang to this.”

  FiveThirtyEight calls Garcia slightly favored, with a 65 percent chance to win. Real Clear Politics says the race leans GOP. The Cook Political Report labels it a toss-up.

  Garcia is a former Navy fighter pilot who then worked for Raytheon. Smith, a former California Assemblywoman, has worked for the U.S. Department of Education.

  

  Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.), second from left, speaks during a press conference in Washington on Sept. 27, 2019. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

  New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District

  Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas, elected in 2018, faces Republican opponent Karoline Leavitt, who is just 25. She worked as an assistant press secretary in the Trump White House and later as director of communications for House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.)

  Trump did not endorse a candidate in the crowded GOP primary but later supported Leavitt with an enthusiastic shout-out on Truth Social.

  FiveThirtyEight terms Pappas as slightly favored to win, with a 65 percent chance of victory. Real Clear Politics, though, says it leans Republican, with it having gone for Trump over Biden by 1 point in 2020. The Cook Political Report calls it a toss-up.

  Pappas, co-chairs the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus. He has campaigned on health care and lowering the cost of prescription drugs and said in a debate that he wants to modernize trucking and shipping regulations to “unkink supply chains.”

  Leavitt told Fox News that she wanted to “really reach out to my generation of voters. . . . I live among them, my friends, my former college roommates, my former colleagues who are really being indoctrinated by the left’s agenda and their messaging. We desperately need strong, conservative, youthful voices on our side of the aisle that are standing up for our country.”

  Like many Republican and Democratic opponents around the country, the two have clashed on abortion, Biden’s economic policies, and the outcome of the 2020 election.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 19:20

• The Funeral Business Is Booming (And Not Because Of COVID)
  The Funeral Business Is Booming (And Not Because Of COVID)

  Authored by Alex Berenson via ‘Unreported Truths’ Substack,

  How bad is the rise in mortality?

  So bad funeral companies are starting to worry.

  Today Service Corporation International, the largest for-profit funeral operator in North America, had its quarterly earnings call. SCI had another great quarter, you’ll be pleased to hear! So far in 2022 the company has made almost $500 million in profits – and its stock is up over 15% since last week’s earnings report.

  (Death is your best investment!)

  

  SCI’s management seems fairly open with investors. For many years, much of the company’s growth came from buying family-run funeral homes as their operators, umm, died out. The underlying funeral business is slow growth and very predictable.

  At least it used to be.

  As Thomas L. Ryan, Service Corporation’s chairman and chief executive, told investors Wednesday morning:

  If you go back in this industry and particularly with SCI, year-to-year you would see the numbers of deaths — probably in one year you may be down 1% or 2%, in the next year you’re up 1% or 2% which you could predict was pretty good accuracy over a year and over a big footprint like ours what was probably going to happen… 2020 comes along, Covid, game-changer, right. We’re having to do at one point of time 20 percent more funerals which is unheard of in a year versus, let’s say, a year or two before.

  So Service Corporation expected that once Covid passed, its business would go back to normal…

  What we would have expected is, why wouldn’t we go back towards, let’s say, a 2019 level, maybe you get a percent or so growth of 2019, I would expect that. So that would be a reasonable level that we think would stabilize. And that’s kind of what we anticipated…

  Only that’s not what has happened.

  What we’re telling you is, the third quarter of this year, we did 15% more calls than we did in the third quarter of 2019. That is not what anybody would have anticipated and that has just a very de minimis amount of Covid deaths [emphasis added] in it.

  

  Covid is gone. But people keep dying. Why?

  Unsurprisingly, Ryan did not mention mRNA vaccines anywhere. Why would he? Doing so would only make for headaches he and Service Corporation do not need.

  But, earlier in the call, he did point to “more cancer deaths” and more broadly a decline in overall health:

  We believe these excess services are more permanent in nature into a combination of aging demographics, higher risk, less healthy lifestyle developed during the pandemic.

  Ryan also suggested delayed medical care might be an issue.

  These explanations are… strained, at best. Aging demographics are hardly new, and the lockdowns that drove a “less healthy lifestyle” ended as early as mid-2020 in most red states and by early 2021 almost everywhere. Opioids and overdoses generally remain a horrendous crisis, but deaths appear to have peaked in early 2022 and fallen slightly since. And for all the discussion of delays in medical care, hospitals and doctors offices have functioned essentially normally for at least 18 months.

  In any case, the United States is hardly alone in seeing a large and so far unexplained spike in deaths in 2022.

  Countries from Germany to Australia to Taiwan are seeing similar trends.

  They all have something in common. No points for guessing what.

  In any case, Service Corporation is expecting business to stay good for years to come.

  “These trends are hard to reverse quickly,” Ryan said.

  “I hope three, four, five years from now will subside a bit. But I don’t think it’s any time soon.”

  *  *  *

  [ZH: It is not just funeral services companies. Market participants were somewhat stunned when Lincoln Financial announced results last week and shares collapsed over 30% after a shocking, and unexpected, $2.6 billion Q3 loss.

  “A Catastrophe (and Not the Natural Kind),” Wells Fargo Securities analysts said in a note to clients Wednesday night, following the after-market release of earnings by the Pennsylvania life-insurance and annuities company.

  

  What drove the big loss?

  Lincoln National group insurance death payouts for working age in USA 18-64 yr olds. 2019 is pre covid and is the baseline, 2020 covid hits no vaccine 9% increase, 2021 covid still here but now add the vaccine a 163% increase. FYI pic.twitter.com/Wb4B4GXjPs

  — Michael Evanson (@MichaelEvanson1) November 3, 2022

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

  So, we wonder, is that the post-vaxx-new-normal-world-order trade: Short Life Insurers, Long Funeral Service Providers?]

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:40

• Top Dems Warn Party Seen As 'Extreme' And Driving Inflation
  Top Dems Warn Party Seen As ‘Extreme’ And Driving Inflation

  A center-left think tank backed by some of the most prominent names in Democratic politics, has warned that the Democratic party is viewed as ‘extreme,’ and unconcerned with top issues among voters.

  

  New polling from Third Way finds that “Despite a roster of GOP candidates who are extreme by any standard, voters see Democrats as just as extreme, as well as far less concerned about the issues that most worry them.“

  A few select quotes via Axios:

  • “Democrats are underwater on issues voters name as their highest priorities, including the economy, immigration, and crime.”

  • “While Democrats maintain a lead on handling certain issues like abortion and climate change, voters also rank these issues as lower priorities.“

  • “[V]oters question whether the party shares essential values like patriotism and the importance of hard work. … Only 43% of voters say Democrats value hard work, compared to 58% for Republicans.”

  • “[E]ven in the areas where Democrats are trusted more [including education], it is not clear that voters are sold on Democrats’ approach or ability to get things done.“

  • “Democrats are benefitting from a perception among voters that Republicans are extreme, but they cannot fully reap the gains of this view, as voters think Democrats are extreme as well.“

  In short, “If Democrats manage to hold on to the House and Senate, it will be in spite of the party brand, not because of it,” reads the Third Way memo regarding the survey.

  When asked which is the most important issue for Congress to prioritize right now, inflation and the economy win out by a wide margin, with 42% selecting it as their top choice. Immigration and the border follows at 11% and protecting abortion rights rounds out the list of issues gaining double digits with 10%. When given two choices, the same priorities rise to the top, with 59% saying inflation and the economy, 30% immigration and the border, and 17% protecting abortion rights.

  

  When asked which party would do a better job handling each issue, Republicans hold a decisive advantage (54%-36%) on inflation and the economy. A majority of voters (53%) also worry that continued Democratic control of Congress will make inflation worse, while less than a quarter (23%) say the same about Republican control. And 56% say Democrats are not focused enough on the economy, while only 36% say the same about their opponents. -Third Way

  

  As Axios notes, “Lifelong, respected Democrats are saying the quiet part out loud — that if Republicans have a huge night on Tuesday, as polls are blaring, Democrats must blame “much deeper” problems than simply the “historical trends” that beset the party in power.”

  

  Of course, this is exactly what James Carville, Bill Maher, and other influential Democrats have been saying for more than a year.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:20

• Guy Fawkes Night Reminded Us That Bitcoin Is A Modern Vendetta Against The Establishment
  Guy Fawkes Night Reminded Us That Bitcoin Is A Modern Vendetta Against The Establishment

  Authored by Alex Lielacher via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Bitcoin enables a digital Gunpowder Plot, giving anyone the ability to opt out of establishment control as Guy Fawkes once attempted…

  

  The Guy Fawkes mask – popularized by the movie “V For Vendetta” – has become a symbol of resistance against the State, worn by anti-government protesters of all factions. Bitcoiners have also picked up the mask, highlighting Bitcoin’s own struggle against the powers that be who control and benefit from the corrupt fiat currency monetary system.

  As we remembered ‘the fifth of November’ this past weekend, here’s a reminder that Bitcoin is more than number-go-up technology. At its core, it’s a monetary revolution that has the potential to change the world forever.

  WHY DOES BRITAIN CELEBRATE THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER?

  “Remember, remember, the fifth of November. Gunpowder, treason, and plot. I see no reason why gunpowder treason should ever be forgot.”

  Ask anyone in the U.K. about Guy Fawkes, and they’ll most likely quote you this poem. The fifth of November is a day when we remember one of the most notorious acts of rebellion against the state on European soil. On November 5, 1605, a group of Roman Catholic Church followers attempted to blow up parliament and kill King James I. The leader of the plot, Robert Catesby, together with his four co-conspirators — Thomas Winter, Thomas Percy, John Wright and the infamous Guy Fawkes — were angered by King James’ refusal to grant more religious toleration to Catholics.

  Through this plot, they hoped that the confusion, which would follow the murder of the king, his ministers and the members of Parliament, would provide an opportunity for the English Catholics to take over the country.

  However, their plan didn’t work.

  They were caught and later hanged for treason. Their action resulted in even more punishment against the Catholic Church. In January 1606, the U.K. Parliament established November 5 as a day of public thanksgiving.

  Today we celebrate November 5 as Guy Fawkes Night or Bonfire Night by lighting bonfires, setting off fireworks and carrying “Guys” through the streets wearing the ever-so-famous Guy Fawkes mask.

  THE CHANGING SYMBOLISM OF THE GUY FAWKES MASK

  The comic and, later, the movie, “V For Vendetta” turned the Guy Fawkes mask into a symbol with many different meanings.

  It’s no longer only memorabilia for the fifth of November, but a symbol against power, corruption and the state apparatus, as well as a means to protect your identity during a time of omnipresent surveillance.

  One of the most obvious symbols of the mask is the uprising against the powers that be.

  Throughout the film “V For Vendetta,” the character V’s identity is never revealed. There was no need to know who he was. The meaning in the graphic novel actually goes a step further and utilizes V’s facelessness to promote anarchy in the hopes of creating a new world order without leaders.

  This vision is one that many protestors or anarchists share as well. Whether they are hacktivist collectives like Anonymous, which is keen to unveil corruption and abuse of power, or protestors against state tyranny in Venezuela, India, Bahrain or Nigeria. Once they put on the mask, they become not only a protestor against power, but also a symbol for others to follow their lead. One person alone with the mask on their face is meaningless, but once a collective puts on the mask, it becomes the symbol against tyranny.

  Obviously, it’s a guard to protect one’s privacy as well, which is why you see so many Guy Fawkes masks at protests. And this blends into online culture as well.

  Satoshi Nakamoto is arguably one of the most famous anonymous activists of the past 20 years. In fact, one of the most portrayed versions of Nakamoto is as someone wearing a Guy Fawkes mask and hoodie. Like V in the movie, it was Nakamoto who launched a vendetta with the financial world.

  They didn’t seek vengeance by hacking the legacy financial system, but rather by creating a system in which everyone is able to transact freely. Once the project was big enough and able to live on its own, Nakamoto left, never to return, thereby nurturing the idea of a movement without any leaders — a leaderless resistance against the fiat monetary system.

  One of the main aspects of Bitcoin is its ability to separate money from the State. This separation is what unites Bitcoiners with protesters on the streets in Venezuela, hacktivists online and Guy Fawkes back in 1605. All of them had or have the goal of dethroning powerful institutions for a better and freer society.

  WHY ANON BITCOINERS WEAR THE GUY FAWKES MASK

  The Guy Fawkes mask is not only a symbol against tyranny but also a shield of protection to hide your identity. And anonymity is a big part of Bitcoin culture.

  Anon Bitcoiners want to protect themselves from the establishment, and the possible repercussions of having their identity linked with a technology that has the potential to topple existing monetary structures that benefit the few in power.

  While Bitcoin is slowly being integrated into the legacy financial system, adding to its legitimacy in the eyes of governments, regulators and big banking, the potential for a ban — as Bitcoin is a way to circumvent the coming central bank digital currency (CBDC) surveillance apparatus — remains a threat.

  History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.

  If you look at what happened with gold in the United States in 1933, where citizens were essentially robbed of their gold possessions, it would be foolish to think that similar plans don’t also exist for Bitcoin.

  Now, one could say as long as you have your private keys and secure your wallet in a multisig structure, not much can happen. That might be true for your bitcoin. But the fact that your identity is linked to a potentially soon-to-be-banned technology poses a risk.

  Anons are able to opt out of that dystopia by wearing a metaphorical Guy Fawkes mask and remaining anonymous. They cut off their real-life personas from their online personas, allowing them to continue to remain unlinked to Bitcoin by name.

  Bear in mind, in the future, CBDCs will exist and will likely emerge as the main tool of surveillance for the establishment. That is another reason why the mask became a symbol against the establishment, whether that be in the Bitcoin space or in activist groups like Anonymous.

  All of these different groups are willing to stand up against tyranny by “putting on the mask.”

  Symbols are only effective if enough people stand up for them. A single Guy Fawkes mask is worthless. However, if thousands of people wear them at protests or have them on in their profile pictures online, they’re able to put pressure on the establishment.

  Statements like “Bitcoin is a peaceful revolution” or “Fix the money, fix the world” have the goal of peaceful anarchy or revolution within them. They don’t want to kill or destroy innocent lives. That’s what the establishment is doing with its endless proxy wars. The goal is to inform citizens and give power back to the individual.

  IS BITCOIN THE FIAT MONETARY SYSTEM’S GUNPOWDER PLOT?

  The simple answer to this question is yes, absolutely.

  However, Bitcoiners don’t plan to blow up parliament. Although I am sure there are Bitcoiners living under truly tyrannical state rule who may be working on overthrowing their governments, Bitcoiners want to change the world peacefully, without bloodshed or physical harm to anyone.

  In “V For Vendetta” and the gunpowder plot of 1605, the goal was to topple the existing power structure at all costs. The characters were willing to sacrifice human lives to see the change they envisioned. This is very different from Bitcoin.

  Bitcoin doesn’t need a violent uprising. Bitcoin is the uprising. Bitcoin itself is a peaceful revolution. There is no need to physically occupy Wall Street or hold bank employees hostage in a robbery. All anyone has to do to take part in the Bitcoin revolution is to become part of the Bitcoin network by running a node and spreading awareness of the power that Bitcoin holds to change the world.

  Bitcoin is antifragile, hard to change and secure by design. These qualities are the gunpowder of Bitcoin. There were many attempts to change its fundamentals — the Blocksize Wars, for example — but none of the attackers were successful in their attempts.

  Bitcoin’s core of believers stuck to Nakamoto’s vision, one that is still alive today. Everyone on earth has the opportunity to take part in the Bitcoin network, benefitting from its ability to enable anyone to store, send and receive value without censorship or needing to ask for approval. That’s why the establishment fears it.

  The establishment doesn’t want you to own anything. Its members are the ones telling you what to eat, drink and spend your hard-earned money on. If you don’t obey, it will enforce new rules or shut you off by controlling your bank account. This is why CBDCs are so dangerous, as they can, in theory, give this establishment complete control over all your financial transactions.

  Just by owning and using bitcoin, you don’t have to follow these rules. You have the option to opt out.

  If there is one thing the gunpowder plot or “V For Vendetta” has taught us, it’s the power of collective minds. The establishment is afraid of more public support for Bitcoin because it knows that once we hit a certain threshold, there won’t be any going back.

  The establishment can’t turn Bitcoin off like a server.

  Without realizing it, it has built a monster. It was because of bad financial incentive structures in the past that Nakamoto created Bitcoin. The greed of the establishment was what led us here.

  One by one, from the bottom up, we’ve risen and continue to give people hope, courage and a vision for a better tomorrow.

  REMEMBER, REMEMBER, WHAT BITCOIN COULD REALLY ACCOMPLISH

  In the third act of “V For Vendetta,” the character Evey has overcome her fear of death. She knows there won’t be any going back, and the plotted revolution on the fifth of November is unavoidable, regardless of her own life.

  In the real world, the establishment has gotten to where it is today because it has been able to corrupt the system with fiat money. If it ever needed more, it was able to print it. Up until today, it was somewhat successful. But its time is running out.

  You can only print so much money before it starts inflating away. The result of that rigorous spending is visible now.

  Figureheads like Christine Lagarde of the European Central Bank or Andrew Bailey of the Bank of England don’t know how to stop inflation. They don’t see any other solution but to print more money and to throw more money at the problem. As we know, however, that doesn’t work.

  Bitcoin fixes this.

  Bitcoin’s limited supply, combined with its disinflationary monetary policy, enables holders to protect themselves from the long-term effects of inflation. But that’s not all.

  Bitcoin is also freedom money. It allows anyone in the world to participate in a new monetary system free of the chains of the fiat currency apparatus. No ruler, no regulator and no bank can lock you out of your bitcoin as long as you hold your own keys.

  That is the true power of Bitcoin. It provides us with financial sovereignty and the power to choose our own destiny.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:00

• Twitter Daily User Growth Hits 'All-Time Highs' During First Week Under Musk
  Twitter Daily User Growth Hits ‘All-Time Highs’ During First Week Under Musk

  While Twitter may be shedding virtue-signaling advertisers (who totally weren’t looking for any reason to trim their ad budgets), daily user growth during the company’s first full week under Elon Musk has hit ‘all-time highs,’ according to an internal document seen by The Verge.

  

  According to an internal FAQ given to the company’s sales team for use in conversations with advertisers, Twitter’s monetizable daily user (mDAU) has jumped to more than 20%, while “Twitter’s largest market, the US, is growing even more quickly.”

  The company has added more than 15 million mDAUs, “crossing the quarter billion mark” since the end of Q2, when it stopped reporting financials as a public company.

  If those numbers are in line with how Twitter reported metrics when it was public, they imply that the service has yet to see a mass exodus under Musk’s ownership. He tweeted on Sunday that, since his deal to buy Twitter was announced, “user numbers have increased significantly around the world.” Twitter last reported 237.8 million mDAUs and a 16.6 percent yearly growth rate for the second quarter.

  While users may not be fleeing Twitter en masse, advertisers are. In another tweet on Friday, Musk said the company has seen “a massive drop in revenue” due to “activist groups pressuring advertisers.” Reports of a sharp spike in racist and hateful tweets after his takeover initially spooked advertisers, though Twitter said afterward that the influx was due to coordinated “trolling campaigns.” The FAQ for advertisers on Monday says that “levels of hate speech remain within historical norms, representing 0.25% to 0.45% of tweets per day among hundreds of millions.” -The Verge

  Advertisers are reportedly scratching their heads over who to voice complaints with since the resignation of top advertising exec, Sara Personette.

  The FAQ was distributed by 10-year company veteran Alex Josephson, VP of Twitter Next – an internal team tasked with helping brands create campaigns on the social network since 2019. According to Josephson’s post to the sales team, 25% of the organization was affected by last Friday’s mass layoffs, and that “the decision to scale back our presence in select geographies contributed significantly to the sales reductions.”

  Meanwhile, the FAQ addresses the upcoming revamp of the Twitter Blue subscription service which introduces paid verification – saying it will “not affect existing verified accounts at this time,” and that “large brand advertisers who are already verified will now have an additional ‘Official’ label beneath their name upon Twitter Blue’s relaunch this week.”

  Musk was reportedly tossing around a $19.99 monthly price point for blue checks, however after far-left author Stephen King threw a Twitter tantrum, Musk lowered the price to $8 per month – which he’s been tormenting 

  We need to pay the bills somehow! Twitter cannot rely entirely on advertisers. How about $8?

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 1, 2022

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

  

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/07/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Why China's Marriage Crisis Is An Existential Threat To The Country
  Why China’s Marriage Crisis Is An Existential Threat To The Country

  Authored by John Mac Ghlionn via The Epoch Times,

  President Xi Jinping recently vowed to launch comprehensive initiatives to address China’s rapidly declining birth rate.

  

  Behind the bombastic rhetoric, however, there lies a truly sobering fact: new policies probably won’t be enough to arrest China’s demographic decline. Here’s why.

  In China, a hyper-traditional society, having a child out of wedlock is still frowned upon. Childbearing and childrearing are synonymous with marriage. Last year, the communist nation saw marriage rates hit a 35-year low. The sharp drop in marital vows comes at the same time China faces an impending demographic crisis. 2021 saw 7.6 million marriage registrations, the fewest since 1986. With falling birth rates and a rapidly aging population, China faces problems that are very much existential in nature.

  In truth, China’s marriage crisis has been an issue for the best part of a decade. In the space of six years, between 2013 and 2019, the number of Chinese citizens getting married fell from 23.8 million to 13.9 million, a 41 percent drop. Of course, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) ill-advised one-child policy, which was in place for 35 years (1980–2015), has resulted in far fewer people of marriageable age. The policy resulted in 400 million fewer babies being born.

  

  Medical staff takes care of a newborn baby at a hospital in Fuyang in China’s eastern Anhui province, on Jan. 19, 2019. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

  China has also witnessed “changing attitudes to marriage, especially among young women who are becoming more educated and financially independent,” according to CNN. Due to “widespread workplace discrimination” and “patriarchal traditions,” an increasing number of women are saying no to marriage.

  Some readers, I’m sure, will roll their eyes at the “patriarchal traditions” bit. If you happen to be one of them, I don’t blame you. I have been highly critical of the ways in which the “p word” has been weaponized and demonized by many individuals in the United States and beyond. However, patriarchal traditions look a little different in China than, say, the United States or the UK. The Chinese, we’re told, have a rather controversial saying: “If you don’t beat your wife every three days, she’ll start tearing up roof tiles.” A quarter of Chinese women are victims of domestic violence. Every 7.4 seconds a wife is beaten by her husband. As is clear to see, Chinese women can be forgiven for having second thoughts about marriage, especially if they were raised in an abusive household.

  Besides the violence, there’s also another reason why fewer Chinese people are deciding to walk down the aisle. China is an incredibly expensive place to live. According to Mercer’s Cost of Living Index 2022, six of the biggest Chinese cities—Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Qingdao, and Nanjing—are among the top 10 most expensive cities on the Asian continent. Meanwhile, Hong Kong, more or less controlled by Beijing, is the most expensive city in the world. Not surprisingly, more Hong Kongers are saying no to marriage and no to starting a family. If one is struggling to pay rent, having a child is probably the last thing on their mind.

  So what, some will say, cities in the United States, UK, and Western Europe are also ridiculously expensive to live in. Yes, they are. But China’s GDP per capita is less than $10,000. This places the country between the Balkan nation of Montenegro and Botswana, located in southern Africa. The United States, on the other hand, has a GDP per capita of $69,000.

  

  A man walks in front of a housing complex by Chinese property developer Evergrande in Beijing on Oct. 21, 2021. (Noel Celis/AFP via Getty Images)

  For years, we have heard so much about China’s impressive GDP growth. At the same time, however, we have heard very little about its less-than-impressive GDP per capita.

  What’s my point?

  There are at least 90 million people currently working in Chinese factories. In a year, they can expect to earn roughly 55,000 RMB (less than $8,000). Even those working in more prestigious positions struggle to make more than $16,000 per year. By 2035, China’s GDP per capita is expected to be $28,700. Try getting married, paying rent, buying necessities, and starting a family on $28,700.

  Moreover, it’s particularly difficult to start a family (or do anything of value) when you can’t find a job. Right now, China’s youth unemployment is close to 20 percent (8.1 percent in the United States (pdf)). Of course, China’s marriage problem isn’t exactly unique. Other countries around the world, including the United States, are also experiencing their own marriage-related issues. However, the size of the problem facing China and the CCP is, for lack of a better word, gigantic—especially now that its economy appears to be going down the proverbial lavatory.

  Analysts at The Lowy institute, a Sydney-based think tank, insist that, even with “continued broad policy success,” China’s “annual economic growth will slow to about 3% by 2030 and 2% by 2040.” China’s economy, we’re told, appears to be suffering from a crisis in confidence among consumers. Is it any surprise? The average Chinese citizen, be they 25 or 75, is struggling to survive.

  In an effort to address the marriage crisis, there’s always the chance that the CCP could use its cruel social credit system to punish adults who refuse to get married and start a family. The CCP might take inspiration from Russia, its close ally, where couples are currently being offered financial incentives to get married and have children. But, commonsense tells us that it will take a lot more than one-off payments and tax subsidies to solve China’s marriage situation, a problem that is fast becoming existential in nature. Money is a necessity, but it’s no substitute for genuine desire. Today, for reasons already explained, very few Chinese have any desire to get married. As the country becomes older and less efficient, expect the flame of desire to become even more faint.

  …

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 23:30

• Late Season Tropical Threat Emerges, Gov. DeSantis Warns "Floridians To Be Prepared"
  Late Season Tropical Threat Emerges, Gov. DeSantis Warns “Floridians To Be Prepared”

  The end of November marks the close of the 2022 Atlantic hurricane season. There are a little more than three weeks left in the season, and AccuWeather forecasters say a tropical threat has emerged just north of the Caribbean and could strengthen into a storm next week, with Florida in the crosshairs.

  A low-pressure system developed on Saturday just south of Puerto Rico. By Sunday, the system, dubbed Invest 98L, moved North of Puerto Rico and has an 80% chance of developing into a subtropical or tropical depression over the next two days. It has a 90% chance of developing over the next five days.

  

  AccuWeather forecasters warn, “this tropical rainstorm will become better organized and likely become a tropical storm as it takes a winding track toward the Bahamas and storm-weary Florida.” If it develops into a tropical storm in the Atlantic basin, it will be named “Nicole.” 

  AccuWeather storm track modeling shows the system is on a westward path and could make landfall in South Florida in the second half of the week. 

  

  Gov. Ron DeSantis and other state officials told Floridians to be prepared for potential tropical impacts. 

  “I encourage all Floridians to be prepared and make a plan in the event a storm impacts Florida.

   “We will continue to monitor the path and trajectory of Invest 98L and we remain in constant contact with all state and local government partners,” DeSantis said.

  The exact landfall timing and location are uncertain but could affect many Floridians still recovering from Hurricane Ian in September. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 23:00

• The Unforgivable Request For Shamnesty
  The Unforgivable Request For Shamnesty

  Authored by Thomas Buckley via ‘The Point’ Substack,

  The morning after is never pleasant… and it shouldn’t be!

  

  It’s about 11 a.m.  The brain activates but you’re not quite sure you can open your eyes.

  You experience what Homer Simpson described as “that sweet couple of seconds before I remember why I’m sleeping on the lawn.”

  You feel around and breathe a sigh of relief that you are still indoors, slowly open one eye, see your spouse glaring at you and it all floods back.  You had too much fun last night.

  Thoughts race – how much did I…? it couldn’t have been that bad, could it…?  Oh wait, maybe there was that thing…was there?

  You shut your eye while remaining extremely aware of your spouse’s foot tapping menacingly on the bedroom floor, trying desperately to immediately recall the previous evening’s proceedings.  At first, the part of your brain that evolved to ensure self-preservation kicks in and you momentarily convince yourself you were actually rather restrained…

  – but then reality crashes in and you open your eyes again, look down, wonder how that stain got on your tie even before realizing that your wore it to bed,  You put on your most sheepish face, look up, say “Honey, I…” and are immediately cut off by the most disgusted and disappointed “I cannot believe you sometimes!” you have ever heard in your life.

  The next few days are rough – you remain a bit too heavy-footed to properly slink around the house, you hunt for a can of soup because you know with absolute certainty your spouse is not going to be cooking anytime soon, you gobble Advil, and you wonder which is worse – the hangover or the nearly lethal tension hovering in the house.

  After a day or so, you start to work your way back to normal – a bit.  You haven’t really done that before, mostly, you tell yourself it was just a party and – even though you admit to overdoing it – everyone was pretty well lubricated (you finally remember that really off-color joke your neighbor told and you know – you think – you didn’t say anything that bad,) and you vow – to yourself first and only after you have worked out the speech in your head – to your spouse that it will never happen again (even though you both know it very well could.)

  And then – in an effort to get yourself completely off the hook for your bad behavior –  you write an article for The Atlantic entitled “Let’s Declare a Drunken Party Amnesty.”

  And you have the self-satisfied gall of the recently repentant to think “well, that’s over and we should never discuss it ever again because that would be rude of you.”

  That’s not how this works.

  The actions taken by Dr. Emily Oster – who had the astonishing temerity to write the “Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty” piece  and her many many over-credentialed, under-educated power mad brethren over the past 30 months cannot be given a pass.

  What happened during the pandemic was obviously more than a one-off drunken party moment.  Having tee many martoonis does not compare to the whirlwind of destruction the COVID reaction caused.

  Massive educational degradation.  Economic devastation, by both the lockdowns and now the continuing fiscal nightmare plaguing the nation caused by continuing federal over-reaction.  The critical damage to the development of children’s social skills through hyper-masking and fear-mongering.  The obliteration of the public’s trust in institutions due to their incompetence and deceitfulness during the pandemic.  The massive erosion of civil liberties.  The direct hardships caused by vaccination mandates, etc. under the false claim of helping one’s neighbor.  The explosion of the growth of Wall Street built on the destruction of Main Street.  The clear separation of society into two camps – those who could easily prosper during the pandemic and those whose lives were completely upended.  The demonization of anyone daring to ask even basic questions about the efficacy of the response, be it the vaccines themselves, the closure of public schools, the origin of the virus, or the absurdity of the useless public theater that made up much of the program.  The fissures created throughout society and the harm caused by guillotined relationships amongst family and friends.  The slanders and career chaos endured by prominent actual experts (see the Great Barrington Declaration) and just plain reasonable people like Jennifer Sey – https://nypost.com/2022/10/24/former-levis-top-exec-reveals-how-woke-mobs-took-over-corporations/ –  for daring to offer different approaches, approaches – such as focusing on the most vulnerable –  that had been tested and succeeded before. 

  And still a million people died.

  And now Oster asks if everyone would just please move on and forget about it?

  Oster kept her job.  Oster got famous.  The pandemic was good for Oster.

  The pandemic was also good for bureaucrats, multi-nationals, putative experts, the mindless media, and internet scolds.  It was good for woke adults who want to remain children, it was good for the national security-industrial complex, it was good for hiding behind, it was good for expanding societal power.

  It was not good for people.

  There are other aspects to consider when mulling over the request as well.

  • First, this amnesty idea was wholly predictable, though when I did so I assumed it would entail at least a modicum of shame – see here:

  • Second, the politics – for the Democrats –  of the request are incredibly stupid.  Placing the misery of the pandemic front and center a week before the mid-term election is beyond a bad idea and is only made the more amazing – and offensive – that it was done purposefully and in the context of demanding a free pass.  The fearlessly narcissistic arrogance of the bubble people knows no bounds – see here:

  • Third, as for the “we really didn’t know but we meant well so we’re all good, right?” aspect of the argument, that is a repellent lie.  Oster and her merry band of pandemicists knew full well (at least after the first few months) exactly what was happening, exactly the collateral damage being caused was and still actively decided to continue to push the false and destructive narrative of the response.  It strongly appears that the reason for the aggressive ignorance was wholly about power, fame, money, societal purchase, doubling down on mistakes so as not to have to admit error, and buying into (and burnishing) their own image as the nation’s saviors.

  It cannot be forgotten that until this moment  – except for Fauci, due to his deadly bungling of the emergence of AIDS – 99 percent of the people who suddenly, like Oster, became experts and got to be on television and publicly worshiped and given real actual power for the first time in their lives were – outside of their narrow fields – utter nobodies.  Being the all-praised, almighty center of attention feels good and that is a feeling you will do anything to keep going.

  Just the mind-warping act of asking for amnesty shows that nothing has been learned by Oster and her ilk and they will, if given the chance, do it all again exactly they way they did it this time.

  Amnesty is pretending something never happened – this episode in our history must never be forgotten if we are to preserve our nation.

  Amnesty will not – it cannot – be given. 

  And please do not ask again.

  *  *  *

  The Point is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 22:30

• Biden Admits The Truth: "No More Oil Drilling" As Energy Stocks Set To Soar
  Biden Admits The Truth: “No More Oil Drilling” As Energy Stocks Set To Soar

  It has been a great year for energy stocks as the chart below clearly reveals…

  

  … and it will be an even better year (and decade) for energy stocks.

  Why? Not because of what Goldman trader Michael Sullivan wrote last week explaining why Energy has (finally) become everyone’s favorite sector (more than two years after we first told our readers to go balls to the wall long XOM):

  “Energy continues to lead. When oil is up. When oil is down. When yields are up, or when they are down. When the US is threatening Windfall Profits Taxes or considering limits on product exports. Whether the market is hiding in defensives or shifting to more offensive positioning … maybe energy equities are leading because the market sees a pretty good set-up for oil: (1) US SPR release rate is slowing; (2) EU sanctions on Russian sea borne crude are expected to start in Dec; (3) we are passing peak refining maintenance and at the onset of winter — both of which should drive a sequential increase in demand; (4) distillate inventories are extremely low and subject to upside risks, link; (5) a Fed pivot would likely support inflows into commodities — implying a weaker dollar — every 10% move in the dollar is about 300k/d to oil demand on an annual basis.”

  It’s not because of what One River CIO Eric Peters wrote in his latest weekend note:

  “The UN forecasts that world population will pass eight billion next week,” said the energy executive. “One billion of us lack proper access to energy,” she continued. “And we are currently consuming 100mm barrels of oil per day.” That is double what it was 50yrs ago (still rising 1.5% per year). The IEA predicts consumption of 125mm barrels per day by mid-century if the current mix of policies continues. “India’s population will surpass China’s next year,” she said. India GDP per capita is $2,500 (China is $14,340). India is striving to catch up. “In the decades ahead, 90% of the world population will demand more energy.”

  It’s because of what Joe Biden let slip just two days before the midterms, namely what everyone always knew would be the pinnacle of catastrophic US energy policy under the democrats: “no more drilling”

  BREAKING: Two days before the midterm elections, Joe Biden clearly states he is for “no more [oil] drilling.” pic.twitter.com/2F9hZNOwMt

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) November 7, 2022

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

  As Michael Shellenberger so poignantly noted, for months, President Joe Biden and members of his cabinet have claimed that they are no obstacle to expanded oil and gas production in the United States.

  On June 21 Biden said, “This idea that they don’t have oil to drill and to bring up is simply not true. This piece of the Republicans talking about Biden shutting down fields is wrong.”

  On June 22, Biden said, I know my Republican friends claim, we’re not producing enough oil and I’m limiting oil production. Quite frankly, that’s nonsense.”

  And on November 2, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm tweeted, “Disinfo about @POTUS’ energy agenda is being used to scare/mislead Americans while industry cashes in. The facts are clear: This Admin outpaced the previous Admin on crude oil production + oil/gas well approvals while also making historic investments in a clean energy transition.”

  But tonight, Biden has effectively admitted that he, Energy Secretary Granholm, and others in his administration have been lying. 

  I have documented the lies Biden has told about his energy policy for the last five months. Others have as well. The Wall Street Journal reported in September that Biden had leased fewer acres of public land and waters offshore for oil and gas drilling than any other administration since World War II.

  

  Granholm tweeted out a Politico article that noted that Biden administration regulators approved oil and gas wells more quickly than the Trump administration did during its first 21 months in office.

  But the story was misleading because those approvals were entirely for drilling on private and state land, which are outside of the administration’s control, something Politico acknowledged 12 paragraphs into its article.

  Biden’s quote, which is on par with his “outrageous” coal plant closure comments, hardly needs more commentary but we will note that it comes just days after the White House unveiled its “brilliantly cunning” plan of promising energy execs that it would buy all the oil they had to sell at $72 to refill the SPR that Biden single-handedly drained to crush US energy companies. Maybe the same oil execs will be just a little skeptical when it comes to anything that comes out of this old man’s mouth going forward.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 22:00

• "It's Not Looking Good" – Martin Armstrong Warns There May Not Be A 2024 Election
  “It’s Not Looking Good” – Martin Armstrong Warns There May Not Be A 2024 Election

  Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

  Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong says, “The cheating in the midterm election next week is going to be so great that it is almost impossible to make a prediction. . . . In a fair midterm election, the Republicans would win the House and the Senate.”

  

  So, what does his Socrates program see for next week?  Armstrong, says, “It’s going to be tight, and the Republicans have a shot at taking the House.  Technically, they should take the House and the Senate.  I am just not sure.  The corruption is so bad, it’s crazy. ..”

  “Pennsylvania sent out hundreds of thousands of ballots to people who are not documented or even American.  I’ve gotten emails from people in Canada, they are getting mail-in ballots.  They mailed them to Canada…

  Where this ends up, who knows?  It’s just so corrupt, it is over the top.  It doesn’t matter who wins.  Nobody is going to accept this thing, and that is the problem.”

  The cheating is going to be so in your face President Trump may not even be able to run for President two years from now.  Armstrong contends, “We may not even have an election in 2024…”

  “It is not looking very good, and it’s probably because this election is not going to be accepted. 

  When it is so over-the-top corrupt, what do you do for the next one? 

  The United States will not exist after 2032.  After 2028 and 2029, we are going to have to redesign a government from scratch.  America is being destroyed. 

  Republics always end in absolute corruption.  We just saw the same thing happen in Brazil.  They staged a major effort to take Bolsonaro out…

  This is a worldwide effort.  They had to get rid of Trump.  The other one who stood in their way is Bolsonaro.  Then there is Putin (Russia) and Xi Jinping (China).  I think you are going to have historians look back at this 50 years from now, and they will call this period ‘The Climate Change Wars’…

  They are trying to take down as much oil energy capacity as possible.”

  Armstrong is still seeing very strong signals on domestic violence everywhere.  Armstrong explains, “Our computer is showing it’s going to be a rocket launch for volatility and civil unrest next year.”

  Armstrong also contends there will be a major loss of confidence in government around the world.  That means gold will start having big demand from big money.  Armstrong also predicts,

  “The whole monetary system as we know it is collapsing.  That was what the bond crisis in the UK was about.”

  There is much more in the 1-hour and 7-minute interview for 11.5.22.

  Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with Martin Armstrong, cycle expert and author of the new book “The Plot to Seize Russia, Manufacturing World War III.” Armstrong is giving the book away if you attend in-person the “2022 World Economic Conference” in Orlando, FL, next weekend.

  To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here

  There is some free information, analysis and articles on ArmstrongEconomics.com. Armstrong’s book, “The Plot to Seize Russia, Manufacturing World War III,” will be given away if you sign up for the “In-Person” conference below.  There will be a book buying link posted soon on ArmstrongEconomics.com, so be on the lookout for it. For tickets to Armstrong’s “2022 World Economic Conference” in Orlando, FL, November 11, 12, and 13, click here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 21:30

• Hedge Fund CIO: "My Best Guess Is That Something Like $300/Barrel Oil Eventually Ends This Cycle"
  Hedge Fund CIO: “My Best Guess Is That Something Like $300/Barrel Oil Eventually Ends This Cycle”

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “Wanna know what would make Biggie’s job easy?” barked Biggie Too, slipping into 3rd person like a warm bath. “On Valentine’s Day, non-farm payrolls is -250k, unemployment is above 4%, Powell says enough is enough, the S&P 500 troughs at 3300, and up we go,” bellowed Biggie, Chief Global Strategist for one of Wall Street’s Too-Big-To-Fail affairs. “The end of the bear market gets given to Biggie, wrapped up in a red bow.” Then Biggie went quiet. Agitating himself. “But Biggie doesn’t get gifts. Not for Valentine’s Day. Not for Christmas. Biggie doesn’t even get damn birthday cards.”

  “Biggie is not going to get a signal we got a big low,” said Too. “Biggie is going to get a continuation of a series of lows next year, and it’s going be horrible, just horrible,” he said, not sounding terribly upset about it if I’m being honest. “And somewhere in the middle of it, something is going to break. It always does. Always.” We’ve seen the warning signs bubbling up. The UK pension LDI debacle. “You don’t hike rates this fast and not break something big. It’s coming,” said Biggie. “And listen, you’ll know when to trade the Fed pivot. It’ll be after everyone has given up on the Fed pivot.”  

  MMT

  “The Fed and almost everyone else misunderstands how interest rates affect the economy,” said Warren Mosler, father of MMT. “Higher rates increase interest payments on gov’t debt, and these dollars get pumped into the economy,” he said. US GDP is roughly $25trln. US national debt held by the public is currently $24trln. If the average interest rate on this debt is 1%, the gov’t will pay $240bln in interest. If overnight rates stay high and the average rate on our debt stock rises to 4%, the government will pay $1trln per year. That’s ~4% of GDP.

  “The gov’t currently increases the deficit to pay interest on its debt, so higher interest rates increase the deficit and money in the system, and this lifts inflation,” continued Mossler. “If a gov’t wants to reduce demand, which I’m not saying is the problem, it should cut interest rates to 0% (keep them there forever), raise taxes, and/or cut federal spending. Lifting interest rates is the opposite of what it should do,” he said. “And raising rates pays interest only to the people in society who already have assets. It is the equivalent of Universal Basic Income for rich people.”

  “The rate hikes have sustained earnings but shifted them from the high multiple stocks into low multiple names,” explained Mosler. “The effect is a one-time decline in overall market capitalization for stocks as a whole, but once we adjust to this shift, the market heads higher to reflect the rising inflation brought on by the Fed,” he said. “Stocks will then be a good inflation hedge until something breaks.” In each cycle, something snaps. “You never know what it will be, but my best guess is that something like $300/barrel oil eventually ends this cycle.”

  

  “As for policy rates, it looks like the Fed will get rates to 5% or so,” said Mosler. “Inflation bumps around between 3%-6%,” he said.  “The federal deficit moves up toward 8%. Interest costs are quickly going to 3% of that and then headed higher still. Nominal GDP is probably in the range of 5%-6%,” said Mosler. “The rising amounts of money flowing into the economy from deficit spending, including things like student loan forgiveness, 8%-9% social security inflation adjustments, and infrastructure spending keeps inflation and nominal growth high. And stocks like nominal growth.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 20:30

• Apple Cuts Outlook For iPhone Shipments Again, This Time Due To Chinese Lockdowns
  Apple Cuts Outlook For iPhone Shipments Again, This Time Due To Chinese Lockdowns

  For the 2nd time in the past month, and just days after its “not all that bad” earnings presentation which helped AAPL be the only GAMMA stock not to tank after reporting Q3 earnings, late on Sunday Apple said shipments of its newest premium iPhones will be lower than previously expected after China lockdowns affected operations at a supplier’s factory.

  In a brief, tersely worded statement, Apple said that it continues to see strong demand for the iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max models but the neverending Chinese lockdowns – which have long ago become just a scapegoat for the Chinese economic implosion – mean “customers will experience longer wait times to receive their new products.” Also, on its website, the company said that deliveries of iPhone 14 Pro handsets are currently listed for late November or early December.

  Here is the full statement…

  COVID-19 restrictions have temporarily impacted the primary iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max assembly facility located in Zhengzhou, China. The facility is currently operating at significantly reduced capacity. As we have done throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, we are prioritizing the health and safety of the workers in our supply chain.

  We continue to see strong demand for iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max models. However, we now expect lower iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max shipments than we previously anticipated and customers will experience longer wait times to receive their new products.

  We are working closely with our supplier to return to normal production levels while ensuring the health and safety of every worker.

  … which company shareholders will wonder why none of this was discussed a little over a week ago when the company reported earnings; to be sure, there was zero mentions of China issues on the earnings call yet anyone following the company knew that it would have to guide down in the future. The only surprise is that the future was just one week later.

  Commenting on the release, Knowledge Vital’s Adam Crisafuli said that it was “so vague it almost makes us think the main intended audience was the Chinese government, not investors .. an indirect way for them to express their displeasure with the lack of change.”  Then again, we doubt China cares what Apple thinks.

  The abrupt move by the Chinese government last Wednesday to lock down the Zhengzhou area that includes a Hon Hai Precision Industry iPhone assembly plant until Nov. 9 is expected to further disrupt a factory already grappling with an on-site coronavirus outbreak, worker exodus and enforced quarantine.

  Apple said the facility is operating at “significantly reduced capacity,” while Hon Hai, the main listed arm of Taiwan’s Foxconn Technology Group, noted in a separate statement that it’s lowering its fourth-quarter outlook to factor in the lockdown.

  “Foxconn is now working with the government in concerted effort to stamp out the pandemic and resume production to its full capacity as quickly as possible,” the Taiwanese company said in a statement.

  In the latest Chinese covid-linked hysteria, the local government has ordered people and vehicles off the streets except for medical or other essential reasons, a prohibition that threatens to cut off the flow of additional workers and components needed to rev up production ahead of the holiday-season crush.

  At what point does it become obvious to everyone that Xi is just using the Wuhan fugitive to cover up for the ongoing Chinese economic implosion.

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 7, 2022

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

  The disruption comes at a crucial time for Apple, which launched the iPhone 14 during an unprecedented slump in global electronics demand. While faring better than other smartphone makers, it’s backed off plans to increase production of its new iPhones this year after an anticipated surge in demand failed to materialize, Bloomberg reported previously. Apple reported better-than-expected results but warned of a holiday slowdown.

  As Bloomberg reminds us, Apple didn’t provide a specific revenue forecast for the current quarter, continuing an approach it adopted at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. But analysts estimate sales of about $128 billion, which would be an all-time record. That forecast is now in serious jeopardy, and futures have reacted appropriately, with Eminis sliding as much as 1.1% in early trading but have since made up nearly half the initial drop.

  Unlike Facebook and Twitter, Apple has yet to unveil major layoffs. Instead, in the face of slowing growth, Apple has paused hiring for many jobs outside of research and development, an extension of its current plan to reduce budgets heading into next year.

  Meanwhile, Foxconn’s plant continues to operate within a “closed loop,” or a self-contained bubble that limits contact with the outside world. That is keeping some production going. Apple said on Sunday it is working closely with its supplier to return to “normal production levels while ensuring the health and safety of every worker.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 20:00

• "The Political Pressure On Powell Has Started With Unemployment Rising Just 0.2% To 3.7%"
  “The Political Pressure On Powell Has Started With Unemployment Rising Just 0.2% To 3.7%”

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “I am deeply troubled by the Federal Reserve’s rapid series of super-sized interest rate hikes, which may inflict unnecessary pain on millions of individuals and families while sending the economy into a devastating recession,” wrote Chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee in a public letter to Fed Chairman Powell.

  “This week’s Federal Open Market Committee decision marks the fourth consecutive mega rate hike by the Fed, resulting in the highest federal funds rate since before the 2008 global financial crisis and the fastest set of rate hikes by the Fed in four decades. Enough is enough,” continued Maxine Waters.

  And this level of political pressure has started with unemployment rising just 0.2% to 3.7%.

  * * *

  “The last thing I’ll say is that I would want people to understand our commitment to getting this done and to not making the mistake of not doing enough or the mistake of withdrawing our strong policy and doing that too soon,” said America’s central bank chief, speaking to journalists, having just hiked interest rates another 75bps.

  “I control those messages,” explained Jay Powell.

  “That’s my job.”

  And indeed, it is. In 1977, Congress set the Federal Reserve’s goals: maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.

  Our politicians did not tell central bankers how to achieve these goals. Neither did they quantify how much short-term pain they would be willing to bear in the pursuit of this mandate, nor did they make clear over what time horizon they would measure success.

  And naturally, in such an infinitely complex system, there is no singular way to achieve these sensible goals. So, we appoint central bankers we believe will have the judgement required to navigate the labyrinth. But of course, the maze is always changing. So the Fed strategies must adapt to our present circumstances.

  What worked during globalization and peace is now largely obsolete. That’s obvious. But what is not yet clear is how the actions of our central bankers and politicians are eroding our collective faith in the value of money.  In recent decades, central bankers and politicians grew increasingly aggressive in rescuing speculators from financial folly. Then Covid happened. And they created more money than anyone could possibly imagine. Presto. Magic. Everyone got something.

  Now we’re forgiving student debt. Newsweek just reported 63% of Americans support federal inflation relief payments. This is before politicians fund vital projects in the decade ahead: military, infrastructure, environment, inequality.

  And now Powell’s job is to navigate a labyrinth, unlike any in American history, in a quest to restore meaning to money.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 19:30

• PTSD-Stricken Progressives Flee Austin Over "Too Many Republicans"
  PTSD-Stricken Progressives Flee Austin Over “Too Many Republicans”

  Progressives who have descended upon Austin, Texas in recent years are starting to reverse course amid a state-wide shift towards conservatism, NY Mag reports.

  

  “It was easy to just be in Never Neverland, floating with a bunch of other transplants having a good time,” said John Stettin, who relocated from Dallas to Austin five years ago and is now leaving for Massachusetts because of ‘too many Republicans,’ as one friend described the situation during Stettin’s going-away party.

  Austin has been a predominantly Democratic city full of ‘liberal expats’ who seek progressive politics and an urban lifestyle ‘at a red-state cost-of-living discount,’ according to the report.

  Then the pandemic hit – and mean Governor Greg Abbott banned municipalities – including Austin – from implementing various COVID measures, such as mask mandates. Then, Abbott codified permitless carry into law and, according to liberals, ‘further restricted voting access.’

  Then, this past February, Abbott ordered child abuse investigations into parents of trans children – who, according to the report, began fleeing texas months ago.

  “I’ve always said, ‘I’m gonna stay and fight until they try to take my kids away,;” said ‘Karen’ (name withheld), who has a trans child and says she did not want to risk being separated from her children. Karen has ‘fled from Austin to Portland, Oregon,’ causing her Republican father to ‘burst into tears.’

  Karen says she has PTSD and survivor’s guilt for not staying behind.

  By June, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Texas was 10 months into implementing an abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest, and a $10,000 reward for informants.

  The overturning of Roe seemed to remove the last obstacle in the state’s march to the far right, which is likely to be cemented in the upcoming election where Beto O’Rourke is way behind Abbott. While the Democratic mayor and the liberal city council institute token measures such as decriminalizing abortion, it’s cold comfort. One 25-year-old woman said she had her tubes tied, fearing the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy. One couple may relocate to the Northeast to carry out their pregnancy. Some job candidates are refusing to relocate. At Stettin’s party, his friend Jeff swiped open his phone to a note entitled “New Austin Cities” — a list of places that are what Austin used to be to him before he moved here from New York. It read, “Pittsburgh, Durham, Boise, Columbus, Jackson Hole, Chattanooga. Factors: Climate change, demographics, economy, location, taxes, nature, weather.” He plans to stick it out at least for now. “Global warming in the next ten years,” he said. “That’s gonna be fucking real.” -NY Mag

  “It’s like how a frog boils one degree at a time,” said Stettin. “They trigger-banned all abortion and they’re offering a bounty! What more do you need if you are a remotely liberal person to get the fuck out of here?”

  “At least if I’m going to get into an argument with a guy in Boston, he’s probably not carrying an AR-15 in his trunk,” he said, referring to his upcoming move.

  Good call John?

  

  That said, while liberals are leaving Austin, it was ranked the fastest-growing metro in the US in February, which has seen its population grow by 33% over the past decade thanks to the draw of ‘hippie-cowboy capital’ tech jobs.

  In the past year, rents in Austin have soared over 20%, while the media home price rose around the same percent over the same period, with companies such as Tesla acting as a primary driver of migration with the construction of a $1.1 billion “gigafactory” nearby.

  If you thought the blue exodus was big now, just wait until after midterms…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 19:00

• National Guard Cybersecurity Units Activated In 14 States Ahead Of Midterm Elections: Reports
  National Guard Cybersecurity Units Activated In 14 States Ahead Of Midterm Elections: Reports

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

  Cybersecurity units from the National Guard will be activated in 14 U.S. states to help counter any threats to election officials’ networks ahead of, during, and after the upcoming Nov. 8 midterm elections, according to reports.

  The 14 include battleground states Arizona, Iowa, and Pennsylvania, as well as Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, North Carolina, New Mexico, New York, Washington, and West Virginia, reported Politico.

  Brig. Gen. Gent Welsh, the commander of the Washington Air National Guard, said at a virtual media briefing on Nov. 4 that not every state is doing it but states that are activating these units “have invested in cyber talent and cyber missions for years,” according to outlet Statescoop, which reports on technology-related news in government.

  “If you don’t have a cyber unit in your state you’re not in a good position to help them protect elections,” Welsh said.

  He added that the National Guard’s participation in election cybersecurity activities “does add an air of credibility to what’s out there,” noting that the National Guard “is still one of the most trusted institutions in the United States.”

  

  ‘As Secure Elections as Possible’

  The plan comes after eight states received support from cyber units in the National Guard during the primary elections that took place earlier this year.

  According to the outlets, there are 38 dedicated cyber units within the Air and Army National Guard across the United States that work to help state and local officials on cyber-related issues such as network assessments and risk mitigation. The cyber units collectively comprise over 2,200 personnel.

  “Our goal is to make sure we have as secure elections as possible. We are at the really beginning stages of this,” said Air Force Maj. Gen. Rich Neely, head of the Illinois National Guard, reported Statescoop.

  National Guard officials will receive security updates from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in their work to support the midterms, Politico reported.

  According to its website, CISA was created in 2018 under the Trump administration to work with government and industry partners to defend against current and predicted threats to cyber and physical infrastructure, including election infrastructure.

  No Indication of Potential Election Infrastructure Disruption: CISA Director

  CISA Director Jen Easterly has repeatedly said she doesn’t expect any major disruptions to the midterms. Most recently, on Nov. 1, at an event hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Easterly said that there is “no information credible or specific about efforts to disrupt or compromise” election infrastructure and that she was “very confident that we have done everything we can to make election infrastructure as secure and as resilient as possible.”

  Air Force Maj. Gen. Rich Neely, head of the Illinois National Guard, said that he and his team are “not expecting to see anything.”

  “But much like we did after Jan. 6, if the Guard’s called in, the Guard responds as needed,” he said, reported Statescoop.

  “We’re not expecting anything with what we’re seeing.”

  Army Major General M. Todd Hunt, the adjutant general of the North Carolina National Guard, said at the media briefing on Nov. 4 that his state has a joint cyber mission center that will facilitate communication between the state’s cyber unit, its departments of Information Technology and Emergency Management, as well as federal contacts from CISA, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI.

  According to the outlets, Hunt said there will be 25 National Guard members on duty in the cyber unit for North Carolina on Election Day, up from the usual core team of 10. The extra members will include federal and emergency management partners.

  “We will surge during the election to ensure that we have 24-hour coverage throughout this whole process,” Hunt said, per Politico. “We are citizen soldiers, we live in this state, and we do have a vested interest in our state elections as well as our federal elections.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 18:30

• "I'm Selling My Blood To Eat, I Have No Choice": Biden Inflation Crushes Americans
  “I’m Selling My Blood To Eat, I Have No Choice”: Biden Inflation Crushes Americans

  Gas, groceries, electricity, and rent — the price of everything has soared to four-decade highs under the Biden administration. Household finances are under severe pressure as wage growth fails to outpace inflation for 18 months, leading many folks to find a second job. Even holding two jobs isn’t enough to sustain the cost-of-living crisis, as some are finding the nearest plasma clinic to donate blood to earn extra cash. 

  Cashe Lewis, 31, of Denver, Colorado, works multiple jobs and is trying to find a third job due to rising shelter inflation. She told The Guardian she works six days a week, sometimes more than 16 hours per day, just to pay the bills. 

  “I’m exhausted all the time … on the one day I have off a week, I donate plasma for extra money. I’m literally selling my blood to eat because I have no choice,” Lewis said. 

  She said many of her “friends and family work multiple jobs” as inflation makes “nothing affordable and the roadblocks set up to keep people in the cycle of poverty benefit the most wealthy members of our society.” 

  Lewis said: “We aren’t living, we’re barely surviving, and we have no choice but to keep doing it.”

  More Americans than ever are working multiple jobs as inflation wipes out real wage growth.

  

  Real wage growth has been negative for 18 consecutive months. 

  

  The personal savings rate has tumbled to multi-decade lows at 3.1%, just shy of the record low of 3.0%…

  

  And some experts are concerned about the pace of growth in consumer credit as debt loads for households soar as their wages can’t cover added costs of food, shelter, and energy. 

  But according to MSNBC’s Joy Reid, her latest comments claim that Americans were oblivious to inflation until conservative political candidates started talking about it.

  Reid’s suggestion insinuates that the public was comfortably unaware of the inflationary/stagflationary crisis and could have stayed that way had it not been for those meddling Republicans and their refusal to use the “common tongue” on the campaign trail. In other words, she believes the average voter is stupid.

  Voters aren’t stupid, and they’re going to vote with their depleted wallets on Tuesday. A recent poll found that most Americans (over 90%) now rate inflation and the economic decline as their top worry going into the midterm elections. 

  And it’s not just Lewis who has sold her blood plasma to feed her family. Many others like her are scouring the internet for where they can donate plasma for money. 

  

  Over the summer, Fox 35 Orlando published a story titled “More people donating plasma to earn extra money amid inflation, rising costs.” They interviewed Dan Hernandez, the director of Octapharma Plasma in Orlando, who said, “We have countless people coming into our facilities saying it’s really hard to make ends meet.” 

  Hernandez said the number of people donating has doubled in the last year, coinciding with the inflation spike in the economy. 

  “Inflation. Everybody who comes here obviously they talk to us, and they tell us that it’s difficult to make ends meet,” he said.

  The general public knows that working multiple jobs, barely affording to live while making frequent stops at the plasma clinic just to put food on the table isn’t normal. At least polling data shows many are awakening to Biden’s failed policies have made their lives worse. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 18:00

• What We Knew In The Early Days Of COVID
  What We Knew In The Early Days Of COVID

  Via The Brownstone Institute,

  The claim is now everywhere:

  • We had to lock down because we just didn’t know about this virus.

  • It was all very confusing and we had to play it safe.

  • We had no other option because we just had no clarity about what we were dealing with.

  • The precautionary principle dictated the unprecedented actions. 

  

  Actually, the precautionary principle goes both directions.

  It also dictates that we not enact policies that we know for sure would wreck lives and liberties. They did it anyway, without sufficient knowledge that the measures would achieve any positive good. 

  We approach the third year and people have forgotten that all the harms of lockdowns were strongly warned about by many voices in many venues. In addition, the virus was much better understood back then and openly discussed. We knew for certain that the panic and fear were being wildly overblown.

  Below follows resources assembled by the ‘Robber Baron‘ and many others who write for the Brownstone Institute. These citations from newspapers, magazines, academic journals and interviews, with many respected voices, show that we certainly knew tremendous amounts in the early days.

  All the warnings and information were readily available to anyone paying attention.

  • 2019: WHO Global Influenza Programme recommends against lockdowns and masks

  • Sept 2019: Johns Hopkins pandemic preparedness study recommends against lockdowns

  • Jan 24: Doctor warns that mass quarantine won’t work and will devastate society

  • Jan 30: Obama health adviser says stop panicking

  • Feb 5: Fauci says there’s no asymptomatic spread

  • Feb 28: Fauci says this is more akin to flu than something more deadly

  • Mar: 81% of Chinese Covid cases are mild

  • Mar 1: Sweden: No effective measure to let healthy school children stay at home 

  • Mar 2: Discussion on how Covid IFR was likely much lower than predicted

  • Mar 2: 800 public health scientists warn against lockdowns, quartantines, restrictions

  • Mar 3: Article on why masks are impractical

  • Mar 3: Berkeley doctor indicates masks are not helpful in preventing Covid

  • Mar 4: Doctor says Covid not nearly as deadly as feared

  • Mar 4: Your doctor is not panicking and neither should you

  • Mar 6: Doctor talking about unnecessary panic over Covid 

  • Mar 9: Article on how Covid is only really dangerous to the elderly 

  • Mar 12: Chief medical officer saying people shouldn’t wear masks

  • Mar 13: Review found severe mental health problems from prolonged quarantine

  • Mar 15: Medical organisation says stopping elective surgeries is unnecessary and dangerous

  • Mar 17: Warning of financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric

  • Mar 19: Article about Covid overaction and its issues

  • Mar 25: Data about the health impacts of crushing the economy

  • Mar 26: Early evidence of hospitals inaccurately listing Covid as cause of death

  • Mar 26: Early data show we’re overreacting to Covid

  • Mar 28: Predictions about the harms of lockdowns: Drugs, Suicide, and Crime

  • Mar 28: Guardian outlines rise in domestic abuse throughout the world

  • Mar 30: Study showing children are not the primary spreader of Covid 

  • Apr 1: Article saying masks offer little to no advantage outside of hospital settings

  • Apr 3: An overview on the dangers of lockdowns 

  • Apr 4: Warning of the harm in delaying non-Covid medical procedures

  • Apr 4: Research showing the seasonality of Coronaviruses

  • Apr 6: U.N. warns about domestic violence surge

  • Apr 6: Piece on domestic abuse during lockdown

  • Apr 7: Study from China finds of 7,324 COVID-19 cases only two transmissions occurred outdoors

  • Apr 7: Piece on the mental health cost of the lockdown on kids

  • Apr 8: Research showing school lockdowns aren’t helpful and cause great harm

  • Apr 13: More confirmation about domestic abuse rising due to lockdowns

  • Apr 14: Children are very unlikely to contract Covid

  • Apr 15: Barely any transmission from outdoor activities

  • Apr 15: Different approaches by countries have little impact on Covid deaths

  • Apr 15: Molecular Biologist suggests the cure is worse than the disease

  • Apr 16: UN overview about the poverty/death that will come from lockdowns

  • Apr 16: CDC mask study concludes that masks don’t work

  • Apr 17: Info on how damaging cancelled procedures are

  • Apr 20: Oxford professor says cases in U.K. peaked before lockdown 

  • Apr 22: Potential for 60,000 cancer deaths due to lack of screening/treatment

  • Apr 23: The harm lockdowns are having on people with heart conditions

  • Apr 24: Data on the mental health toll of lockdowns

  • Apr 24: Study showing school closings are the least cost-effective pandemic policy

  • Apr 27: The rise of domestic abuse during lockdowns

  • Apr 28: Increasing child abuse is a side effect of Covid lockdowns

  • Apr 29: Cancer deaths could increase by 20% due to lockdown

  • Apr 30: Santa Clara seroprevalence study shows high prevalence

  • May 1: Indications from Europe that lockdowns are ineffective

  We certainly live in an age of short attention span but many these signs and warnings came weeks or months before the world locked down and they chronicled the damage as it was happening.

  Why all this came to be completely ignored remains the burning question. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 17:30

• Meta Reportedly Readying To Fire 1000s This Week
  Meta Reportedly Readying To Fire 1000s This Week

  Just over a week ago, Meta CFO Dave Wehner confidently stated that the not-so-giant tech firm will basically freeze headcount and limit new hiring…

  Our pace of hiring slowed in the third quarter, consistent with our previously-stated plans. We added 3,700 net new hires in Q3, down from our Q2 net additions of 5,700 despite Q3 typically being a seasonally stronger hiring period. We expect hiring to slow dramatically going forward and to hold headcount roughly flat next year relative to current levels…

  We are making significant changes across the board to operate more efficiently. We are holding some teams flat in terms of headcount, shrinking others and investing headcount growth only in our highest priorities. As a result, we expect headcount at the end of 2023 will be approximately in-line with third quarter 2022 levels.

  At the time, we were a little surprised (given the scale of the losses)…

  In a normal world METHA would announce 20% layoffs after the close

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 27, 2022

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

  With the shares down 36% since then (and is down over 70% this year), something has apparently changed extremely fast.

  

  The Wall Street Journal reports that, according to people familiar with the matter, Meta is planning to begin large-scale layoffs this week.

  As of the last earnings, Meta had over 87,000 employees (and has never seen a quarterly decline in headcount in its 18 year history)…

  

  The WSJ sources say that layoffs are expected to affect many thousands of employees and an announcement is planned to come as soon as Wednesday, with company officials having already told employees to cancel non-essential travel beginning this week.

  While smaller on a percentage basis than the cuts at Twitter Inc. this past week, which hit about half of that company’s staff, the number of Meta employees expected to lose their jobs could be the largest to date at a major technology corporation in a year that has seen a tech industry retrenchment.

  Meta is far from alone…

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As a reminder, CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees at a companywide meeting at the end of June:

  “Realistically, there are probably a bunch of people at the company who shouldn’t be here.”

  It seems he has found his people.

  None of this should come as a surprise to ZeroHedge readers since we have been warning of a post-Midterm collapse in payrolls.

  Everything had to be held together ahead of the election in the “strong as hell” economy...

  

  But then…

  Sherrod Brown letter confirms after Midterms we get -250K payrolls report, perhaps as soon as December

  Need scapegoat

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 25, 2022

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

  …and given the letters from various high-ranking Democratic Party officials, we know who the scapegoat for this collapse will be…

  

  But what happens next to Zuck?

  Prediction: This ass kicking wont break Zuck — it will make Zuck.

  He will RIF, reduce R&D spend, RIF again possibly, and start buying back stock with juiced FCF https://t.co/QsokdRorQ1 pic.twitter.com/u3ZTdeTIyX

  — @jason (@Jason) November 6, 2022

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

  Given the outcry at Elon Musk’s decision to cut ‘less productive’ Twitter employees (while losing millions every day), we wonder how long before those that #LearnedToCode will need to transition and #LearnToBarista and their voting bloc will turn on one of their greatest funders.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 17:00

• "When True Democracy Goes Away, People Get Hurt": Obama Joins Mantra That Democracy Is At Risk If GOP Wins
  “When True Democracy Goes Away, People Get Hurt”: Obama Joins Mantra That Democracy Is At Risk If GOP Wins

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Former President Barack Obama continued the Democratic campaign theme this week in arguing that democracy is in danger if Republicans prevail in the midterm elections. I have a new column out this weekend addressing the over-the-top rhetoric coming from Democratic politicians and pundits. However, the former president’s speech was revealing as he cited the very arguments made by Democrats  . . . as attacks on democracy.  Obama did not go as far as some but he also seemed to channel the dire warnings of the imminent collapse of our democracy if the Republicans should prevail in the elections.

  Obama remains one of the most impressive speakers of our time. With the unpopularity of President Joe Biden, candidates are relying heavily on Obama for good reason. His standard stump speech is still heads and shoulders above most other politicians.

  Yet, the speech below was notable in the arguments that Obama warns voters not to heed.

  “I understand that democracy might not seem like a top priority right now. Especially when it doesn’t seem like the results always work for you. When you don’t see enough progress on issues that matter to you and your family. Sometimes progress is slow. But we have seen throughout history and we’re seeing right now what happens when you give up on democracy.”

  It was a curious argument given the effort of many in the party to pack the Supreme Court and push censorship on social media.

  Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass, has declared the Supreme Court illegitimate and has called to pack the Court for rending opinions against “widely held public opinion.”

  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., even questioned the institution’s value: “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.” She has now demanded the impeachment of Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch based on the entirely false claim that they lied under oath in their confirmation hearings. After the Dobbs decision, Ocasio-Cortez demanded “there must be consequences” for the Court.

  Elie Mystal (past writer for Above the Law and the Nation) called the Constitution “trash.” Some law professors want to “reclaim America from Constitutionalism.”

  Obama added that you see the threat to democracy “in countries where the government tells you what books you can and cannot read.” Yet, many on the left are seeking to preserve censorship by surrogate on social media and seeking to prevent the publication of books by those with whom they disagree, including a book by Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. With corporate censorship threatened, many leaders like Hillary Clinton are turning to good old-fashioned state censorship.

  Indeed, President Joe Biden has questioned how citizens will know the truth without censors framing what the truth is on social media and the Internet.

  Obama ended this discussion with the same ominous warnings heard from other Democratic politicians and pundits:  “when true democracy goes away, people get hurt.”

  Various pundits have been pushing the vote-Democratic-or-die mantra. On MSNBC, historian Michael Beschloss on MSNBC declared a Republican win could lead not only to the end of history books and democracy but lead to the killing of our children. That was then followed by another MSNBC interview with actor and Director Rob Reiner who claimed that Republicans “are willing to kill, literally kill, to get the power . . .  this might be the last election we have in a democracy.”

  It is language that is not just demagoguery but dangerous. It is meant to spread fear in citizens and make them believe that our constitutional system is about to fail. We have the most successful constitutional system in the history of the world. It has weathered every storm and will weather our current political divisions. What kills democracy are self-inflicted wounds caused by those who cast doubts about our safety or demonize their opponents as enemies of the state.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 16:30

• Morgan Stanley's 3 Keys Takeaways For Investors From Election Week In America
  Morgan Stanley’s 3 Keys Takeaways For Investors From Election Week In America

  By Michael Zezas and Seth Carpenter, strategists at Morgan Stanley

  On Tuesday, Americans will cast their ballot for members of Congress. Well…most Americans will. Many will have already voted by mail, meaning that, as in 2020, investors may have to wait days to know with certainty who will control Congress. Given the axiom that markets hate uncertainty, here are our three key takeaways to help investors to cope with the lack of clarity that election week in America will bring:

  1. Concerned about near-term market volatility? Higher volatility more likely results from a better-than-expected night for Democrats than for Republicans. Outcomes that meet expectations typically do not move markets a lot. And judging from recent levels and trends in both polls and prediction markets, Republicans are expected to win a majority in at least one chamber of Congress. Against that backdrop, it is important to note that we do not see a Republican win as leading to policies that on their own would be important market catalysts in any direction. Conversely, Democrats’ expanding their majorities in Congress would buck the expectations set by polls and prediction markets. That outcome would also undercut the notion that inflation is an electoral liability for the Democrats. Investors could see this result as freeing the party from the political and legislative constraints that kept Congress from enacting some of the fiscally expansionary policies that were part of President Biden’s original ‘Build Back Better’ agenda. Hence, markets could assign a higher probability to further fiscal expansion, with Congress and the Fed effectively pulling in opposite directions on inflation. The short-term implications for markets could be higher Treasury yields and a stronger dollar, reflecting the potential for a higher peak federal funds rate.

  2. A Republican ‘win’ may not create near-term market volatility, but does introduce situational risks for 2023. Benign neglect is often the outcome for a split government in the US, but not always. Following the 2010 midterm elections, gridlock led to protracted debt limit standoffs and government shutdowns. The resolution to one such standoff was the Budget Control Act of 2011, which implemented contractionary fiscal policy while the economy was still weak. Indeed, when the legislation was passed in August of that year, the unemployment rate stood at 9%. The result was weaker growth and a slower economic recovery, which partially explains why the liftoff of the fed funds rate was delayed until 2015 and unfolded gradually thereafter. At present, Republican leadership is signaling its intent to deploy the same tactics if the party wins majorities. While markets could easily dismiss these negotiations as political theater, as they have in recent years amid solid economic conditions, if the economic outlook sours in 2023 in unexpected ways, the specter of the Budget Control Act could weigh on markets.

  3. Beware premature conclusions on election night. As in 2020, the increased use of vote by mail means the early reported vote tallies may not be a good indicator of who is winning, especially in races expected to be close. What we saw in 2020 and in other elections is that mail-in ballots were cast more often by Democrats than Republicans, and in many jurisdictions were counted after in-person voting. That means early reported results should look favorable to Republicans, but as in 2020, leads can vanish over time. Consider the Pennsylvania Senate race. Assuming mail-in ballots are cast in the same proportions and with the same party skew as they were in 2020, we estimate that the Republican candidate could win the in-person vote by 29% and still lose after all ballots are counted. Hence, we will need to reserve judgement, perhaps for days, on which party seems poised to control Congress. If you’re looking to cut through this noise and assess whether early results are consistent with a good outcome for Democrats or Republicans, check out our ‘Blue Shift’ interactive tool.

  And as always, our ultimate piece of advice for those who don’t like political uncertainty…vote!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 15:30

• "I Heard A Big Bang": California Man Believes Meteorite Destroyed His Home
  “I Heard A Big Bang”: California Man Believes Meteorite Destroyed His Home

  On Friday, dozens of people across Northern California witnessed a bright ball of light tumbling from the night sky. Several captured the phenomenon on camera, while one man believes the final destination of that bright light, which could be a meteorite, destroyed his home. 

  “I heard a big bang,” Nevada County resident Dustin Procita told local news KCRA’s Michelle Bandur. 

  Procita said after that loud noise, he “started to smell smoke. I went onto my porch and it was completely engulfed in flames.”

  

  Bandur spoke with Josh Miller, captain of Penn Valley Fire Department, who said a call came in around 7:30 pm local time for a structure fire. It took firefighters several hours to combat the flames. 

  Friday at 7:26 pm, CAL FIRE responded with Penn Valley FPD to a Residential Structure Fire near Lake Englebright. E2354 arrived first reporting a well involved trailer and vehicle, with no threat to vegetation. The fire was contained, committing resources for approx. 4 hours. pic.twitter.com/WPfjtZcLj8

  — CAL FIRE Nevada-Yuba-Placer Unit (@CALFIRENEU) November 5, 2022

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

  “It appears the bright ball of light captured on car and home videos landed in the middle of nowhere. Procita believes it was a meteor that landed on his house,” Bandur said. 

  Anyone else just see this crazy flash light up the sky? Captured by my dashcam in El Dorado Hills, CA. pic.twitter.com/4BlzOB5ISD

  — Derek Schnell (@DerekKCRA) November 5, 2022

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

  Miller told the reporter: “Everyone I talked to said it was a flaming ball falling from the sky and landed in that general area” of Procita’s home. He said those who observed the fireball in the night sky tracked it to the incident area. 

  “I had one individual tell me about it first and I put it in the back of my mind but then more people — 2, 3, 4 — started coming in and talking about it,” he said.

  

  At the same time, the Southern Taurids meteor shower was at its peak in the region. Miller said it could take at least a week or more to determine the cause of the fire. 

  Wonder if the homeowner has meteorite insurance? 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 15:00

• 5.5 Million Illegal Aliens Crossed US Border Since Biden Took Office: Report
  5.5 Million Illegal Aliens Crossed US Border Since Biden Took Office: Report

  Authored by Tom Ozimek and Steve Lance via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The total number of people who have entered the United States illegally since President Joe Biden took office has climbed to 5.5 million, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

  

  Dan Stein, president of FAIR, shared the stark number during a recent interview on NTD’s “Capitol Report” program, which followed a recent announcement by the Biden administration that nearly 2.8 million illegal border crossers were stopped in the fiscal year ended in September, a record high.

  U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) disclosed the figures in a recent operational update that brought the total official number of illegal border crossers to around 4.4 million since Biden took office.

  Stein said FAIR arrived at the 5.5 million figure by adding to the 4.4 million an estimated 1.1 million who managed to evade capture and entered the United States undetected.

  “It’s pretty straightforward,” Stein said of the estimate. “There are typical projections that are confirmed by Census data of people who just run around—they call them ‘gotaways’—who enter without inspection, then disappear.”

  “If you look at the entire period, it’s about 5.5 million since Biden took office,” adding that FAIR projections estimate the cost to taxpayers to be $20 billion.

  Stein blamed the Biden administration for dismantling Trump-era “deterrence strategies” along the border for the surge.

  The White House did not immediately return a request for comment on the figures Stein cited.

  CBP said that a surge in migration from Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua in September brought the number of illegal crossings to the highest level ever recorded in a fiscal year.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 14:30

• Biden Press Secretary Under Fire For 'Mega MAGA Republican' Comment
  Biden Press Secretary Under Fire For ‘Mega MAGA Republican’ Comment

  A government watchdog group has filed a complaint against White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, alleging that she violated the Hatch Act when she made comments about “Mega MAGA Republican” officials.

  

  In a Nov. 3 complaint, Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) told the US Office of Special Counsel (OSC) that Jean-Pierre violated the federal law that limits the political activities of federal employees, when she said during a Nov. press conference, “Unfortunately, we have seen mega MAGA Republican officials who don’t believe in the rule of law,” adding “They refuse to accept the results of free and fair elections, and they fan the flames of political violence through what they praise and what they refuse to condemn.”

  Jean-Pierre: “Democracy is under assault and we cannot pretend otherwise… Mega MAGA Republican officials…don’t believe in the rule of law. They refuse to accept the results of elections and they fan the flames of political violence.”pic.twitter.com/6v8k7GbJrw

  — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) November 2, 2022

  PPT director Michael Chamberlain said the comments were “disparaging President Biden’s political opponents,” adding that her statements “were clearly made in her role as an employee of the White House and appear to be political in nature, seeking the defeat of her political opponents in the Republican party in the upcoming general election less than a week away on November 8.”

  As The Epoch Times further notes;

  The watchdog group is asking the OSC to “promptly investigate Ms. Jean-Pierre’s conduct as a potential Hatch Act violation based on her use of her official position to advocate for the defeat of a political party.”

  “We request that you promptly investigate these potential violations and immediately intervene to ensure that the government officials do not abuse their official authority in an attempt to influence the results of the impending 2022 general election.”

  “The comments appear to be clearly designed to influence voters in next week’s election,” Chamberlain said in a separate statement. “A quick and complete investigation into these statements would be a good first step in helping to restore the American public’s trust in its government.”

  PPT in a release said that Jean-Pierre’s statement is an “attempt to sway an election” and is a “direct violation of the Hatch Act’s prohibition” against government employees using their office to influence an election.

  The group alleges that her statement cannot be attributed to “an insufficient knowledge of the restrictions of the Hatch Act,” in part because her predecessor, Jen Psaki, and White House Chief of Staff, Ron Klain, have previously been found in violation of the same federal law. Furthermore, Jean-Pierre herself “has on several occasions cited the Hatch Act as justification for avoiding responding to queries from the press corps,” PPT noted.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 14:00

• Haley Joel Osment For Fed Chair
  Haley Joel Osment For Fed Chair

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  Haley Joel Osment for Fed Chair

  Maybe I’m the one who is “seeing dead people” as I’ve had my share of mistakes recently, but given Powell’s take on inflation, I think that he is the one “seeing dead people,” so Haley might be a good candidate.

  As much as I’d like to rant and rave about Friday’s wild market gyrations, the growth of trading in daily expiration stock options, flows into TQQQ and ARKK, and my new “favorite” ETF DBMF (managed futures), that will have to wait until the week starts.

  Today, we focus on inflation and (most importantly) jobs as we’ve hammered home the inflation story a lot lately. Some of this follows directly from Let Them Eat Expectations and Powell & The Fed (link).

  Inflation

  Let’s start this section with the bold statement that I would rent my house for two years to anyone who would pay me what the average of three credible realtors thought we could get at this time last year! However, I am not sure how well that will go over with my wife if someone takes me up on that offer. In any case, the input for rent in CPI is just ludicrously off-market. We’ve compared real world/timely rent numbers with owners’ equivalent rent in several recent pieces:

  • OER Seems Crazy

  • Inflation Dumpster Dive which also digs into commodity inflation, autos, and inventories.

  • More Inflation Dumpster Diving as I couldn’t stay out of the dumpster, and found more on rents, autos, and inventories!

  As you can tell, autos, big ticket items, inventories, and commodities have also been themes in our “inflation questions.” We won’t spend any more time on those. Instead, we will try to address (more thoroughly) the questions about the job market that we are receiving.

  Jobs Will Be the Absolutely Last Thing to Crack in This Cycle

  My view is that:

  • We will see signs of a slowdown that will give the market hope that we can get a soft landing. This will re-start the “everything” rally (which fell apart after 2:30 pm on Wednesday), but started to claw its way back to life on Friday.

  • Then we will have the fear of a serious, deep, and longer-term recession.

  The second phase would include big hits to employment. While employment is almost always the last bit of economic data to roll over, it will be even slower to react this time around!

  Companies have spent the better part of the last 2 years finding it extremely difficult to hire employees! Arguably it has never been so difficult to hire employees. Even with pay, better benefits, and accommodative work schedules nothing seemed to help! So, here we are, with signs of weakness in the economy, uncertainty over the future (from so many perspectives), and even a few negative employment headlines. However, layoffs remain low and hiring seems solid. Why would we expect anything different?

  While we all make mistakes, we rarely make the same mistake twice as we tend to overcompensate (*cough* transitory *cough cough*). HR departments will be particularly reluctant to use layoffs in the first, second, or even third round of cost cuts! The inability to hire is too fresh in our minds and no-one wants to be caught in the situation where we get some sort of “softish” landing and need to hire people who were just let go. Starting conditions matter and the starting point of this slowdown is that labor is more protected than ever before – therefore weakness will show up in the labor market even later than usual. We could also see some discrepancies between large companies (that can afford to carry marginally useful workers) and small businesses (who don’t have that luxury).

  By the time that we see the data hit the employment statistics, it will be too late to do anything (and we should be at least starting to see a serious risk-off move).

  Questions Around the Jobs Data

  For rent, autos, and a few other things, I’m firmly in the camp that someone at the Fed is “seeing dead people.” For jobs, the data isn’t bad and that doesn’t surprise me because employment will be the last shoe to drop.

  Having said that, there are some things about the job market that deserve attention.

  • In Friday’s NFP Instant Reaction (link), we highlighted a few issues that don’t necessarily show extreme strength in the job market: wages, participation rate, and the large difference between the Household and Establishment Surveys (even considering relative accuracy).
    • Since we sent that, we’ve had numerous discussions about whether the Establishment is picking up the aforementioned possibility that large corporations are more reluctant than small companies to let go of employees at this stage. It also could be possible that people who know that they are being laid off report themselves as not working while the companies have yet to fill out the paperwork or are still paying severance. These are just few discussion points around this large deviation (2.3 million jobs since March).

      
       

    • We live in a world of “adjustments” to all of our data. I’m told that employment numbers tend to get revised down later than other numbers as the economy weakens (though I haven’t tried to verify that). But we did get 455,000 jobs created by the “birth/death” model in the October 2022 report, which was more than the 363,000 similar jobs calculated in the 2021 report. That seems a bit odd, as I’d be surprised if more people were creating businesses in October 2022 compared to October 2021. The overall jobs number last year was about 400k better than this year’s, so why is the birth/death model better? Anyways, something to think about.

  In Let Them Eat Expectations we explore the JOLTs report and come up with some questions that warrant further discussion and may account for why it seemed “to good to be true”. For example, since internet job sites have grown, the gap between jobs and hirings has been increasing which may explain why payroll numbers (even the good elements) weren’t as frothy as one might have expected from September’s JOLTs report (it is also a month old when it’s released).

  Jobs – Bottom Line

  I’m certainly seeing some “dead people” in the jobs data. Maybe I’m looking too closely, but it is easier to paint a less rosy job story than the consensus headlines are portraying.

  More importantly, we should not take much solace in the employment data as it will be the absolutely last part of the economy to roll over and by then, it will be too late! We will be Wile E. Coyote realizing that we are standing on air!

  Markets – Bottom Line

  I want to believe in the everything rally, but the Fed will likely push back and considering how painful the 36 hours after the press conference were, I’m embarrassed to even suggest that.

  Having said that, we have 6 weeks of economic data, we’ve made it through the bulk of earnings, and we get some seasonality in our favor. Buybacks are also in the headlines (rather than earnings), and we have a real shot that the Fed is now data dependent rather than on some pre-ordained path!

  Finally, my view remains that regardless of who wins what this week in the midterms, we will see more attention on the economy (at the expense of inflation fighting) and more steps towards coming to some sort of peaceful arrangement with Russia and Ukraine.

  Good luck and if you are in part of the country enjoying unseasonably great weather, enjoy it with some live people as “seeing dead people” isn’t all it’s cracked up to be!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/06/2022 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• China Shows Off Stealth Fighter Jet In First Public Ground Display
  China Shows Off Stealth Fighter Jet In First Public Ground Display

  Twitter is flooded with tweets showing what appears to be China’s first public ground viewing of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force’s stealth fighter jet. 

  State-owned media outlet China Daily reported, “this is the time for J-20s, one of the world’s most advanced fighter jets, to appear in front of the public on the ground” at the 14th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Guangdong province’s Zhuhai on Saturday afternoon. 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Cool…The J-20 was shown in public for the first time!https://t.co/jUeJ21BeJW pic.twitter.com/reho5KwWA3

  — 彩云香江 (@louischeung_hk) November 5, 2022

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

  The latest news: Four J-20s came to the China Air Show and performed a flight show. Two of them landed. The J-20 will be displayed on the ground for the first time. pic.twitter.com/Sb392A07wE

  — 彩云香江 (@louischeung_hk) November 5, 2022

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

  進行起飛檢查的J-20 pic.twitter.com/UhLyBno6R0

  — 乐子壬1号机 (@kt396) November 5, 2022

  “The stealth plane had carried out several flight performances at previous Zhuhai Airshows and had flown in military parades, but have never been close to the public out of consideration for confidentiality,” China Daily said.  

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

  Air Show 2022 in Zhuhai🇨🇳
  PLAAF 2x J-20 Leaving for Further Exercises After Ground Display.
  Very Beautiful Imagery of J-20 Powered by WS-10C Yet EOTS Gets Covered pic.twitter.com/ZMGwGUqULp

  — David Wang (@Nickatgreat1220) November 5, 2022

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

  🇨🇳PLAAF J-20 Has Landed for Zhuhai Air Show 2022
  Jet Stationary Display this Year? pic.twitter.com/EYuvzKmf6k

  — David Wang (@Nickatgreat1220) November 5, 2022

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

  #J20 Aircraft Footage at the #ZhuhaiAirShow2022. pic.twitter.com/VzoCs2DgFu

  — International Defence Analysis (@Defence_IDA) November 5, 2022

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

  The J-20 is China’s first stealth combat aircraft that made its maiden flight in 2011 and was officially declassified in 2016. It was deployed by the PLAA Air Force in 2017, becoming the third stealth fighter jet in the world to enter service after US F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II. In 2020, Russia’s Sukhoi Su-57 entered service with the Russian Aerospace Forces. 

  Global powers are locked in an arms race to procure fifth-generation fighters and hypersonic weapons as threats of the next conflict increase by the month. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 23:00

• Why Is The Left So Afraid Of Twitter?
  Why Is The Left So Afraid Of Twitter?

  Authored by Alan Dershowitz via The Gatestone Institute,

  A campaign is currently underway by left-wing organizations and politicians to demand that Twitter, now owned by Elon Musk, continue its practice of censoring hate speech and other “objectionable” postings.

  

  A letter sent to Twitter’s top 20 advertisers, signed by 40 activist organizations, including the NAACP, the Center for American Progress, GLAAD and the Global Project Against Hate and extremism, contained the following veiled threat:

  “We, the undersigned organizations call on you to notify Musk and publicly commit that you will cease all advertising on Twitter globally if he follows through on his plans to undermine brand safety and community standards, including gutting content moderation.”

  This means that Musk must not roll back what Twitter has on the books now, and commit to enforcing the existing rules. In other words, Twitter advertisers have been asked to boycott Twitter unless it continues to censor.

  Decades ago, during the height of McCarthyism, it was the hard right that demanded censorship, while the left insisted that the marketplace of ideas should be left open to all forms of speech.

  As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1801:

  “[W]e have nothing to fear from the demoralizing of some if others are left free to demonstrate their errors, and especially the law stands ready to punish the first criminal act produced by false reasoning. These are safer correctives than the conscience of a judge.”

  Jefferson’s distrust of “the conscience of a judge” would probably be even greater if the censors were the CEOs of companies that rely on advertisers for their profits.

  At a time of growing division, hostility and violence, it is understandable to look to censorship as the easy solution to a difficult problem. But censorship requires censors, and once censors are given the ability to pick and choose what the public will hear, this slippery slope moves us away from freedom and toward repression.

  I certainly do not like the kind of anti-Semitic hate speech that is pervasive on many of today’s internet platforms and I am the recipient of these emails and tweets on an almost daily basis. Free speech is not free. The old expression that “sticks and stone may break my bones, but names will never hurt me” is false. Names hurt me, my family and others. But that is not the issue. The issue is whether in an open society we must endure these pains in order to avoid being in even great pains of selective censorship.

  The Framers of the First Amendment chose to endure the pain of too much speech over the dangers of speech controlled by the government. But Twitter is not the government. Neither is Facebook or YouTube. They are giant media companies that dominate and control the flow of speech throughout the world. And the dangers of putting control of those flows in the hands of invisible elitist censors threatens to undercut our most important freedom.

  This is the most important free speech issue that will be faced during the remainder of the 21st century: whether to tolerate untrammeled and sometimes even dangerous freedom of speech or to demand private censorship of the kind that the government could not impose.

  Some have proposed that we treat giant social media companies like “common carriers,” such as railroads and telegraph companies. But under the First Amendment, placing controls over public speech is different from regulating travel and even personal telegraph communications.

  One manifestation of the divisiveness of our nation is that complex issues of this kind are rarely debated dispassionately and intelligently. Instead, people are forced to choose sides: are you for Musk or against him? Are you for controls on internet speech or against it? The first casualty of divisive extremism is nuance. And it is nuance that is sorely needed with regard to this issue of internet censorship.

  Let nuanced proposals be offered and discussed. Let us not rush to judgment about so important and complex issues.

  And most important, let free speech not become weaponized as a partisan issue.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 22:30

• The Celestial Zoo: Mapping The Objects In Our Universe
  The Celestial Zoo: Mapping The Objects In Our Universe

  Humans have been observing the universe for thousands of years.

  And, as Visual Capitalist’s Carmen Ang details below, while we haven’t figured out all the answers quite yet, we’ve made some remarkable discoveries when it comes to learning about outer space.

  What are some of the most notable observations that scientists have discovered so far? This map of outer space by Pablo Carlos Budassi highlights more than 200 celestial objects in our universe and provides details and facts about each one.

  

  The Types of Celestial Objects Mapped

  To create this graphic, Budassi used a combination of logarithmic astronomical maps from Princeton University, as well as images from NASA.

  The visualization highlights 216 different celestial objects that are color-coded and organized into five overarching categories:

  • Moons and Asteroids

  • Planets

  • Galaxies

  • Star System

  • Great Scales/Superclusters

  At the center of the map is the Sun, which is the largest object in our Solar System. According to NASA, the Sun’s volume is equivalent to 1.3 million Earths. The Sun is the powerhouse of life here on Earth—its energy provides our planet with a mild, warm climate that keeps us alive, keeping the Earth from becoming a frozen rock.

  While the Sun is the only star in the Solar System, there is a neighboring star system called Alpha Centauri that’s approximately 4.37 light-years away. It’s made up of three stars—Proxima Centauri, Alpha Centauri A, and Alpha Centauri B.

  Proxima Centauri, as the Latin name indicates, is the closest of the three to Earth and has an Earth-sized planet in its habitable zone.

  The Life of a Star

  In a star’s early stages, it’s powered by hydrogen. However, when its hydrogen stores are depleted, some stars are able to fuse helium or even heavier elements.

  Stars similar to the size of the Sun will grow, cool down, and eventually transform into a red giant. The Sun has about 5,000 million more years before it reaches its red giant stage, but when that happens, it will likely expand to the point where it swallows up the Earth.

  While stars emit energy for years, it’s important to note that they don’t shine for eternity. Their exact life span depends on their size, with bigger stars burning out faster than their smaller counterparts.

  But as light from distant objects millions of light-years away takes a long time to reach us here on Earth, the largest of stars shine for hundreds of millions of years after they die.

  Just How Big is Our Universe?

  Some experts believe that the universe is infinite, while others argue that we can’t yet know for certain because current measurements aren’t accurate enough.

  However, scientists believe that our observable universe extends about 46 billion light-years in every direction, giving it a diameter of roughly 93 billion light-years.

  But just how much of the universe extends beyond what we can see? We may never find out.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 22:00

• Escobar: Berlin Goes To Beijing – The Real Deal
  Escobar: Berlin Goes To Beijing – The Real Deal

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  The Scholz caravan went to Beijing to lay down the preparatory steps for working out a peace deal with Russia, with China as privileged messenger…

  

  With his inimitable flair for economic analysis steeped in historical depth, Professor Michael Hudson’s latest essay, originally written for a German audience, presents a stunning parallel between the Crusades and the current “rules-based international order” imposed by the Hegemon.

  Professor Hudson details how the Papacy in Rome managed to lock up unipolar control over secular realms (rings a bell?) when the game was all about Papal precedence over kings, above all the German Holy Roman Emperors. As we know, half in jest, the Empire was not exactly Holy, nor German (perhaps a little Roman), and not even an Empire.

  A clause in the Papal Dictates provided the Pope with the authority to excommunicate whomever was “not at peace with the Roman Church.” Hudson sharply notes how US sanctions are the modern equivalent of excommunication.

  Arguably there are Top Two dates in the whole process.

  The first one would be the Third Ecumenical Council of 435: this is when only Rome (italics mine) was attributed universal authority (italics mine). Alexandria and Antioch, for instance, were limited to regional authority within the Roman Empire.

  The other top date is 1054 – when Rome and Constantinople split for good. That is, the Roman Catholic Church split from Orthodoxy, which leads us to Russia, and Moscow as The Third Rome – and the centuries-old animosity of “the West” against Russia.

  A State of Martial Law

  Professor Hudson then delves on the trip by “Liver Sausage” Chancellor Scholz’s delegation to China this week to “demand that it dismantle its public sector and stops subsidizing its economy, or else Germany and Europe will impose sanctions on trade with China.”

  Well, in fact this happens to be just childish wishful thinking, expressed by the German Council on Foreign Relations in a piece published on the Financial Times (the Japanese-owned platform in the City of London). The Council, as correctly described by Hudson, is “the neoliberal ‘libertarian’ arm of NATO demanding German de-industrialization and dependency” on the US.

  So the FT, predictably, is printing NATO wet dreams.

  Context is essential. German Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, in a keynote speech at Bellevue Castle, has all but admitted that Berlin is broke: “An era of headwinds is beginning for Germany – difficult, difficult years are coming for us. Germany is in the deepest crisis since reunification.”

  Yet schizophrenia, once again, reigns supreme, as Steinmeier, after a ridiculous stunt in Kiev – complete with posing as a unwitting actor huddled in a bunker – announced an extra handout: two more MARS multiple rocket launchers and four Panzerhaubitze 2000 howitzers to be delivered to the Ukrainians.

  So even if the “world” economy – actually the EU – is so fragilized that member-states cannot help Kiev anymore without harming their own populations, and the EU is on the verge of a catastrophic energy crisis, fighting for “our values” in Country 404 trumps it all.

  The Big Picture context is also key. Andrea Zhok, Professor of Ethical Philosophy at the University of Milan, has taken Giorgio Agamben’s “State of Exception” concept to new heights.

  Zhok proposes that the zombified collective West is now completely subjugated to a “State of Martial Law” – where a Forever War ethos is the ultimate priority for rarified global elites.

  Every other variable – from trans-humanism to depopulation and even cancel culture – is subordinated to the State of Martial Law, and is basically inessential. The only thing that matters is exercising absolute, raw control.

  Berlin – Moscow – Beijing

  Solid German business sources completely contradict the “message” delivered by the German Council on Foreign Relations on the trip to China.

  According to these sources, the Scholz caravan went to Beijing to essentially lay down the preparatory steps for working out a peace deal with Russia, with China as privileged messenger.

  This is – literally – as explosive, geopolitically and geoeconomically, as it gets. As I pointed out in one of my previous columns, Berlin and Moscow were keeping a secret communication back channel – via business interlocutors – right to the minute the usual suspects, in desperation, decided to blow up the Nord Streams.

  Cue to the now notorious SMS from Liz Truss’s iPhone to Little Tony Blinken, one minute after the explosions: “It’s done.”

  There’s more: the Scholz caravan may be trying to start a long and convoluted process of eventually replacing the US with China as a key ally. One should never forget that the top BRI trade/connectivity terminal in the EU is Germany (the Ruhr valley).

  According to one of the sources, “if this effort is successful, then Germany, China and Russia can ally themselves together and drive the US out of Europe.”

  Another source provided the cherry on the cake: “Olaf Scholz is being accompanied on this trip by German industrialists who actually control Germany and are not going to sit back watching themselves being destroyed.”

  Moscow knows very well what the imperial aim is when it comes to the EU reduced to the role of totally dominated – and deindustrialized – vassal, exercising zero sovereignty. The back channels after all are not lying in tatters on the bottom of the Baltic Sea. Additionally, China has not provided any hint that its massive trade with Germany and the EU is about to vanish.

  Scholz himself, one day before his caravan hit Beijing, stressed to Chinese media that Germany has no intention of decoupling from China, and there’s nothing to justify “the calls by some to isolate China.”

  In parallel, Xi Jinping and the new Politburo are very much aware of the Kremlin position, reiterated again and again: we always remain open for negotiations, as long as Washington finally decides to talk about the end of unlimited NATO expansion drenched in Russophobia.

  So to negotiate means the Empire signing on the dotted line of the document it has received from Moscow on December 1st, 2021, focused on “indivisibility of security”. Otherwise there’s nothing to negotiate.

  And when we have Pentagon lobbyist Lloyd “Raytheon” Austin advising the Ukrainians on the record to advance on Kherson, it’s even more crystal clear there’s nothing to negotiate.

  So could this all be the foundation stone of the Berlin-Moscow-Beijing trans-Eurasia geopolitical/geoeconomic corridor? That will mean Bye Bye Empire. Once again: it ain’t over till the fat lady goes Gotterdammerung.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 21:30

• 2022 Midterms: How Many Americans Have Voted Early?
  2022 Midterms: How Many Americans Have Voted Early?

  According to the United States Elections Project, at least 32 million people had cast their ballots as of November 2 for the midterm elections.

  Of those, as Statista’s Anna Fleck reports, roughly 13 million people voted in person nationwide, while more than 17 million returned their ballot by mail.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Fewer votes have been cast so far this year than in 2018, when the last midterms were held. Then, a total of 39 million ballots were counted, according to the U.S. Elections Project. However, this year’s figures will likely rise further before Election Day itself, since a total of 57 million mail ballots had initially been requested.

  As Statista’s chart above shows, the early voting wave has been highest in the states that have the biggest populations. Texas has led the way with nearly 3.8 million votes, followed by California with 3.4 million and Florida with 3.3 million.

  The U.S. Elections Project found that in terms of demographics, 44.2 percent of early voters were Democrats, versus 33.5 percent Republicans, and 22.3 percent independents.

  The over 65 year olds currently make up the biggest group at 46.2 percent of early voters nationwide, followed by 40.3 percent aged 41-65. Women also make up the slightly larger share at 54 percent, versus men at 44.8 percent.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 21:00

• US To Station More Nuke-Capable Assets In Korea
  US To Station More Nuke-Capable Assets In Korea

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

  The White House has authorized employing strategic assets in South Korea more frequently. The announcement comes as Pyongyang, Seoul and Washington conduct unprecedented aerial war games. At a news conference with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and South Korean Defense Minister Lee Jong-sup, Lee stated Austin pledged to set up deployments of nuclear-capable weapons. He said the US promised, “to effectively respond to any DPRK provocation by employing US strategic assets to the level equivalent to constant deployment through increasing the frequency and intensity of strategic asset deployment in and around the Korean Peninsula.”

  Austin expressed the deployments would not be permanent but rotate in and out. “No new deployment of strategic assets on a permanent basis, but you’ll see assets move in and out on a routine basis,” the defense chief said.

  

  Austin stated the strategic deployments will extend beyond the Korean Peninsula. “What we’re doing together not only to – on a bilateral basis, but also with our allies in Japan,” Austin said. Washington, Seoul and Tokyo signed a trilateral defense agreement on the sidelines of the NATO summit in June. Pyongyang denounced the agreement as a NATO-like alliance in the Pacific.

  The news conference came after the US and South Korea announced it was extending their largest-ever aerial war games. The military drills, dubbed Vigilant Storm 23, include 240 US and South Korean aircraft. Initially, the exercises were scheduled to run for five days but have now been extended by a day.

  Before Vigilant Storm 23 kicked off, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un slammed the drills as a rehearsal for invasion and promised a “powerful” response if Seoul and Washington went through with the exercises. On Wednesday, Pyongyang fired 23 short-range ballistic missiles, a single-day record. One missile was fired near the maritime border for the first time since the partition. South Korea responded by firing three air-to-surface missiles into waters north of the inter-Korean maritime border.

  North Korea followed the flurry of missiles by launching an intercontinental ballistic missile on Thursday. Seoul believes the ICBM failed in-flight. On Friday, North Korea carried out large-scale aerial maneuvers. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said that 180 North Korean warplanes were detected in various areas inland and along the country’s eastern and western coasts. Seoul noted the warplanes did not approach the inter-Korean border.

  In response, South Korea scrambled 80 warplanes, including F-35s. The South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff said it was “maintaining a firm readiness posture for further provocations.” Military activity on the Korean Peninsula is at a multi-year high. Pyongyang has carried out a record number of missile tests this year. Washington and Seoul have returned to live-fire war games.

  A diplomatic solution currently seems impossible. Austin and Lee reiterated Washington and Seoul’s position that Pyongyang must agree to give up its nuclear arsenal. Kim signed a new law in September that says North Korea will not denuclearize until the US does.

  Kim views his nuclear weapons as the only effective deterrent against Washington-based regime change. The White House says it seeks a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. However, Austin threatened to use nuclear weapons against North Korea at the press conference. Last week, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman said Washington was prepared to deploy its nukes to defend Seoul.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 20:30

• US Space Plane Orbits Earth For 900 Consecutive Days With Mysterious Payloads
  US Space Plane Orbits Earth For 900 Consecutive Days With Mysterious Payloads

  U.S. Space Force’s robotic X-37B space plane keeps extending its flight-duration record, orbiting around the Earth for 900 days, according to Space.com. 

  The reusable space plane designed and built by Boeing is flying its sixth mission, known as Orbital Test Vehicle-6 or OTV-6, which was initially launched from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida on May 17, 2020. It remains unclear when the top-secret mission will end. 

  On Jul. 7, Boeing Space tweeted the X-37 “has set another endurance record — as it has on every mission since it first launched in 2010.” 

  

  Many of OTV-6’s experiments and activities are classified. But some experimental payloads have been made public, such as the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory’s Photovoltaic Radio-frequency Antenna Module, a small device that converts solar power into radio frequency microwave energy. 

  Space.com expands more on the non-classified experiments and technologies being tested:

  “Technologies being tested in the X-37B program include advanced guidance, navigation and control, thermal protection systems, avionics, high temperature structures and seals, conformal reusable insulation, lightweight electromechanical flight systems, advanced propulsion systems, advanced materials and autonomous orbital flight, re-entry and landing.”

  The X-37B is similar to the retired space shuttle, although the space plane is a fraction of the size, coming in at 29 feet in length and 9.5 feet high, with a wingspan of 15 feet. 

  

  Boeing boasts the X-37B as “one of the world’s newest and most advanced re-entry spacecraft.” It can operate anywhere from 150 to 500 miles in altitudes and de-orbit with landing capabilities. 

  “While there are rumors or theories that the X-37B might be a testbed for orbital weapons or could be used to capture adversary satellites, experts doubt these claims, arguing that the plane is far too small and not maneuverable enough to be used for these roles,” Space.com said. 

  It’s anybody’s guess when the top-secret space plane will return to Earth. Here’s a list of the previous flights:

  • OTV-1: launched on Apr. 22, 2010 and landed on Dec. 3, 2010, spending over 224 days in orbit.
  • OTV-2: launched on Mar. 5, 2011 and landed on Jun. 16, 2012, spending over 468 days in orbit.
  • OTV-3: launched on Dec. 11, 2012 and landed on Oct. 17, 2014, spending over 674 days in orbit.
  • OTV-4: launched on May 20, 2015 and landed on May 7, 2015, spending nearly 718 days in orbit.
  • OTV-5: launched on Sept. 7, 2017 and landed on Oct. 27, 2019, spending nearly 780 days in orbit.

  Meanwhile, Space Force detected last week that China’s secretive reusable spaceplane released a mystery object in orbit. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 20:00

• Crickets… Illinois Professor Publishes Racist Attacks Against Herschel Walker With No Outcry From Faculty Or Media
  Crickets… Illinois Professor Publishes Racist Attacks Against Herschel Walker With No Outcry From Faculty Or Media

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Professor Sundiata Cha-Jua, a prominent history and African-American studies professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, is under fire after using racist slurs to describe Georgia Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker. While the racist attack has drawn criticism on conservative sites, there has been no opposing statement or protest at the university. The media has also been largely quiet. The contrast to past controversies involving conservative faculty members again raises the concern over a double standard applied by colleges and universities as well as the media. Thus far, the response to the use of racist slurs or tropes against Republicans has been the familiar sound of crickets.

  Cha-Jua wrote in The News-Gazette Walker is “incompetent, subliterate and coonish.”

  

  Recently, Walker was subjected to a racist attack on MSNBC by regular guest (and writer for Above the Law and the Nation) Elie Mystal. MSNBC never apologized to Walker or affirmed its opposition to such racist commentary.

  The column was an attack on Black Republicans who Cha-Jua refers to as “MAGA Black White supremacists.”

  The column seems to follow a pattern among Democratic politicians in attacking Black and Hispanic voters who are shifting over to the GOP. President Biden was ridiculed for declaring “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

  Likewise, minority members have been opposed by minority caucuses or campaign funds controlled by Democrats. For example, Republican Jennifer-Ruth Green has attracted national attention in a surprisingly competitive race against an incumbent Democratic Rep. Frank Mrvan. The race has Democrats so worried that the Congressional Black Caucus took the controversial step of backing her white opponent despite a stated purpose of being “a non-partisan body made up of African American members of Congress” committed to achieving “access to Black Americans and other marginalized communities.”GOP Rep. Mayra Flores was barred from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.The media has also shown the same open hostility or bias. Notably, the Huffington Post recently wrote a column celebrating the surge of Muslim Americans in the midterms as a candidates but omitted the Muslim American running to be the next senator from Pennsylvania (arguably the highest of these races): Dr. Mehmet Oz.  The column titled “American Muslims In The Midterms Aren’t Long-Shot Candidates Anymore,” simply does not include the Republican among the notable Muslims seeking public office.

  In his highly offensive column, Chu-Jua compares a Black Republican candidate Terence Stuber to a slave serving white masters: “And like the incompetent, subliterate and coonish Herschel Walker, Stuber reiterates ‘massa’ Trump’s talking points.” Stuber is running for Champaign County Clerk.

  The lack of any protest or statement at the university is another example of how such controversies are handled when they involve faculty on the left as opposed to right. There are relatively few conservative or Republican faculty at most universities today, but the response to any such controversial statements is often immediate and overwhelming.

  I have defended faculty who have made similarly disturbing comments “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.

  I would defend Cha-Jua’s right to speak despite his offensive rhetoric in any effort to fire him. Yet, such language should be condemned. A professor used openly racist slurs to attack African Americans running for office and the silence from the university and the faculty at Illinois is perfectly deafening. The contrast in these cases is glaring and chilling. The professors and pundits who have written hair-triggered columns or tweets are notably silent when the racist attack is directed against Black Republicans or conservatives.

  The response explains the sense of fear and intimidation for some faculty in speaking out on campuses. There is a general view that a conservative or dissenting faculty member will be given little quarter or protection in any controversy. Given the relatively small number of openly conservative  or Republican professors left on many faculties, the chilling effect is perfectly glacial.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 19:30

• Xi's Eviction Of Hu From Communist Congress Supports Reform Agenda
  Xi’s Eviction Of Hu From Communist Congress Supports Reform Agenda

  Last month’s Chinese Communist Party’s National Congress brought a moment of high visual drama, when former president Hu Jintao was suddenly escorted by ushers from the carefully-scripted proceedings, as current President Xi Jinping looked on.

  The former Chinese leader Hu Jintao was abruptly escorted out of a highly choreographed meeting of the Communist Party elite.

  We deconstructed the footage. Here’s what the videos show: https://t.co/MFy7lqtFFa pic.twitter.com/RQxHvxvXie

  — The New York Times (@nytimes) October 28, 2022

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

  State media said 79-year-old Hu was “not feeling well,” but a close analysis of the video by The New York Times seems to indicate that, as he was being removed, other officials were trying to prevent him from seeing a document that listed the new members of the powerful Central Committee, which was about to be announced. 

  While Hu dominated headlines, he wasn’t the only official to nudged away from the center of power: Hu Jintao’s protege, 59-year-old Hu Chunhua, was demoted from the Politburo Standing Committee. He’d long been considered as a potential future Chinese leader. 

  The standing committee is now dominated by Xi loyalists, leaving China-watchers debating over what it portends for the future of Chinese governance and foreign policy — and tensions over Taiwan.

  Some have interpreted it to mean Xi is angling for perpetual leadership of the country. However, Nikkei Asia‘s Ken Moriyasu, is skeptical: “China is not North Korea. It is hard for a politician like Xi, with little to show in terms of achievements, to stay atop the country for so long.”

  Moriyasu likewise doubts that Xi’s maneuvering portends an invasion of Taiwan. Rather, he think Xi has some unpopular policies in mind, and wants a team around him that will see those policies through the controversies that accompany them. 

  “That’s a reform cabinet in disguise. It’s a common prosperity cabinet,” Lauren Johnston, associate professor of the China Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, tells Moriyasu.  

  Common prosperity is a term Xi uses to encapsulate a policy agenda focused on reducing income inequality, writes Moriyasu: 

  At an August 2021 meeting of the party’s committee for financial and economic affairs, Xi spoke of raising the pay of low-income groups, promoting fairness, making regional development more balanced and stressing people-centered growth. 

  Any governmental emphasis on ending income inequality carries an implicit threat to reduce higher incomes, either via taxation or outright caps. Xi’s rhetoric implies he’d like to use both avenues. He’s promised to “reasonably regulate excessively high incomes and encourage high-income people and enterprises to return more to society.” 

  “Xi wants young, hardworking people to be able to get somewhere as the middle class, getting a job, buying a home. If 85% of a youth’s wages is going to rent,” Johnston says, “it’s not sustainable.”

  

  Li Qiang has emerged as Xi’s number-two. He’d previously demonstrated his loyalty to Xi by strictly carrying out Xi’s draconian zero-Covid policies as party chief of Shanghai. “Li Qiang showed himself willing to take on the rich elites in China’s richest city,” says Johnston.

  The same resilience will be essential when Xi goes after “excessively high incomes.” Worries over such an agenda have already taken a toll on Shanghai stocks. 

  Between the Biden administration’s assault on China’s semiconductor market to high youth unemployment, real estate woes and the lingering effects of zero-Covid policies on the Chinese economy, the five years between now and the next Chinese Communist Congress will be challenging for Xi, according to Zhu Jianrong, a professor at Toyo Gakuen University in Tokyo.

  “Xi now has his back against the wall. He got his team and will now have to deliver,” says Zhu. Otherwise, a fourth term as party chair will be unlikely. 

  Zhu says a war over Taiwan doesn’t make sense in the context of Xi’s broader agenda: 

  “The unification of Taiwan and the effort to build a modern socialist country contradict each other. The goal is to win without fighting. China will prioritize catching up with the U.S. in overall national power while avoiding a full-front conflict until then at all costs. It’s a new version of Deng Xiaoping’s ‘biding time’ strategy.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 19:00

• Beating Back The Jungle Of Red Tape
  Beating Back The Jungle Of Red Tape

  Authored by Ron Shultis via RealClear Wire,

  Besides “tax increase,” few terms rile up Americans more than “red tape.” Like a vine or weed that spreads out of control, red tape conjures up visions of a fast- and ever-growing jungle of rigid, excessive, and bureaucratic regulations that bring action grinding to a halt. And these regulations have consequences: The average regulatory cost for a new business in its first year is more than $83,000. Here in Tennessee, it would take an individual spending 40 hours a week eleven weeks to read all of Tennessee’s 114,000-plus regulations, totaling more than eight million words. These regulations ensnare businesses and individuals and deprive us of our freedoms and future prosperity. State leaders must implement broad regulatory reform to ensure no Tennessean suffers from backbreaking regulations and better unleash the state’s economy. 

  

  A regulatory reform agenda will include many layers of improvements. First, make it easier to “count” the number and cost of current regulations. Fortunately, a recently passed law will require all bureaucracies to report by the end of 2023 and every eight years afterwards a list of every regulation on the books. 

  From there, state lawmakers should seek to “cap” either the total number or cost of regulations. In Wisconsin, the legislature can require an independent economist to calculate the cost of proposed regulations on businesses and another review after the fact to confirm estimates to cap the impact of regulations on the economy. Ideally, the cap is lower than the current total, forcing leaders to “cut” those that are too onerous or outdated. For the best example of how reducing regulatory burdens can unleash our economy, look to our neighbors in the north: After a poor economic decade in the 1990s, the Canadian province of British Columbia decided to try something drastic. Starting in 2001, for every new proposed regulation, bureaucracies had to repeal at least one regulation — with the goal of reducing regulatory requirements by one-third within three years. The province exceeded that goal, cutting regulations by roughly half. The result was that the province’s economy transformed from lagging Canada’s as a whole to its fastest growing province since 2002.

  After adopting a “count, cap, and cut” approach, state policymakers should provide tools to create more regulatory flexibility. Currently few options exist for those just seeking clarity if their business is subject to certain regulations. If an innovative small business wants some guidance on whether regulations apply to them or not, they often must hire legal counsel and go before an administrative law judge, an intimidating process for most. To solve this problem, regulators should be empowered to issue no-action letters (NALs). NALs allow an agency to state that it will not punish a business owner or person if they engage in some action. Without a similar tool, regulators often can only punish a new company who can then appeal to begin the process of working with them. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. NALs provide additional tools to regulators to provide the clarity and flexibility people need, especially businesses in a highly innovative world.

  Finally, to prevent regulations from ever growing out of hand again, the burden to prove the necessity of new regulations should be on the government. Currently, the burden typically falls on Tennesseans in court to prove a regulation is unduly onerous. If the government is going to impose costs on Tennesseans, it should be on them to prove that the regulation is necessary to protect the public. 

  Reforming regulations does make news headlines like tax cuts or recruiting new businesses with taxpayer money. However, if Tennessee lawmakers wish to engage in broad regulatory reform, they will be rewarded. The example of British Columbia shows that while regulatory reform is unlikely to grab headlines, it can transform economies in just a few short years. A holistic regulatory reform agenda will include many layers but with a three-tiered approach, first “counting, capping, and cutting” then providing more flexibility, and then finally shifting the burden of proving new regulations to where it belongs our state’s leaders can beat back the jungle of red tape and unleash prosperity for Tennesseans like never before.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 18:30

• Why Are Fact-Checkers Ignoring False Statements On School Closures?
  Why Are Fact-Checkers Ignoring False Statements On School Closures?

  Authored by Chandler Lasch via RealClearPolitics.com,

  With each new report on the effects of pandemic-era school closures on American children, the story only seems to get worse…

  

  In September, the Associated Press reported that, according to a study from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), “Math and reading scores for America’s 9-year-olds fell dramatically during the first two years of the pandemic … Reading scores saw their largest decrease in 30 years, while math scores had their first decrease in the history of the testing regimen behind the study.”

  On October 24, data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), often called the “nation’s report card,” shed more light on the abysmal declines. According to the AP, “Across the country, math scores saw their largest decreases ever. Reading scores dropped to 1992 levels. Nearly four in 10 eighth graders failed to grasp basic math concepts. Not a single state saw a notable improvement in their average test scores, with some simply treading water at best.”

  “It is a serious wakeup call for us all,” Peggy Carr of the NCES told AP reporter Collin Binkley.

  “In NAEP, when we experience a 1- or 2-point decline, we’re talking about it as a significant impact on a student’s achievement. In math, we experienced an 8-point decline—historic for this assessment.”

  As Derek Thompson of The Atlantic noted, several studies have tied falling test scores to school closures, including a 2022 paper published by the National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research. The authors concluded: “It seems that the shifts to remote or hybrid instruction during 2020-21 had profound consequences for student achievement. In districts that went remote, achievement growth was lower for all subgroups, but especially for students attending high-poverty schools. In areas that remained in person, there were still modest losses in achievement, but there was no widening of gaps between high and low-poverty schools in math (and less widening in reading.)”

  In addition, the effects of school closures on students extend beyond falling test scores and lost learning. They include social isolation, loss of motivation, adverse mental health symptoms, and a lack of resources for students with disabilities, not to mention the high economic costs and other burdens placed on parents.

  With all this data comes the need to analyze school-closure policies and, for those responsible, to answer criticism. But as some officials have issued misleading and false statements about their roles in the pandemic response, a question arises: Where are the fact-checkers?

  After the September report from the NCES, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, “What is the administration going to do about this severe learning loss, and does the administration shoulder any blame for not pushing schools to reopen sooner?”

  Jean-Pierre blamed Republicans for the slow reopening of schools.

  “[Reopening schools] was the work of this president and that was the work of Democrats in spite of Republicans not voting for the American Rescue Plan, [of] which $130 billion went to school[s] to have the ventilation, to be able to have the tutoring and the teachers, and be able to hire more teachers,” she said.

  “And that was because of the work this administration did.”

  But it was Democrats, not Republicans, who led the charge to keep schools closed.

  Did any major fact-checkers set the record straight and correct Jean-Pierre’s false statement?

  No.

  Neither Snopes, FactCheck.org, the Washington Post, USA Today, nor Politifact saw fit to address this topic. (PolitiFact has examined only two statements from Jean-Pierre since she was appointed press secretary in May, arguably part of a larger pattern of ignoring her claims.)

  Jean-Pierre is not the only one trying to shift blame about school closures. In an ABC interview, Dr. Anthony Fauci recently claimed, “I ask anybody to go back over the number of times that I’ve said ‘we’ve got to do everything we can to keep the schools open.’ No one plays that clip. They always come back and say, ‘Fauci was responsible for closing schools.’ I had nothing to do [with that].”

  Fauci, who plans to step down later this year from his role as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, should not be held responsible for every decision made to stop in-person learning across the country. But to say that he played no role is a stretch.

  Like many other officials, Fauci changed his opinions on school re-openings over the course of the pandemic. At times he advocated for a return to in-person schooling; at other points he claimed that, while reopening schools was ideal, “what is paramount is the safety and the welfare of the children and of their teachers,” and that schools could safely reopen only when “you have a very, very low level of infection.”

  His advocacy for school closures during his tenure as head of the NAID is evidence enough that he played some role in keeping schools locked down. But mainstream fact-checkers once again failed to acknowledge his false assertion.

  With all the false and misleading claims being made about school closures, fact-checkers have ample opportunity to set things straight. As recently as October 25, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer severely understated the amount of time that students in her state were out of school. In a debate against Republican challenger Tudor Dixon, Whitmer stated, “Mrs. Dixon says that I kept students out longer than any other state. That’s just not true … Kids were out for three months.”

  According to Bridge Michigan, Whitmer later clarified that she was referring to “closures that were the direct result of her or her health department’s orders.” While she shouldn’t be held liable for decisions made at the local level that kept some school districts remote into 2022, she nevertheless misstated the extent to which schools were closed. Fact-checking outlets avoided addressing Whitmer’s dubious assertions, as well as Fauci’s and those of other prominent figures who try to minimize the impact of school closures or their roles in them.

  At times, opinion writers took to task those responsible for school-closure falsehoods when fact-checkers at those same outlets declined to do so. For example, Marc A. Thiessen wrote an op-ed titled “What Fauci got wrong is still costing America’s children,” and Ingrid Jacques criticized American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten’s attempts to distance herself from her own union’s pro-closure policies.

  With the midterms just around the corner, it’s important for parents and other voters to understand who played a role in the pandemic decisions that affected students. And when it came time to provide context and clarity on this issue, fact-checkers shirked their duty.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 17:30

• Dove Vs. Hawk: The Financial Conditions Index
  Dove Vs. Hawk: The Financial Conditions Index

  What do financial conditions indicate about the economy? What effects do they have on growth?

  From S&P 500 Index returns to the Cboe Volatility Index (VIX) to a range of credit conditions, the Chicago Fed’s Financial Conditions Index looks at whether financial activity is tighter than the historical average—or more accommodative.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld details below, this Markets in a Minute chart from New York Life Investments compares financial conditions in 2022 to the last 40 years as interest rates rise at the fastest rate in decades.

  

  How Is the Financial Conditions Index Measured?

  First, the Chicago Fed’s Financial Conditions Index takes 105 weighted average indicators of financial activity and organizes them into three main categories.

  Together, the sum of these indicators provide an update on the state of U.S. financial markets.

  

   

  For example, low equity market volatility is associated with lower risk and better financial conditions.

  Credit market factors, such as mortgage spreads and corporate bond yield spreads, indicate the credit conditions of the economy. Credit spreads are the difference in bond yields (returns) of two different debt securities with the same maturity, but with different credit quality.

  In this way, a narrower credit spread often indicates better financial conditions, while a wider credit spread indicates worse conditions. Credit spreads apply to any debt instrument like mortgages or corporate bonds.

  Asset prices, as seen in the S&P 500 Index, are part of the leverage category which measures the state of U.S. debt and equity markets. When the index is declining, it can be associated with tighter conditions.

  Dove vs. Hawk

  Another way to look at the state of financial conditions is through a ‘dovish’ or ‘hawkish’ lens.

  When conditions are more accommodative, they can be seen as more dovish. This is when monetary policy favors lower interest rates to boost economic growth and employment.

  Hawkish conditions, on the other hand, are characterized by tighter monetary policy. This is seen in higher interest rates to control inflation, but typically at the expense of economic growth, spending, and employment.

  The Best of Times & the Worst of Times

  When have the best and worst financial conditions taken place in recent history?

  Following the recession of 1990, interest rates fell after periods of unprecedented highs in the 1980s. This eased the debt burdens for corporations and households, creating some of the most favorable financial conditions in the last several decades.

  Despite the early 1990s being characterized with the most accommodative conditions, the period was marked by slow economic and employment growth.

  Interestingly, it was not until the second half of the decade that growth accelerated, amid low inflation and unemployment. Broadly speaking, an increase in private-sector spending and employment helped drive this growth.

  

  By contrast, the early 1980s saw the worst financial conditions by far. Interest rates hit historic highs to rein in inflation, and financial conditions were strained.

  Historically, tighter financial conditions have been linked to falling asset values and increasing risk premiums. This is the additional return an investor can expect to receive for holding a riskier asset compared to the return from a risk-free asset like a government bond.

  During these conditions, economic activity can slow and the net worth of households and nonfinancial companies could decline amid tightened credit conditions.

  A Closer Look: 2022 In Context

  Against the backdrop of six interest rate hikes and declining equity market performance in 2022, financial markets are facing challenging conditions.

  Given these factors, are conditions more hawkish or accommodative?

  Compared to historical averages, financial markets still fall on the dovish side. Although conditions have slowly become less accommodative from their recent peak in mid-2021, they remain closer to neutral from a long-term perspective.

  Still, corporate bond spreads, key indicators in the Financial Conditions Index, could widen if interest rates and default concerns continue to rise. Higher yields, in tandem with strain on other financial indicators like the VIX and S&P 500 returns, could tilt conditions to become more hawkish looking ahead.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 17:00

• Luongo: The Oil Nationalization Two-Step
  Luongo: The Oil Nationalization Two-Step

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

  Blood rack, barbed wire
  Politicians’ funeral pyre
  Innocents raped with napalm fire
  Twenty-first century schizoid man

  – King Crimson, “21st Century Schizoid Man”

  You’ve all heard me rant about the “Straussian Two-Step,” which is nothing more than a retread of the Hegelian Dialectic.  

  Here’s the formal definition:

  An interpretive method, originally used to relate specific entities or events to the absolute idea, in which some assertible proposition (thesis ) is necessarily opposed by an equally assertible and apparently contradictory proposition (antithesis ), the mutual contradiction being reconciled on a higher level of truth by a third proposition (synthesis ).

  In modern politics it’s used to create a false reality by asserting something that is partially true (at best) or a truth that you yourself as a person in power created.

  

  In today’s case it’s a manufactured energy crisis across the West.

  In order to see the Straussian Two-Step however you have to work backwards. This process is not an a priori deduction or an exhaustive fit of investigative journalism.

  Rather it is an inductive conclusion based on awareness of the motivations of those in power and seeing how they lead a mass of people to a pre-ordained conclusion. In other words, schizo-posting.

  Thesis

  So, say your goal is to legitimize the state takeover, or advance another step forward the state takeover, of an industry.  Let’s use oil and gas for today’s lesson.

  The first thing you do is manufacture a crisis that will disrupt the supply of the product you want to takeover. In this case, it started with COVID-19, which disrupted far more than just the energy sector.

  More than 2 million barrels per day of refining capacity was lost world wide thanks to COVID-19. Given the current hostility to new refineres (more on this later), those barrels are not coming back.

  Don’t forget, that for a “Straussian Two-Step” this big you will have to brainwash and/or gaslight two entire generations into hating themselves for being rich, wasteful, spoiled, alive or worse, just plain white.

  So, they are already primed to hate all the things at play here — capitalism, Big Oil, Banks, Old White Guys (rich or poor) — and enrage your useful idiots by pushing their already tenuous hold on reality to the literal breaking point.

  “I can’t even….” isn’t the most common phrase uttered on Tik-Tok for nothing.

  That’s the Thesis part.

  So, when the crisis hits thanks to natural gas disruption you forbid buying of from a particular country…

  — Hello, Vlad? We’re in a helluva pickle, would you mind invading Ukraine…? Nyet…? Well, we’ll see about that….

  — MISSING PAGES FROM THE RETURN OF DR. STRANGELOVE WORKING SCRIPT.

  … you demonize not only Vlad but the industry itself for price gouging and preying on the widdle guy during a war.

  There’s a word for this… chutzpah.

  Antithesis

  Predictably, you then allow your fake political opponents …

  [enter Cocaine Mitch from Stage Right]

  … to produce the opposite argument. In this case, the counter is obviously we need free markets to produce oil and gas. The refiners are just responding to the market.

  That fake opposition, of course, also blames Vlad for this crisis to ensure the market’s champion looks not only patriotic but also suitably bought and paid for by Big Oil, Old White Guys, etc.

  Both sides of this argument have now been framed 90 degrees away from the real source of the problem, government intrusion into the flow of oil and gas to your homes.

  This is a crisis that if left solved to human ingenuity and, yes, the studious application of greed, would be over in a matter of weeks as refineries shut down during COVID would come back online, supply chains reorganized etc.

  While the crisis phase would be over quickly, the long term investment cycle set off in refining would take longer to structurally immunize the industry against future supply shocks to accomplish.

  And if you’re daft enough to believe government has any of that investment path mapped out on their whiteboards in their noble service to humanity, I can’t even…

  If I could buy stock in psychoanalysis right now I’d be long AF.

  Prices may not return to normal for years but the market, without intervention by rapacious morons both in government and running them from behind the curtain, would eventually grind the arbitrage out of the fuel industry nearly entirely.

  Guess who wins there folks? That’s right you. But, again, you hate yourself for being, well, yourself.

  Once the crisis is here and the rhetorical groundwork laid after months of repeating these lies about the cause of the crisis — PUTLER DID IT — it’s easy to move the conversation to where you really want it to go.

  Remember the goal. Destroy free markets, nationalize oil and gas.

  This means also preparing the next move to get rid of another aspect of the free market while zeroing in on the current crisis. In this theoretical case, we’re looking at the massive diesel crack spreads of refineries, fueling the perpetual motion machine of Marxism’s inherent envy.

  Moreover, this situation exploded on the eve of a crucial election to put into the mouths of the crisis actors we call colloquially, “Members of Congress.”

  

  Synthesis

  Their solution? Put windfall profit taxes on refiners who are taking advantage of the vulnerable and needy common man. They are evil ‘price gougers’ by accepting the bids from the market for the fruits of their labors which occurred precisely because of artificially inducing a shock to the system.

  In the case of diesel fuel in the US this is clearly a manufactured crisis.  COVID took a lot of refineries in the Northeast (PADD-1) offline.  And given the hostility of the Biden administration and environmentalists to the oil industry as a whole, as I alluded to earlier, those refineries are not coming back online anytime soon.

  Don’t take my word for it, take it from the ones who own the refineries.

  “Building a refinery is a multi-billion dollar investment. It may take a decade. We haven’t had a refinery built in the United States since the 1970s. My personal view is that there will never be another refinery built in the United States.”

  According to Wirth, oil and gas companies would have to weigh the benefits of committing capital ten years out that will need decades to offer a return to shareholders “in a policy environment where governments around the world are saying ‘we don’t want these products to be used in the future’”.

  Why would they? If it were your money would you begin the insane process to build an oil refinery in the US today even with crack spreads at $70+ per barrel? Of course not. By the time you filed the first Environmental Impact Assessment application form the spreads could be back to $20 because it’s politically advantageous for the “Straussian Two-Steppers” to take the pressure off for a few months.

  Government is keeping the market in a supply/demand mismatch on purpose. That’s the only conclusion you can draw. Because if “Biden” wanted to solve this problem he wouldn’t be draining the SPR, he’d be rolling back regulations on refining oil or offering some of that ‘infrastructure money’ to help the industry rebuild post-COVID.

  No matter how committed you are to saving the planet from Climate Change civilization is directly downstream of energy production.

  If he wanted lower gas prices he wouldn’t be trying to expand subsidies to poor people, pandering for their votes, he’d be going to the negotiating table with Putler and working out a mutually unappetizing solution to everyone’s interests in Ukraine.

  High Bid Wins the Prize

  Diesel fuel demand is mostly inelastic, since it’s simply necessary for our daily life. Any supply disruption will cause massive price spikes because people will fall all over themselves bidding up the price of available supply to get what they can.

  This is the one thing morons leftists can’t wrap their head around. Producers aren’t withholding supply and ‘raising prices’ in an open market economy. That’s propaganda. The reality is that consumers bid up the price for everything in demand or withhold those bids when the cost/benefit isn’t in their favor.

  There is no need to control this. The things under supply shock will flow to those who have the means to bid for them and producers get the signal there is money to be made increasing supply. It is this give and take that always alleviates shortages, unless they are not allowed to do so because ‘rules.’

  As the late, great Gary North told us over and over again, “Everything’s for sale, high bid wins.” If you have anyone to blame for higher diesel crack spreads you need only look in a mirror. Because we could have spare refining capacity by now if it weren’t cost prohibitive, even at these prices, to bring the idle plants back on line.

  Remember, everything’s for sale and high bid wins. Everyone does the cost/benefit analysis.

  This is the dynamic at play when I use the term cost-push inflation.  A supply shortage pushes the bids for basic goods up out of necessity and pouring money into the system through government handouts only accelerates this effect.  

  Low cost or free dollars flow to the things people need the most and that is the main source of our inflation today.

  So, when you see the headlines full of scaremongering like the US only has 20 days of diesel fuel left, this undergirds the bids for limited supply.  The futures markets are stripped of their power to coordinate supply over time and producers are stuck being demonized by low quality agitprop from the likes of AOC and Lizzie Slapaho.

  Nationalization: The Next Two-Step

  Windfall profit taxes are already on the way in Germany, 90% of all profits taxed away to the state. Energy production, when that bill passes, will be nationalized in Germany. The end of rational energy pricing will be gone.

  Germany will become another energy subsidizing hellscape like we see all over the world.

  The choice in front of German energy companies now is Uniper’s fate, nationalization through bailout, or remain ‘private’ but on a government-mandated cost-plus business model the profits from which will never outcompete the depreciation curve.

  Today here in the US the Democrats are pushing for outright nationalization of all oil and gas production. That was the goal all along, the thesis. The fake antithesis is the “Drill baby, Drill,” crowd on Capitol Hill, crying crocodile tears over the loss of the Keystone XL pipeline for more than a decade.

  The synthesis this time around will be finally getting through their long-sought after billionaire’s tax in the form of a windfall tax starting with evil Big Oil. Even if they don’t get it, it’s not like they don’t have other things on their to-do lists to get it done.

  They are starting here again because they know no one will seriously consider outright nationalization (the next synthesis) unless there’s a war with Russia…

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you aren’t schizo

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 16:30

• Is Big Tech Funding Literal Migrant "Roadmaps" To Enter The US From Central America?
  Is Big Tech Funding Literal Migrant “Roadmaps” To Enter The US From Central America?

  The medical aid nonprofit Doctors Without Borders is providing and distributing maps for migrants that show routes through Central America to reach the United States, according to a new report by the Daily Caller.

  And the kicker? The organization providing the maps is funded by “a number of prominent tech companies”. 

  Called “shelters for people on the move” in Spanish, the map lists clinics and aid areas along routes to the U.S. 

  It shows paths that start in Guatemala that lead to the U.S.-Mexico border and lists clinics and shelters along the Mexican border that migrants can stop at during their trip. These clinics and shelters are across the border from major U.S. cities like El Paso, Texas and San Diego, California, the report says. 

  

  Meanwhile, Doctors Without Borders has gotten sizeable donations from companies like Google and Amazon, the report notes. It has also received millions in donations from the foundations of billionaires like Elon Musk and Michael Bloomberg.

  Doctors Without Borders spokeswoman Jessica Brown told The Daily Caller: “As a medical humanitarian organization providing medical and mental health care to people on this migration route, MSF [Médecins Sans Frontières] prints and distributes these maps to ensure that people know where to find shelter and humanitarian assistance and how to access mental health services along the migration route.”

  Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) Director of Government Relations and Communications RJ Hauman concluded: “The fact that an international medical NGO with billions in the bank is making literal roadmaps to guide migrants from Central America to our southern border is not only an affront to its core mission, but a globalist attack on our sovereignty.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 16:00

• Rickards: A Bodyguard Of Lies
  Rickards: A Bodyguard Of Lies

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  The all-important midterm elections are just one week away. I’ve said a lot about them, and will have more to say about them in the days to come.

  

  But today, I want to talk about something even more important: truth vs. official lies. More specifically, I want to talk about truth and propaganda.

  It’s said that truth is the first casualty of war. And Churchill once said that in wartime, truth is so precious that it needs to be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.

  That’s why propaganda plays such a large role in modern warfare.

  The fact is wars are conducted in part through lies and propaganda. For example, in the early days of World War I, the British cut the undersea communications cables that ran from Germany to the U.S.

  The British wanted to control the flow of information and issue what we call today “misinformation.” And so they created inflammatory accounts of German atrocities to sway public opinion, like German soldiers skewering Belgian babies on bayonets.

  While there will always be individual acts of atrocity in wartime, these reports were largely propaganda.

  Here in the U.S. itself, President Wilson had special police forces who arrested anyone reporting negative news on the progress of the war. Sound familiar?

  It’s like the social media companies today canceling or censoring anyone who reports that the vaccines don’t work or masks don’t work. The media call it “misinformation” (even though it’s scientifically valid) and move on.

  The same is true with the war in Ukraine. The propaganda machine kicked into overdrive early on.

  Bodyguard of Lies

  The CIA and MI6 leaked a steady stream of anti-Russian lies to prop up morale. These lies were reprinted in warmonger media outlets like The Washington Post, The New York Times and NBC News.

  That means it’s almost impossible for U.S. citizens to get the real story through mainstream media outlets. Still, there is some honest reporting going in if you know where to find it.

  You just have to filter the sources and find those with good pipelines of information (including inside the government) who do not have a hidden agenda and are willing to speak the truth.

  It’s not necessary to rely on Russian sources (the Russians are certainly not above propaganda, although they’re generally more truthful than the U.S. media, believe it or not). There are excellent analyses to be found among Swiss sources, German experts who are not in favor of the war and some on-the-ground reporting from the front lines on specialist websites.

  Get Ready for the Russian Counteroffensive

  Some of the best sources are found among retired U.S. military officers who are experts on warfare, still have good contacts inside the military and intelligence communities, and who consider the war in Ukraine to be highly detrimental to U.S. national security and the economy.

  One top commentator who fits this description is Colonel (Ret.) Douglas Macgregor, who wrote a recent commentary about the war. Macgregor points out that Russia is preparing for a full-scale counterattack to roll-back recent Ukrainian gains near the Donbas and Kherson.

  The Russians have been consolidating their positions: resupplying, mobilizing troops, and preparing for winter warfare at which they excel. It’s just a matter of waiting for the ground to freeze so trucks and armor can maneuver without getting bogged down.

  The attack could come as early as November or December at the latest. Yet, that is not Macgregor’s main concern.

  Is the 101st Airborne Division Being Used as Bait?

  His fear is that the U.S. will double down in the face of this attack and deploy U.S. troops to the battle. The Pentagon recently deployed units of the 101st Airborne Division to Romania, just miles from its border with Ukraine.

  Airborne forces are generally light infantry that lack the firepower of, say, armored units or mechanized infantry.

  But if these forces did get directly involved in the fighting, heavier reinforcements would be on the way. From there, it could be a short step to nuclear war with Russia.

  To some, that might sound unrealistic or even paranoid. They’ll say it’s just scare-mongering. But this is a legitimate possibility, and there’s a real chance of it happening. The fact is, we’ve been on the path of escalation with Russia since 2008 and the tempo of escalation has accelerated since the war began in February.

  All experts on nuclear warfighting agree that if a nuclear war begins, it will be the result of escalation to the point that one side feels it is cornered and has no choice but to use nukes. That point is getting closer by the day.

  Macgregor calls on Congress to stop the White House, but he’s not optimistic that’ll happen.

  Nuclear War? It’s Not the End of the World

  The possibility of nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia is a shocking development after thirty years, during which nuclear weapons and nuclear war between superpowers were almost forgotten.

  What is as disconcerting is the fact that the discussion of nuclear war is casual, almost flippant, and carries none of the seriousness with which the topic was formerly addressed. It also carries no comprehension of the existential consequences and sheer horror that the use of nuclear weapons entails.

  It’s almost as if the warmongers in and around the White House were playing a game of chicken without realizing the other driver had no intention of changing course.

  Now the U.S. elites have started psychological operations (psyops) aimed at Putin with nuclear weapons as the bait. They claim that Putin has threatened to use tactical weapons in Ukraine and possibly other parts of Eastern and Central Europe.

  That’s a lie; Putin never said that.

  When asked, both Putin and Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev said that if attacked, Russia would defend itself by all means necessary, including the possible use of nuclear weapons. That’s not news. That has been Russian or Soviet policy since the early 1950s. It has also been U.S. policy since then. Neither side has ever renounced the first use of nuclear weapons.

  Putin’s expected answer to a question posed has been turned into a threat he never made. This is U.S. and UK propaganda at its worst (and most dangerous). This lie about Putin’s intentions quickly morphed into another psyop about a “false flag” operation.

  That’s when you stage an attack disguised to look like an attack by your enemy in order to justify your own “retaliation,” which you were planning all along. Recently, the narrative that Putin would use nukes or conduct a false flag operation morphed into a related narrative that Putin would use a “dirty bomb.”

  He Said, He Said

  In effect, Putin would detonate a dirty bomb and then blame the Ukrainians and Americans. A dirty bomb is not a nuclear weapon, but it does employ radioactive material wrapped around conventional explosives. When detonated, the radioactive material is dispersed and can poison or kill any people or livestock in the area.

  Not to be outdone, the Russians countered by saying the U.S. or Ukraine would conduct the false flag by detonating a dirty bomb and then blaming the Russians as an excuse to escalate Western involvement in Ukraine.

  At this point, we have both sides warning the other side will conduct a false flag with a dirty bomb in order to justify their own pre-planned escalation. If a dirty bomb does go off, each side will blame the other and the truth will be a casualty of war.

  Meanwhile, a senior Russian foreign ministry official has warned that U.S. satellites, which have been providing critical targeting information to Ukraine’s armed forces, may be “legitimate” targets of Russian forces.

  How would the U.S. respond if Russia starts taking out its satellites? We may soon find out.

  Is Your Portfolio Ready for Nukes?

  By the way, I’m not apologizing for Putin or defending his invasion of Ukraine. I’m just looking at the current situation and objectively analyzing where things could go next, based upon the facts.

  And I’m not making a specific prediction; I’m just giving you a warning because the media doesn’t seem to want to.

  It might seem like an inappropriate question given the potential for widespread death and destruction, but is your portfolio ready for nukes?

  In a nuclear confrontation, stocks and bonds could become worthless as exchanges are closed around the world. At best, they will retain some value as illiquid private equity tokens.

  The best assets in this catastrophic scenario are land, gold, silver, food, water, and heat for your home.

  Nothing else will matter much.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 15:30

• Joy Reid Says Voters Didn't Know About Inflation Until Republican Politicians "Taught Them" The Word
  Joy Reid Says Voters Didn’t Know About Inflation Until Republican Politicians “Taught Them” The Word

  MSNBC’s Joy Reid has been a veritable gold mine of bad takes, ignorant comments and authoritarian arguments over the past few years. 

  This includes her consistent demand that people without covid vaccines be denied medical care, that they be punished with fines, as well as her baseless assertions that hurricanes are a product of “global warming.” 

  Her latest comments might be her most bizarre yet, with a mind boggling claim that American voters were essentially oblivious to the issue of inflation until conservative political candidates started talking about it.

  This narrative appears to be an extension of a common gas-lighting strategy among Democrats; a way to dismiss the problems Americans most care about in 2022 as overblown. Reid’s suggestion insinuates that the public was comfortably unaware of the inflationary/stagflationary crisis and could have stayed that way had it not been for those meddling Republicans and their refusal to use the “common tongue” on the campaign trail.  In other words, she thinks the average voter is stupid.

  Reid argues that the only people that use the word “inflation” are “journalists and economists” and that it is not a part of the normal lexicon of discussion.  One might point out to Reid, since she seems incapable of grasping simple logic, that Americans have not faced a true inflationary threat since the 1970’s, over 40 years ago.  So, it’s not surprising that inflation was not a term used around every dinner table in the country until today as the threat returns with a vengeance. 

  It should be noted that Joy Reid has covered the inflation crisis on her own show on a number of occasions, which means she also may have contributed to the wider usage of the terminology, not just conservatives.  Here’s Reid hitting the inflation issue over 8 months ago:

  The leftist pundit’s take on the situation is definitely uneducated, as she tries to blame companies as the culprits behind inflation as if they are raising prices artificially.  She ignores the fact that prices also spiked in commodities and raw materials, energy, labor and shipping, which means goods cost much more for producers to manufacture.  It is bottom line inflation that causes the prime bulk of price increases on store shelves, not businesses trying to squeeze extra profits out of consumers. 

  Beyond that, Reid seems to think it’s perfectly acceptable for leftists to put their own spin on the inflation problem as a way to push their political agenda forward, but it’s not okay for conservatives to ring the warning bell because now Democrats are tied inexorably to our country’s economic decline.   It’s the legendary MSNBC double standard all over again.  

  The fact that a majority of Americans are aware of inflation dangers and are talking about them is a good thing.  It shows that the public is paying attention and they are seeking solutions.  Reid’s position is an elitist one, asserting that the general public should remain in the dark, and that such issues should only be entertained among small circles of “professionals” who will let the rest of us know what we should think and when we should think it.         

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 15:00

• Is Following ESG Criteria Breaking The Law?
  Is Following ESG Criteria Breaking The Law?

  Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  One problem for CEOs who direct their companies to follow the goals of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria is that in doing so, they may be breaking the law. According to legal experts, ESG initiatives can cause companies to break antitrust, civil rights, and Employee Retirement Income Security Agency (ERISA) laws.

  “The way ESG is being implemented is completely antidemocratic, which is to say that they are just flouting laws,” George Mason University law professor Todd Zywicki told The Epoch Times. “They’re flouting democratically elected laws and bringing things about that are often illegal.”

  

  Violation of Antitrust Laws

  According to a report titled “Liability Risks for the ESG Agenda” (pdf), by Washington D.C. law firm Boyden Gray, companies that take part in coordinated actions against other companies or industries could be violating U.S. antitrust laws. The report states, “Federal law prohibits companies from colluding on group boycotts or conspiring to restrain trade, even to advance political or social goals.”

  It cites the Sherman Act of 1890, which prohibits “every contract, combination … or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce.” Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote on this subject, commenting that “antitrust laws in general, and the Sherman Act in particular, are the Magna Carta of free enterprise. They are as important to the preservation of economic freedom and our free-enterprise system as the Bill of Rights is to the protection of our fundamental personal freedoms.”

  Hundreds of the world’s largest corporations have signed joint pledges through international clubs such as Climate Action 100+, the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the Net Zero Asset Managers Alliance, and others to reduce the use of fossil fuels.

  GFANZ, which includes 550 global corporations as members, states that “all members have independently committed to the goal of net zero by 2050, in addition to setting interim targets for 2030 or earlier and reporting transparently on progress along the way.” GFANZ banking members include Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, BlackRock, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs.

  Climate Action 100+ includes 700 investment companies representing $68 trillion in assets; it also includes 166 companies with a combined market capitalization more than $10 trillion. Among the hundreds of members of Climate Action 100+ are some of the world’s largest and most powerful companies, including Boeing, BP, Caterpillar, Chevron, Dow, Exxon, Ford, Honda, Lockheed Martin, Mercedes, Nestle, Nissan, PepsiCo, Proctor & Gamble, Raytheon, Siemens, Coca Cola, Toyota, United Airlines, American Airlines, Walmart, BlackRock, State Street, Goldman Sachs, Fidelity, PIMCO, and Allianz. It also includes America’s largest state pension funds, such as CalPERS, CalSTRS, New York City Pension Funds, and New York State Common Retirement Fund.

  The Boyden Gray report notes that the argument that ESG advocates make—that companies which follow ESG guidelines are better investments —“relies heavily on bandwagon effects.” In other words, if enough asset managers collaborate to shift their investments toward ESG-compliant companies, the shares of those companies become more valuable; and even more so if governments subsidize industries like wind and solar, while punishing fossil fuel companies.

  Violation of Civil Rights Laws

  Beyond antitrust, another area where ESG may run afoul of America’s laws is where the push for racial and gender equity violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. In step with ESG social justice goals, United Airlines announced in April 2021 that it would set racial and gender quotas when hiring pilots.

  The company stated that “our flight deck should reflect the diverse group of people on board our planes every day. That’s why we plan for 50 percent of the 5,000 pilots we train in the next decade to be women or people of color.”

  A number of recent court rulings have underscored the validity of U.S. laws regarding racial discrimination. In June 2021, a federal judge ruled that the Biden administration’s farming grants, which gave preference to racial minorities, were illegal. In a separate case, the courts ruled that COVID-relief grants by the Biden administration that excluded white restaurant owners were also illegal.

  But America’s civil rights laws go beyond government policy to include private industry as well, opening companies up to lawsuits from employees. In August, for example, American Express became the latest company to face an employee lawsuit for racial discrimination. Brian Netzel, a decade-long employee who was fired in 2020 on what he claims are racial grounds, stated in his class-action lawsuit that American Express “gave preferential treatment to individuals for being black and unambiguously signaled to white employees that their race was an impediment to getting ahead in the company.”

  In October 2021, a white male employee was awarded $10 million by a jury that agreed with his claim that he was fired as part of a race-based policy by his employer, Novant Health. After five years of positive work reviews, David Duvall was fired “without warning or cause as part of an intentional campaign to promote diversity in its management ranks; a campaign [Novant] has boasted about publicly,” his suit stated.

  “It’s been well known for decades that quotas are illegal,” Zywicki said. “But when you start looking at things like racial sensitivity training, they’re engaging pretty much in rampant stereotyping, negative stereotyping of certain groups, and they are engaging in rampant preferences for others. All of this runs pretty clearly up against existing civil rights laws.”

  Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, a component of ESG, are coming under fire, both as mandatory employee training and as hiring criteria.

  It was reported on Nov. 2 that University of North Carolina’s School of Medicine “forces applicants, students, and professors to constantly prove their commitment to the tenets of diversity, equity, and inclusion as a prerequisite to advancement, rather than basing such decisions on merit alone.” This was based on a report by a nonprofit called Do No Harm, which charged that one of UNC’s main criteria for hiring and promotion of teachers was “a positive contribution to DEI efforts.”

  Stanley Goldfarb, the chairman of Do No Harm, stated in a letter to the school that “it is inappropriate to require that candidates for promotion and tenure demonstrate their commitment to a political ideology. Forcing candidates to declare their support for DEI when many undoubtedly oppose it would compel dishonesty.” This report comes amid a case before the U.S. Supreme Court wherein UNC was charged with having unconstitutional race-based admission standards.

  Violation of Fiduciary Laws

  A third area where ESG clashes with U.S. law regards the legal obligation of fund managers and corporate executives to act in good faith and in the best interests of investors and shareholders.

  The Employee Retirement Income Security Act, passed in 1974 to address corruption and misuse of pension money, requires that private pension fund managers invest “solely in the interests of participants and beneficiaries.” It set what is called a “prudent expert” standard of care for fund managers and allows fund beneficiaries to sue managers for failing to uphold this standard.

  While ERISA applies to corporate pension funds, many U.S. states have applied similar language to public pension funds. Currently, 24 states forbid ideological investing for their public pension funds, including ESG.

  An August letter to BlackRock, signed by 19 state attorneys general, for example, charged that BlackRock had a “duty of loyalty” to state pensioners who invested in its funds and that “your actions around promoting net zero, the Paris Agreement, or taking action on climate change indicate rampant violations of this duty, otherwise known as acting with ‘mixed motives.’”

  In response, BlackRock wrote that “one of [its] most critical tasks as a fiduciary investor for our clients is to identify short- and long-term trends in the global economy that may affect our clients’ investments.” The letter states that “governments representing over 90 percent of global GDP have committed to move to net-zero in the coming decades. We believe investors and companies that take a forward-looking position with respect to climate risk … will generate better long-term financial outcomes.”

  State attorneys general disagreed, stating that despite climate-change rhetoric, “governments are not implementing policies to require net zero … In particular, the United States has not implemented net-zero mandates. Despite doing everything in his power at the beginning of his presidency to shut down fossil fuels, even President Biden is appearing to reverse course given the harm his inflationary policies have inflicted on the American people.”

  In October, Swiss bank UBS downgraded the shares of BlackRock, stating that “as [BlackRock’s] performance deteriorates and political risk from ESG has increased, we believe the potential for lost fund mandates and regulatory scrutiny has recently increased.”

  In addition to the risk that ESG asset managers violate their fiduciary duty to investors, there is also the risk that corporate managers violate their duty to act in the best interest of the shareholders of the company.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 14:30

• Biden Betrayed As CNN, NYT Fact Checkers Set Stage For Downfall
  Biden Betrayed As CNN, NYT Fact Checkers Set Stage For Downfall

  Last week, the New York Times wrote a puff piece which framed President Biden’s numerous gaffes during a Florida rally as ‘verbal fumbling.’

  

  Biden conflated the war in Ukraine with the Iraq war, then lied when he said he got the two confused because his son Beau died in Iraq.

  NEW – Biden: “Inflation is a worldwide problem right now because of a war in Iraq… excuse me, the war in Ukraine. I’m thinking about Iraq because that’s where my son died.” pic.twitter.com/G2QeYUqdHN

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 1, 2022

  The same day, the White House was called out by CNN‘s Daniel Dale over a now-deleted tweet claiming “Seniors are getting the biggest increase in their Social Security checks in 10 years through President Biden’s leadership,” when in fact – as Dale noted, “The size of Social Security checks is linked, by law, to inflation. This year’s increase is unusually big because the inflation rate is unusually big.”

  when you’ve lost the “fact checkers”… https://t.co/XKFyvecGx2

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 2, 2022

  And while the White House deleted the Tweet, Biden repeated the claim twice last week. As The Blaze notes;

  • Speaking in Florida on Tuesday, Biden said, “And on my watch, for the first time in 10 years, seniors are getting an increase in their Social Security checks.”
  • Then at a campaign rally, Biden said on Tuesday, “On our watch, for the first time in 10 years, seniors are getting the biggest increase in Social Security checks, period.”

  There’s a lot that’s wrong with that declaration. First of all, this will be the seventh increase in a row. Second, increases are routine because they happen automatically — based on changes to a particular calculation of the Consumer Price Index (CPI-W), and not the actions of the president. 

  What makes Biden’s boast especially preposterous is that it ultimately points to the fact that what’s happened “on his watch” is 40-year-high price inflation.

  

  Fast forward four days, and both CNN and the New York Times have gone scorched earth on Biden, in what appears to be a’ coordinated effort’ to distance mainstream Democrats against a President who’s become an increasing liability with batshit crazy comments, obvious confusion, and several recent sniffings.

  Adding this CNN fact check to the thread. Looks like a coordinated effort.

  Hat tip: @IUTruthtellers and @mindnotforrent https://t.co/rjhg6iMHK0

  — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) November 5, 2022

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

  There’s a reason Daniel just decided to start doing his job two years in and 4 days before a before an election that effectively ends Biden’s presidency. Try and guess what that is. pic.twitter.com/EIA7YiFmDc

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) November 5, 2022

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

  On Friday, the Times took Biden and his White House to task for a series of false statements about the state of the economy and what Biden has done for it.  

  

  For example, Biden routinely positions himself as an unprecedented cutter of budget deficits, as he did recently in Syracuse:

  “This year the deficit, under our leadership, is falling by $1.4 trillion. Ladies and gentlemen, the largest ever one-year cut in American history on the deficit.” 

  Not so fast, says the Times: 

  Left unsaid was the fact that the deficit was so high in the first place because of pandemic relief spending, including a $1.9 trillion economic aid package the president pushed through Congress in 2021 and which was not renewed. Mr. Biden was in effect claiming credit for not passing another round of emergency assistance.

  What the Times didn’t point out was that Biden and the Democratic Congress have teamed up to significantly increase deficits over the budget horizon, as illustrated by the Manhattan Institute‘s Brian Riedl:   

  

  Fact check leads White House to delete tweet, then the spin begins…

  Hilarity ensued over the Social Security self-own, as Twitter users “added context” that demolished the boast… causing Elon Musk to tweet; “The system is working.” 

  The system is working 🤣

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 2, 2022

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

  After the White House deleted the tweet, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “Look, the tweet was not complete. Usually when we put out a tweet we post it with context, and it did not have that context.”

  “The tweet was not complete. Usually when we put out a tweet we posted with context and it did not have that context.”@PressSec responds to deleted White House tweet that gave President Biden credit for Social Security increases. https://t.co/kLf3TkYg3L pic.twitter.com/4jnchY9XaO

  — The Hill (@thehill) November 3, 2022

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

  What’s particularly damning about the Social Security brag is that, rather than bubbling up in spontaneous Biden remarks — always a nail-biting experience for his team — this was part of a prepared speech. That speaks volumes about the collective economic wisdom of his controllers.  

  The Times also hit Biden for saying — off the cuff — that he pushed student debt forgiveness through Congress, where “I got it passed by a vote or two.” 

  Though many were quick to brand this a “lie,” when you consider he personally instituted debt forgiveness via an executive order that was many months in the making, it’s more likely it was the latest example of his accelerating mental decline.

  Not surprisingly, the Times couldn’t bring itself to explicitly raise that possibility, but did note that Biden’s assertion was “perhaps the most head-scratching” of his false economic statements, as it was “starkly at odds with the reality,” especially when his executive order is now facing multiple court challenges.

  The Times then called out misleading or false communications about economic growth, gas prices and inflation in general. 

  CNN, meanwhile, put out the following piece Saturday morning:

  

  They ding Biden on the Social Security propaganda and lying about corporate taxes.

  Biden repeatedly suggested in speeches in October and early November that a new law he signed in August, the Inflation Reduction Act, will stop the practice of successful corporations paying no federal corporate income tax. Biden made the claim explicitly in a tweet last week: “Let me give you the facts. In 2020, 55 corporations made $40 billion. And they paid zero in federal taxes. My Inflation Reduction Act puts an end to this.”

  But “puts an end to this” is an exaggeration. The Inflation Reduction Act will reduce the number of companies on the list of non-payers, but the law will not eliminate the list entirely.

  That’s because the law’s new 15% alternative corporate minimum tax, on the “book income” companies report to investors, only applies to companies with at least $1 billion in average annual income. (There are lots of nuances; you can read more specifics here.) According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the think tank that in 2021 published the list of 55 large and profitable companies that avoided paying any federal income tax in their previous fiscal year, only 14 of these 55 companies reported having US pre-tax income of at least $1 billion in that year.

  In other words, there will clearly still be some large and profitable corporations paying no federal income tax even after the minimum tax takes effect in 2023. The exact number is not yet known. -CNN

  CNN then called out Biden for lying about the national debt and the deficit, the unemployment rate, his student debt cancellation scheme, gas prices, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and the Trump tax cuts.

  What’s going on here?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 14:00

• How The Soviets "Fixed" Inflation, But Wrecked The Economy
  How The Soviets “Fixed” Inflation, But Wrecked The Economy

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  Price inflation and the resulting business cycles are monetary phenomena, and without increases in the money supply—i.e., monetary inflation—there is no price inflation. If the world were a very simple place, we would see this relationship clearly displayed: when the money supply increased, we would also see a general increase in prices soon thereafter. The world, however, is not a very simple place and an economy can include countless factors that can mask, delay, and otherwise obscure the connection between monetary inflation and price inflation. 

  

  For example, monetary policymakers in the US have long benefited from the disinflationary effects of global trade and increasing worker productivity. This means that, for decades, consumers should have seen prices of most goods and services falling. Instead, relentless monetary inflation over the past three decades has resulted in positive price growth that is seemingly mild, and policymakers can claim victory over inflation. Moreover, new money can enter the economy in a variety of ways, often manifesting as asset-price inflation rather than as noticeably high price increases in food or household goods. 

  Governments also have many tools at their disposal to delay or hide the effects of monetary inflation, sometimes for many years. Price controls and subsidies, for example, can obscure the true costs of goods and services for the end consumer. These tactics cause shortages, bubbles, and other problems, but these can often be blamed on “greed” or “capitalism.” 

  One particularly interesting case of how governments can hide price inflation for decades is the Soviet Union. Under the Soviet regime, the money supply—denominated in unbacked fiat money, of course—was continually expanded to increase wages and create the impression of prosperity. This would have led to price inflation quickly, but for the shortage economy and demand-killing government policies endured by the average Soviet citizen. As is so often the case, the regime was able to cover up the effects of inflation for a time, but the policies ultimately proved to be disastrous. 

  Preventing Inflation through State Control of the Economy

  As a regime increases the money supply, demand will generally rise. But rising prices will become acute only if there are actually products and services on which consumers and enterprises can spend their new money. Thus, a regime wishing to avoid price inflation can keep increasing the money supply so long as it also reduces demand by limiting the availability of goods. This prevents improvements in the standard of living, but it can indeed keep down price inflation. 

  This cannot be easily done in a country where the population expects to live under a relatively free economy. In an unhampered or partially interventionist economy, a lack of widespread price controls often means a large number of goods and services will continue to be supplied, albeit at higher prices, in an inflationary environment. But, because the USSR oversees a heavily controlled, command economy, the regime could more easily dictate prices, limit imports, and force consumers to save rather than spend.

  Ultimately, though, by the late 1980s, the regime was forced to “open up” its economy to market forces as a restive population increasingly demanded a standard of living more in line with what existed in the West. However, once the regime ceased controlling prices and savings, prices exploded, government revenues cratered, and the Soviet regime ended its days in an orgy of money printing and hyperinflation. 

  How the Soviet Regime Manipulated Price Inflation

  The fact that the Soviet regime preferred shortages to inflation has its roots in the hyperinflationary history of the Soviet economy. By the middle of the twentieth century, Soviet planners were already well aware of the dangers of hyperinflation. With the end of the czarist regime, and the cessation of the First World War, the new socialist regime took over a country that was already broke and highly dysfunctional. Hyperinflation soon followed. The Bolsheviks attempted to do away with money altogether, but this naturally failed, and a number of monetary reforms followed. By the late 1920s, however, the regime was engaging in widespread price control efforts, including the highly unusual tactic of peacetime rationing. This limited price inflation for many goods and set the stage for the “repressed inflation” that would become a mainstay of the Soviet system for decades. Prices nevertheless began to rise rapidly in many areas, and the Second World War brought on a new wave of price inflation and prices spiraled upward. This was followed by another currency reform—i.e., devaluation—of the Soviet ruble in 1947. Efforts at price controls were redoubled and overall prices actually declined during the 1950s. 

  Throughout much of the 1950s and early sixties, the regime was perennially concerned about price inflation. In fact, Soviet ideology stipulated that inflation did not actually exist in the USSR. As claimed by Vasily Garbuzov, the Soviet Minister of Finance in 1960:

  In the Soviet Union there is not and cannot be any inflation; the possibility of inflation is fully precluded by the very system of planned socialist economy. In our country both wholesale and retail prices are established by the government and, therefore, the purchasing power of the ruble is controlled on a planned basis. …The stability of Soviet currency is guaranteed by the monopoly of currency and the monopoly of foreign trade which is one of the most important advantages of the socialist economic system.

  This is propaganda, of course, but in a sense, Garbuzov was right. A socialist state really could moderate the price effects of monetary inflation by throttling back the standard of living and consumption options whenever it seemed prices were rising.

  This was necessary because the money supply continually expanded as wages rose. In their 1985 study on the Soviet economy, Igor Birman and Roger Clarke wrote: 

  The reason for the excess supply of money is that the state has consistently ‘over-paid’ the population in the form of wages, pensions, stipends etc., which exceed production (plus net imports and minus net exports) of consumer goods at the currently ruling retail prices (fixed by the state). While there has indeed been a steady rise in retail prices (despite the stability of the official index) this has been very far from sufficient to equalise the real effective demand of the population with the available supply of goods. In other words, the state generates excessive purchasing power in the hands of the population.

  In an unhampered economy wages are closely tied to the productivity of workers, so wages would not grow out of proportion to the amount of goods and services available in the economy. In a socialist, economy, however, the price of labor—i.e., wages—were arbitrarily set like all other prices. Wages under socialism are also paid out of the public treasury and can be increased to the liking of the regime itself. This often meant rising wages because higher wages were politically popular. Rising wages potentially created the impression of prosperity, even when the economy wasn’t actually more productive. Also, as Birman and Clarke note

  During the last two decades [i.e., 1965 to 1985] it has pursued the ‘confidence trick’ policy of trying to stimulate productivity by higher money wages without raising the supply of consumer goods by nearly sufficient to translate the increase in money wages into increased real incomes.

  Increasingly, after 1965, the Soviet money supply was out of proportion to the productive capability of the economy. In a relatively free economy, this would quickly lead to price inflation, but the Soviet regime had ways of shifting the economic burden elsewhere. 

  Thus, prices were kept under control not through fiscal disciple, but through price controls. This led to shortages because, if wages were rising while goods prices could not, demand quickly exceeded supply. Soviet citizens often found they had very little to spend their money on, with the result being the long queues and empty store shelves we now associate with the Soviet economy. 

  By this mechanism, the regime can continue to inject new money into the economy but also prevent ordinary people from spending “too much” money and thus ratcheting up consumer prices. The downside, of course, is that the standard of living goes down considerably, as historian Steven Efremov notes: 

  The system of price controls had deleterious effects both for Soviet consumers and for the economy as a whole. … Shortages of most foods led to lower quality diets, and many consumer products that were routinely available in the West, such as telephones, cars, and modern washing machines were amazingly rare in the Soviet Union. Living conditions were less comfortable in many ways, with less housing space per person, no central heating, no air conditioning, and often no sewer connections or hot water. 

  The result was essentially forced savings. Efremov continues: 

  When consumers could not find anything they wanted to buy, many chose to save a portion of their income every year. This effect was cumulative over the years, as unsatisfied demand from each year was carried over to the next and the population’s savings continued to grow.

  In some respects, this was good for the regime because this unspendable savings could also be tapped for buying the government’s debt. But this stored up money—known as the “monetary overhang” increased much more rapidly than did the production of goods and services, and Efremov concludes “the money supply had grown to become many times larger than what was needed for regular circulation.” This would come back to haunt the regime when the economy began to open up and consumers could finally spend the money, causing prices to soar. 

  An additional method of pushing down official inflation numbers was to subsidize consumer goods. Retail price subsidies were introduced in in the Soviet Union in 1965 as part of a major economic reform package. Soviet authorities then began to implement price subsidies of “basic foods such as meat, milk, bread, sausages, sugar, and butter.”1 The purpose was to keep prices stable. These subsidies survived subsequent economic reform efforts and became a larger and larger part of the economy heading into the 1980s, with government spending rapidly increasing to push down prices through subsidies.

  Spending Rises and the Economy Stagnates 

  None of this worked to actually help the Soviet standard of living. 

  To combat the effects of monetary expansion and falling standards of living, the Soviet regime perennially attempted to increase production to narrow the gap between money growth and productivity growth. Due to the impossibility of economic calculation under socialism, however, Soviet central planning could not coordinate goods and capital efficiently, and the productivity of workers stagnated. 

  Another result was further declines in government revenue. Although taxes were levied and some revenue could be collected on imports, government monopolies—i.e., government-owned enterprises—controlling a variety of goods and services produced much of the income the regime relied on. These enterprises could theoretically increase revenues with increased output, but output often stagnated as wages—i.e., production costs—rose.

  Government budgets thus increased alongside falling revenue. Byung-Yeon Kim notes, for example, that “retail price subsidies … rose from 4 per cent of state budget expenditure in 1965 to 20 per cent in the late 1980s.”2 

  Yet, the availability of consumer goods certainly did not keep up. Rather, consumer had few places to spend their money and “the share of forced savings in total monetary savings increased from 9 per cent in 1965 to 42 per cent in 1989.”3

  Measured by the prevalence of shortages, it is clear the Soviet economy was in a state of stagnation by the late 70s. Shortages became even worse. Kim concludes: 

  Consumer market conditions in the official retail network deteriorated rapidly in the years 1965-78. This is most likely to have been caused by stable consumer prices faced with rising consumer purchasing power. Even though the rapid deterioration halted during the period 1979-83, this was not sufficient to restore equilibrium. Further worsening of consumer market conditions occurred after 1984. In particular, shortages in the consumer market intensified significantly in 1989 because household money income increased much faster than the availability of consumer goods.4

  The wage increases continued with little positive effect. Throughout the 1980s, Soviet state-owned enterprises raised wages in an attempt to create a “wealth effect” and to placate dissatisfied workers. Yet, with few goods available to buy, rising wages ceased to be much of an inducement to harder work. Birman and Clarke note that after a time, rising wages “become ineffective—additional unspendable money is no longer an incentive to work harder or more productively.” Worker productivity suffered. This problem only accelerated as the decade wore on and, as Igor Filatochev and Roy Bradshaw note, “wages increas[ed] four times faster than labour productivity throughout 1989 and 1990.”

  The 1980s: A Time of Growing Deficits and Money Printing 

  All of this spending on wages and subsidies combined to create conditions under which government deficits rose, leading for even greater monetary expansion. Kim concludes:

  Although the budget deficit was officially recorded only from 1985 onwards, many reliable Soviet and western sources have maintained that a sizable deficit already existed well before the 1980s.5

  Up until the 1970s, there had been a connection between revenues and spending to the point that deficits were manageable. As time went on, borrowing to address deficits became increasingly expensive for the regime, and printing money—above and beyond the need for wages—was increasingly viewed as a way out:

  [P]rinting of money began well before the late 1980s, that is, from 1977 onwards, and tended to increase during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Overall, the Soviet budget tended to destabilize the consumer market, at least after 1977, by putting money into circulation. In particular, a sharp increase in printing money in the late 1980s suggests that the Soviet economy was then on the verge of collapse.6

  Amount of Deficit Financed by Printing Money

  

  Source: Byung-Yeon Kim, “Causes of Repressed Inflation in the Soviet Consumer Market, 1965-1989: Retail Price Subsidies, the Siphoning Effect, and the Budget Deficit,” The Economic History Review 55, no. 1 (Feb. 2002): 121

  Hyperinflation Sets In 

  By the late 1980s, the Soviet economy was already primed for price inflation, yet so-called repressed inflation continued to be a sizable factor pushing down official inflation rates until the mid 1980s. With the advent of perestroika and some limited promarket reforms, Soviet citizens were increasingly able to purchase more goods and import more goods. Decades of forced saving led to runaway inflation as shortages became less acute in many cases. That “monetary overhang” came out of savings accounts and drove price inflation to disastrous heights. 

  It took some time for the official numbers to catch up with reality. The regime’s official numbers had long understated even the moderate levels of price inflation in earlier periods, but after the mid-80s, the gap between official inflation and estimated real inflation grew considerably. Efremov summarizes the divergence, noting that in 1988 official inflation was 0.6 percent but 6 percent in the real marketplace. By 1989, official inflation was 2 percent, but it was really 8 percent. In 1990, it was 5.3 percent, but really 20 percent. And then the wheels started to really come off in 1991, with 96.3 “official” inflation that was really 200 percent. 

  The Soviet Union collapsed shortly thereafter, and the new regime did not issue falsified inflation numbers anymore. Instead, the real inflation rate in 1992 was estimated to be more than 2,300 percent. Hyperinflation continued for three more years until the old Soviet ruble finally ceased to exist.

  A Socialist Guide to Lowering Price Inflation

  The Soviet experience provides an example of how expanding the money supply forces a choice. In response, an inflationist regime can commit to reining in monetary inflation to tackle rising prices. Or, a regime can “solve” an inflation problem by destroying demand via price controls and shortages.  The latter choice requires lowering the standard of living and gradually reducing consumer choices again and again. Yet, even this draconian option fails to prevent hyperinflation in the end.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/05/2022 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Could Voting Out Anti-Gun Politicians Next Week Secure The Second Amendment?
  Could Voting Out Anti-Gun Politicians Next Week Secure The Second Amendment?

  Submitted by Erich Pratt, the Senior Vice President of Gun Owners for America.,

  This past year, America saw all sorts of headlines with a Second Amendment connection. From the Bruen decision at the Supreme Court and states passing more gun control in its wake, to the mass murders in Uvalde and Buffalo that prompted poorly crafted and openly unconstitutional legislation from Congress, there was a lot to digest.  

  Now as we approach election day next week, the debate over guns will play out in the ballot box, and we are confident which way America will go. 

  Despite the Bruen precedent, which is already having ripple effects on unconstitutional gun laws across the country, anti-gun legislators in both parties and at every level of government are doubling-down or even compromising away your rights because a vocal minority demands they “do something.” This phrase, while emotionally compelling, has unfortunately also led to bad policy, like the Cornyn-Murphy gun control package passed in late June.  

  Think about it. Just 48 hours after the Bruen decision, President Biden signed a major gun control package into law that, among other provisions, now relegates adults aged 18-21 to being second class citizens. Nothing could be more frustrating, especially with the edict that had just come from the Supreme Court – but hey, the Senate negotiators couldn’t let that get in their way. 

  Then we have Governor Hochul in New York, who teamed up with her legislature to quickly pass a highly restrictive concealed carry law – only after their previous (and less restrictive) law was overturned by our nation’s highest court!  

  

  In neighboring New Jersey, legislators are poised to go even further, by requiring individuals to obtain liability insurance to carry firearms! These policies will not stand judicial muster, just look at the comments from Judge Suddaby in our suit against the New York’s new concealed carry restrictions. Or look to Winchester, Virginia, where GOA won in court against a local ordinance that prohibited carry in many public locations, or Philadelphia where we secured a permanent injunction against the anti-gun Mayor’s latest gun grab in less than a week.   

  Frustratingly, at a time when crime is spiking across our country and sits atop voters’ minds, anti-gunners appear more focused on ensuring their constituents have no means to effectively protect themselves. In Congress, Senators from some of the most pro-gun states in the country sold your rights down the river. Voters are demanding one thing and their representatives are doing the opposite.  

  While the courts are a viable option, voting out anti-gun politicians is a much swifter alternative. Thankfully, We the People will soon have our say again, and it appears all but guaranteed that the Second Amendment will be more favored come January in both Washington and across the states. 

  Like we warned the anti-gun crowd after the Bruen decision, come into compliance and ensure our constitutional rights are protected, or we (or the voters) will force you to.  

  *   *   *

  Gun Owners for America, the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 23:40

• Meanwhile In London…
  Meanwhile In London…

  Here’s something you don’t see every day…

  In a bizarre moment caught on video, two giant Christmas baubles bounced down London’s Tottenham Court Road this week after being swept by high winds, as passing cars attempt to avoid them…

  They are reportedly part of an art installation by artist Tom Shannon which was due to remain on display in St Giles’ Square.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 23:20

• Whitney: The One Chart That Explains Everything
  Whitney: The One Chart That Explains Everything

  Authored by Mike Whitney,

  Look at the chart below. The chart explains everything.

  

  It explains why Washington is so worried about China’s explosive growth. It explains why the US continues to hector China on the issues of Taiwan and the South China Sea. It explains why Washington sends congressional delegations to Taiwan in defiance of Beijing’s explicit requests. It explains why the Pentagon continues to send US warships through the Taiwan Strait and ship massive amounts of lethal weaponry to Taipei. It explains why Washington is creating anti-China coalitions in Asia that are aimed at encircling and provoking Beijing. It explains why the Biden administration is stepping up its trade war on China, imposing onerous economic sanctions on its businesses, and banning critical high-tech semi-conductors that are “are essential not just… for virtually every aspect of modern society, from electronic products and transport to the design and production of all manner of goods.” It explains why China has been singled-out in the US National Security Strategy (NSS) as “the only competitor with both the intent and, increasingly, the capability to reshape the international order.” It explains why Washington now regards China as its biggest and most formidable strategic adversary that must be isolated, demonized and defeated.

  The chart above explains everything, not just the hostile diplomatic jabs that are designed to discredit and humiliate China, but also the openly belligerent policies that are aimed at Russia as well. People need to understand this. They need to see what is really going on so they can put events in their proper geopolitical context.

  And what “context” is that?

  The context of a Third World War; a war that was thoroughly-planned, instigated and (now) prosecuted by Washington and Washington’s proxies. That’s what’s really going on. The increasingly violent conflagrations we see cropping-up in Ukraine and Asia are not the result of “Russian aggression” or “evil Putin”. No. They are the actualization of a sinister geopolitical strategy to quash China’s meteoric rise and preserve America’s dominant role in the world order. Can there be any doubt about that?

  No. None.

  This is why we are experiencing the redivision of the world into warring blocs. This is why we are seeing the roll back of 30 years of Globalization and massive suppyline disruption. And this is why Europe has been thrust headlong into frigid darkness and forced deindustrialisation. All of these suicidal policies were concocted for one purpose and one purpose alone, to maintain America’s exalted spot in the global system. That is why all of humanity is presently embroiled in a Third World War; a war that is designed to prevent China from becoming the world’s biggest economy; a war that is designed to preserve US global primacy. Check out this excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

  An October 19 Financial Times article by Edward Luce, entitled “Containing China is Biden’s explicit goal,” sounded the following alarm: “Imagine that a superpower declared war on a great power and nobody noticed. Joe Biden this month launched a full-blown economic war on China—all but committing the US to stopping its rise—and for the most part, Americans did not react.

  “To be sure, there is Russia’s war on Ukraine and inflation at home to preoccupy attention. But history is likely to record Biden’s move as the moment when US-China rivalry came out of the closet.”

  Moreover, last week, a top Biden administration official indicated that the US was preparing new bans on China in key hi-tech areas. Speaking at the Center for a New American Security, Alan Estevez, the under-secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, was asked if the US would ban China from accessing quantum information science, biotechnology, artificial intelligence software or advanced algorithms. Estevez admitted that this was already being actively discussed. “Will we end up doing something in those areas? If I was a betting person, I would put down money on that,” he said….

  Luce concluded his Financial Times article cited above by declaring: “Will Biden’s gamble work? I’m not relishing the prospect of finding out. For better or worse, the world has just changed with a whimper not a bang. Let us hope it stays that way.”…(“Biden’s technology war against China”, World Socialist Web Site)

  Once again, look at the chart. What does it tell you?

  The first thing it tells you is that the hostilities we see in Ukraine (and eventually Taiwan), can be traced back to a fundamental shift in the global economy. China is growing stronger. It’s on a path to overtake the United States economy within the decade. And with growth, come certain benefits. As the world’s biggest economy, China will naturally become Asia’s regional hegemon. And, as Asia’s regional hegemon it will be able “to settle regional disputes in its own favor and to de-legitimize U.S. regional and global leadership.”

  Can you see the problem here?

  For nearly two decades, the US has oriented its foreign policy around a “rebalancing of forces” strategy called the “pivot to Asia”. In short, the US intends to be the dominant player in the world’s most populous and prosperous region, Asia. Can you see how China’s rise derails Washington’s plan for the future?

  The United States is not going to let this happen without a fight. Washington is not going to let China muscle-it-out of the markets that it plans to dominate. That’s not going to happen. And if you think that’s going to happen, you’d better think again. The United States will go to war to avoid a scenario in which the US plays “second fiddle” to China. In fact, the foreign policy establishment has already decided that the US will engage China militarily for that very objective.

  So, our thesis is simple; we think WW3 has already begun. That’s all we’re saying. The ructions we see in Ukraine are merely the first salvo in a Third World War that has already triggered an unprecedented energy crisis, massive worldwide food insecurity, a catastrophic break-down in global supply lines, widespread and out-of-control inflation, the steady reemergence of extreme nationalism, and the redivision of the world into warring blocs. What more proof do you need?

  And it’s all economic. The origins of this conflict can all be traced back to the seismic changes in the global economy, the rise of China and the unavoidable decline of the United States. It is a case of one empire replacing the other. Naturally, a transition of this magnitude is going to generate tectonic changes in global distribution of power. And along with those changes will come more flashpoints, more devastation, and the looming prospect of nuclear war. And this is precisely how things are playing out.

  So, how does the chart explain what is happening in Ukraine?

  Washington’s proxy war in Ukraine is actually aimed at China not Russia. Russia is not a peer competitor and Russia does not have the economic wherewithal to displace the United States in the global order. NordStream, however, did pose a significant risk to the US by greatly strengthening Moscow’s economic relations with the EU and particularly with Europe’s industrial powerhouse, Germany. The Moscow-Berlin alliance—which was mutually beneficial and key to German prosperity—had to be sabotaged to prevent further economic integration that would have drawn the continents closer together into the world’s biggest free trade zone. Washington had to stop that in order to preserve its economic stranglehold on Europe and defend the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Even so, no one expected the US to blow up the pipeline itself in—what appears to be—the greatest act of industrial terrorism in history. That was truly shocking.

  In essence, Washington sees Russia as an obstacle to its “pivot” plan to encircle, isolate and weaken China. But Russia is not the greatest threat to US global primacy; not even close. That designation belongs to China.

  The Third World War is being waged to contain China not Russia. What the war in Ukraine suggests is that—among foreign policy elites—there is general agreement that, The road to Beijing goes through Moscow. That appears to be the consensus view. In other words, US powerbrokers want to weaken Russia in order to spread US military bases across Asia. Ultimately, the military will be called upon to enforce Washington’s economic rule over its new Asian subjects. If that day ever comes.

  We think it is extremely unlikely that Washington’s ambitious plan will succeed, but we have no doubt that it will be implemented all the same. Tens of millions of people are likely to die in a desperate attempt to turn-back the clock to the fleeting ‘unipolar moment’ and the equally short-lived American Century. It is a tragedy beyond comprehension.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 23:00

• Getting Away With Murder In The US?
  Getting Away With Murder In The US?

  The share of murders going unsolved is on the rise in the United States, according to the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS).

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck details in the chart below, 2020 saw a record low of only 54.4 percent of the country’s homicide cases cleared – or an estimated 9,836 out of 21,570 crimes. Due to data reporting delays, this is the latest available data.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  A case is “cleared” when either it is solved and the suspected killer has been arrested and formally charged or when the case has been deemed an “exception”, which means the assailant cannot be arrested, whether that’s because they are already dead, imprisoned elsewhere, or for another reason.

  The sudden drop in 2020 can partly be attributed to the fact that homicides saw a nearly 30 percent increase that year, according to the FBI’s 2020 Uniform Crime Report, which meant police and sheriff’s departments were overwhelmed with cases.

  The longer downward trend, however, is likely the result of a number of reasons.

  For instance, analysts argue that data collection in the 1960s and 1970s is not fully reliable and so their clearance levels are likely exaggerated.

  Meanwhile, more recently, a decline in police trust and willingness to work with law enforcement are also possible factors.

  Jeff Asher, a crime analyst, explains in an interview with The Atlantic, that the rise in gun violence is a main contributor to the trend. Since guns can be shot from further away, gunshot homicides tend to be more difficult to solve.

  “The nature of murder in America is changing in ways that we don’t really talk about enough”, he explains.

  “You’ve got a bunch of cities where firearms make up 80 to 90 percent of murders today. That is the main driver. Guns make murders much harder to solve, and it leads to lower clearance rates everywhere.”

  Judge the source on that last one…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 22:40

• Macleod: The Great Global Unwind Begins, Part 2
  Macleod: The Great Global Unwind Begins, Part 2

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  With price inflation rising out of control and interest rates rising strongly, the trading environment for commercial banks has fundamentally changed. With bad debts looming and bond prices in entrenched downtrends, procrastination is now the enemy of bankers.

  We are at the beginning of The Great Unwind, and this article elaborates on my first article for Goldmoney on the subject published here. 

  The imperative for bankers to respond to these conditions overrides all other matters if their businesses are to survive these changed conditions. We are entering a cyclical downdraft of the bank credit cycle which promises to be cataclysmic. And the monetary policy planners at the central banks can do nothing to stop it.

  After outlining the scale of the problems faced by each global systemically important bank, this article looks at the future for the $600 trillion derivatives mountain.

  It was born out of the long-term decline in interest rates from the mid-eighties, which ended last year. It is almost entirely distributed through banks and shadow banks.

  The question to address is, what is the future for the derivative mountain, now that the long-term trend for falling interest rates is over? And what are the economic consequences?

  

  If it’s you in the hot seat…

  Imagine, for a moment, that you are the CEO of a commercial bank involved in lending to businesses and with profit centres acting in a range of financial activities. As CEO, you are answerable to the board of directors for the bank’s performance, and ultimately the bank’s shareholders for maintaining and advancing the value of their shares. 

  Furthermore, let us set this imaginary exercise in the present. These are the issues that should keep you awake at night:

  • In common with your competitors, the ratio of your balance sheet assets to total equity is almost the highest in the history of the bank, in many cases for other banks over twenty times leaveraged.

  • Official inflation, measured by the CPI is about ten per cent, and producer prices are rising somewhat faster. Your central bank expects a return to the 2% target in two- or three-years’ time. But your contacts at the central bank have privately admitted to you that they cannot imagine the circumstances where this would be true without a deep recession.

  • Bond yields are rising, and losses are beginning to impact on the bank’s investments. The bank has relatively little direct exposure to corporate bonds and equities, but they are commonly held as collateral against customer loans.

  • How are higher interest rates impacting the quality of the bank’s loan book? The bank supported its business customers through the covid pandemic, which increased the indebtedness of them all. This exposes the bank to excessive default risk if rates rise further.

  • The mortgage loan book has been a profitable business for decades. But the bank is beginning to see a material rise in delinquencies. If loan guarantees are not forthcoming from government agencies, the bank may have to shut this activity down.

  • What impact will higher interest rates have on the bank’s derivative exposure? What are the counterparty risks in derivative chains? Derivatives that involve inadequately capitalised counterparties should perhaps be sold on, or where the bank has the option to do so, closed down.

  The underlying problem is that the conditions that led to the bank becoming increasingly involved in diversified activities, such as investment banking, trading, and investment management have now changed. Since financial deregulation in the 1980s, the bank has expanded into these profitable areas. The whole industry moved from dealing in credit into generating fee income. The growth in fee income can be directly related to the long-term trend of falling interest rates, which apart from interruptions such as the dot-com excesses and the Lehman crisis, stimulated growth in corporate finance, underwriting, investment management, and trading in financial securities. The expansion of these activities in turn led to a massive expansion of derivative markets, with new instruments being devised, such as credit default and interest rate swaps.

  If, and this is really what should worry you, the long-term trend of falling global interest rates has ended and is now set to be reversed, not just temporarily but for the rest of the decade and perhaps beyond, then the reasons justifying the bank’s expansion away from its core lending business have come to an end. As CEO, how do you unwind the deep-rooted departmental interests, and keep the shareholders onside?

  It is time for the whole executive to be urgently involved in a wide-ranging debate about how serious these threats might be and where you should take actions to protect the bank’s shareholders’ interests. Given the high level of balance sheet leverage, the bank’s survival is at stake if you act indecisively or too slowly. You are facing head-on the unpleasant prospect of The Great Unwind.

  Balance sheet ratios

  There are two ratios that concern bankers. The first is the relationship between liquid and illiquid assets with respect to sources of balance sheet funding. These are set by regulators through Basel regulations, now in their third iteration. Banks are required to submit details of their balance sheets periodically to bank regulators in accordance with the net stable funding requirement formula as set out in Basel III.

  The second ratio is of less importance to regulators, which is the relationship between Tier 1 capital and the total balance sheet, which Basel regulations simply states that the maximum leverage ratio is for Tier 1 capital to not be less than 3% of the bank’s balance sheet assets. Put another way, subject to certain conditions, a bank can theoretically leverage its assets to equity as much as thirty-three times. But it should be noted that within that leverage ratio, a bank is permitted to net off certain classifications of credit, reducing its apparent balance sheet size. The following are examples of hidden forms of balance sheet assets and liabilities:

  • Security financing transactions, which include repos and other derivatives, can be netted off where they are between the same counterparty and maturity. For a true accounting picture, a bank balance sheet should reflect credit and debt obligations on both sides of its balance sheet until they are extinguished.

  • Long and short credit derivatives can be netted so long as there is no maturity mismatch. Again, the full obligations should be reflected on both sides of the balance sheet. And valuation methods give banks enormous wriggle room, an issue which regulators are unable to properly address.

  • Off-balance sheet items are only partially recognised through standardised credit conversion factors. Where a bank has off-balance sheet activities, they should be properly reflected in its accounts.

  Therefore, true bank balance sheet leverage can be considerably greater than a bank complying with Basel regulations will declare in its audited accounts. But while conforming with Basel regulations, the board of a bank has a primary duty, often forgotten even by some directors, to their shareholders.

  It is changes in the ratio between a bank’s assets and its shareholders’ equity which drive the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction, which in turn drives the business cycle. 

  While they have a specific expertise in assessing lending risk, bankers are human. When they perceive lending risk to decline, they increase the quantity of credit offered, recorded as assets on their bank balance sheets, without increasing shareholders’ equity. Their confidence is synchronised through individual banks’ market intelligence and commonly available information concerning lending conditions. What few bankers realise is that it is expansion of their cohort lending which creates the very confidence in the lending conditions being observed. 

  The benefit to the bank is enhanced by expanding the ratio of total balance sheet assets to shareholders’ equity. A gross lending margin of two per cent becomes 20% for the shareholders on a balance sheet ten-times leveraged. However, this depends on margins being maintained, which, when banks compete with each other for lending business, is unlikely. Furthermore, the trend for declining rates over the decades due to the policies of the monetary authorities has led to a general increase in shareholder leverage as banking cohorts try to maintain profitability on slimming margins.

  We all know that this recently reached an extreme position, with unnaturally negative interest rates imposed by central banks principally in Japan, the Eurozone, and Switzerland. In response to heavily compressed rate margins, the large commercial banks in the Eurozone were leveraging up through repos to gear up the slimmest of lending margins. The European repo market has been rolling over in excess of €9 trillion in all currencies with euros the largest component by far. 

  For these reasons, the most highly leveraged G-SIBs (global systemically important banks) are in the Eurozone and Japan. Table 1 below shows their balance sheet leverage from highest to lowest (the third column), and the price to book rating upon which the market values this leverage risk. Share prices were as of last weekend.

  

  With the Eurozone’s and Japan’s G-SIBs heading the list of most highly leveraged banks, the question before us is now that interest rates are rising, how will these banks adjust their balance sheet ratios to more normal levels, which are probably in the region of eight to ten times or even less? True balance sheet gearing in all cases is likely to be far, far higher principally because of the accounting treatment of derivative obligations. These are the banks leading involvement in repos, have significant derivative positions, have netted out foreign exchange, commodity, and credit derivatives, and have only partially reflected off-balance sheet obligations through standardised credit conversion factors. 

  In general terms, in the new interest rate environment banks are almost certain to restrict counterparty risk by reducing their exposure to other banks for two reasons. Firstly, contracting balance sheets throughout the banking industry enhance systemic risk significantly, and a significant number of the banks in Table 1 are highly likely to fail. And secondly, as a cohort bankers are motivated to act the same way for the same reasons at the same time, even for banks without derivative exposure. The contraction and consequences of interbank obligations should not be ignored.

  The problems of rising inflation, interest rates, and bond yields

  After decades of minimal price inflation, central banks were caught unawares when consumer prices started to rise and continued to do so. Initially, they said it was transient. When they were laughed at, they then merely pushed back their forecasts of consumer price inflation returning to the 2% target back a year. The chart below, of the current UK’s Office for Budget Responsibility forecast is typical. It is due to be updated on 17 November, but it is a racing certainty that the OBS will still expect it to return to 2%, a little further delayed. To admit otherwise is to acknowledge a complete failure of monetary policy.

  

  The US Congressional Budget Office is similarly unrealistically optimistic about the outlook for consumer price inflation. The illustration below is lifted from the CBO’s website.

  

  But with consumer prices already rising in the US, UK, and Europe at a 10% clip and likely to go higher in the coming months, the interest rate disconnection is substantial and can only be bridged with interest rates doubling or even tripling from current levels. Even if they only double, business plans for all manufacturers and service providers will go out of the window. And with that catastrophe, bad debts for the banks will simply soar.

  The effect on financial securities will be no less devastating. While banks generally limit their bond exposure to shorter maturities — typically bills and bonds maturing in less than a year — it is likely that banks in the Eurozone and Japan will have some exposure to longer maturities. They might have some exposure to corporate bonds and collateralised debt obligations as well, which will be at risk from rising interest rates. This is not to be ignored, and the evidence of a downturn in credit availability for corporates is already evident in loan officer surveys. Our next chart, of US banking sentiment towards corporate borrowers confirms that credit contraction for non-financial borrowers is already underway.

  

  Clearly, bank credit is set to contract mightily, and together with higher interest rates it is likely to lead to escalating non-performing loans, insolvencies, and rising unemployment. These conditions are likely to develop before interest rates can properly reflect the debasement of the major currencies, reflected in the rise in consumer prices.

  Economists commonly assume that the developing recession will restrict consumer demand, leading to an amelioration of the consumer price inflation problem. Furthermore, some supply chains are beginning to flow again, particularly with respect to computer chips. But before we can consider how a fall in demand affects prices, we should remember that the initial market effect of contracting bank credit is always to drive interest rates higher, due to accelerating credit demand arising from lost sales and accumulating inventories while banks are trying to reduce their credit obligations. 

  Since almost all recorded transactions that make up GDP are settled with bank credit, its contraction will reduce GDP as well. The extent to which this is the case cannot be mechanically predicted. However, since bank balance sheets are very highly leveraged and rising interest rates will force a severe credit contraction, the effect will not be trivial. If a banker is to retain control over non-performing write-offs, he must not delay in reducing his exposure.

  It is for this reason that the cycle of bank credit is like a saw-tooth series of gradual increases followed by sharp declines. And the more exaggerated the increase, the more catastrophic the decline.

  Mortgage loan books

  It turns out that the sub-prime mortgage crisis of 2007-2009 was little more than a blip in the growth of bank lending for residential property ownership. But America with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac is different from other jurisdictions, where banks have become highly active originators in the mortgage business.

  With old memories of ruinous interest rates, borrowers have consistently gone for fixed rate mortgages in preference to floating rates. Some 80% of residential mortgages in the UK are fixed rate for between two and five years before they are reset. Until recently, to opt for fixed rates was the wrong decision. Banks have profited mightily, not by simply lending long and borrowing short, but by covering fixed rate offers with interest rate swaps allowing a healthy turn for the bank, with early termination expenses covered by penalties for the borrower.

  For a bank, the beauty of this business lies in the transaction size and minimal administration. And with house prices continually rising, the collateral has been secure. But this has now changed dramatically, with mortgage rates soaring and house prices turning lower. The previous lucky minority who opted for floating rates find they face an enhanced risk of repossession of their homes. And interest rates have probably only started to increase.

  From a banker’s point of view, this is turning into a very bad business. Payment defaults are certain to increase rapidly; not just for those on floating rates, but with the majority of borrowers on two- and three- fixed rate deals which are maturing at a rapid rate. A two-year fixed rate of less than two per cent faces renewal at over three times that. And no banker wants the bad publicity of foreclosing on homeowners and their families in droves, “who through no fault of their own” face eviction.

  In any event, when homeowners in large numbers face eviction, the lenders have the problem more than the homeowners. It is both politically and practicably impossible for lenders to evict families in large numbers and put their homes up for sale. Apart from anything else, residential property values would collapse under the combined weight of higher borrowing costs (if mortgages are still available) and an increasing supply of liquidated housing stocks. Look no further than what happened to property prices in cities like Atlanta in 2007-2010, as the liar-loans were unwound. All that happens from the bank’s point of view is that even solvent borrowers would be pushed deeply into negative equity.

  The difficulties in managing these politically toxic issues will not be the only problem facing bankers. Existing fixed-rate mortgages have been covered through credit default swaps, which are only as good as a bank’s counterparties. If, say, a British bank has a highly leveraged Eurozone bank as its counterparty, it will soon be thinking about counterparty risk in a more focused way. Where it can, it should seek to novate these obligations with more secure counterparties. But that comes with costs.

  In a rising interest rate environment, this easy-come business will not be easy-go.

  Wider derivative considerations

  According to the Bank for International Settlements, OTC derivative market interests in the global banking system amounted to $600 trillion equivalent of notional amounts outstanding last December.[i] Being based on only seventy dealers in twelve countries reporting to their respective central banks, the statistics are not the whole picture, capturing an estimated 94% on average of their wider triannual survey covering an additional thirty nations.

  To this can be added a further $40 trillion in regulated futures and options markets, in which banks play a major counterparty role. To give an idea of the sheer scale of these activities, global GDP is estimated at roughly $100 trillion.

  The credit nature of OTC derivatives is poorly understood, and therefore widely ignored by commentators. Nevertheless, these are credit obligations which are only extinguished after the terms of the individual derivative contracts have been satisfied. But being purely financial, they differ from a contract which has on one side the delivery of goods or a service, and on the other a settlement invariably in bank credit. A financial transaction, be it a forward settlement, a swap, or an option exercise, involves both debt and credit obligations. And since debt is synonymous with credit because one always balances the other in both parties’ books, until a financial obligation is settled there is twice the notional credit involved. 

  The simplest example to take is deferred settlements, such as foreign exchange forwards. In these cases, there are two parts to the contract: there is the initial agreement, under whose terms there may or may not be a partial margin payment due immediately, and the second part is satisfaction of the entire contract by its completion.

  At a notional $104 trillion — the BIS’s figure for mid-2021— foreign exchange contracts are the second largest segment of the $600 trillion OTC total. Ten per cent of that $104 trillion are options. According to the BIS’s triannual survey, only 84% of foreign exchange contracts are captured in the semi-annual statistics, so a truer figure is $124 trillion.

  By maturity, they split 80% up to a year, 15% one to five years, and the rest over five years. Therefore, these are not a simple case of next day settlement, but credit obligations of material duration.

  The status of options is different from forward settlements, being initial settlements for a transaction that might not eventually take place. The buyer of the option has no further credit obligation other than the initial payment of a premium to the seller of the option. But the latter party does have a continuing credit obligation which is not in his power to extinguish before it finally matures. Because all foreign exchange contracts on the BIS’s statistics represent only one side of foreign exchange contracts, the whole amount of $124 trillion are definitely credit, the majority of which, only excluding options, is duplicated by matching credit obligations for the other counterparties. Therefore, total foreign exchange derivative credit in trillions is double notional amounts outstanding less one side of notional options. This amounts to $236 trillion.

  According to the BIS, the gross market value of this credit is $2.548 trillion. The BIS defines gross market value as “the sum of the absolute values of all outstanding derivatives contracts with either positive or negative replacement values evaluated at market prices prevailing on the settlement date”. In other words, to the extent to which the banking system is counterparty to these OTC derivatives, in total their balance sheets will reflect this figure, and not actual credit obligations, which are almost a hundred times greater.

  It is in this context that counterparty risk must be considered. Counterparty risk is a wager that delivery of a credit obligation might not occur, and the relevant figure with respect to foreign exchange commitments alone for assessing it is $236 trillion. As an indication of the scale of these credit obligations, the BIS reports that the total of global bank credit to the non-financial sector amounted to $226.3 trillion at the date of its latest derivative statistics, similar to the scale of foreign exchange derivative credit on its own.[ii]

  In round figure terms, all other OTC derivatives in the BIS statistics total about five times the recorded foreign exchange total. They include in the BIS’s notional amounts:

  • Interest rate contracts — $475.2 trillion

  • Equity-linked contracts —$7.28 trillion

  • Commodity contract — $2.22 trillion

  • Credit derivatives — $9.06 trillion

  • Credit default swaps — $8.80 trillion

  • Not otherwise classified — $337 billion.

  Interest rate derivatives in rising rates

  Interest rate derivatives make up the vast bulk of all OTC derivatives, with the notional contract amount of interest rate swaps totalling $397.11 trillion, and forward rate agreements adding a further $39.44 trillion. A swap is a financial derivative in which two parties agree to exchange payment streams based on a specified notional amount for a specified period. And a forward rate agreement is a contract in which the rate to be paid or received on a specific obligation is for a set period of time, beginning at some time in the future.

  What concerns us here are the consequences of a rising trend of interest rates for the values of these contracts. FRAs might continue thrive if interest rate relationships along yield curves permit. But an environment of rising counterparty risk might be a hurdle too high for participating banks to overcome. A far more important consideration is the future for interest rate swaps.

  Unlike the foreign exchange contracts described above, interest rate swap notional amounts are not bank credit obligations. The credit commitments of both parties are only for the income streams on a notional amount. An originator, usually a bank, funds a fixed interest stream from a floating rate, rather than the other way round.

  A clue to the relationship between the gross market value of these contracts and interest rates is illustrated below, which is of interest rate swaps only originated in US dollars.

  

  The chart confirms what we would expect: that major falls in the Fed funds rate stimulate the gross market value of interest rate swaps; and increases in the funds rate correspondingly leads to falls in their gross value. From this, we confirm that declining interest rates lead to profits for banks taking floating rates and offering fixed rates. This is the protection that customers from the gamut of pension funds to homeowners seek from higher rates. While over the long-term interest rates were declining, interest rate swaps were a profitable form of insurance product for the banks to offer. And we can now see that with sharply rising interest rates, not only will these profits vanish, but the banks are bound to exit this market entirely.

  This is the heart of The Great Unwind. It will be a surprise to observers to see the BIS’s OTC derivative statistics collapse as interest rates rise further. Existing contracts with time to run can be closed down by buying out counterparties, entering offsetting swaps, selling the swap to another party, or entering an option on offsetting swaps. But these solutions to a bank withdrawing from interest rate swap obligations will be very costly, if available at all, as the entire banking cohort attempts to depart from this market. 

  Undoubtedly, large losses will result, threatening the entire global banking network through enhanced systemic risk.

  Derivatives and the Bretton Woods III meme

  That we are entering an entirely new banking and financial environment was originally put forward by a Credit Suisse analyst, Zoltan Pozsar, earlier this year. Pozsar argued that since the ending of Bretton Woods, a new financial era had dominated financial markets, which he described as Bretton Woods II. He contended that the trend for lower interest rates has now ended, that global supply chains will be repatriated, and that the era of the petrodollar is over. Instead, Bretton Woods III will be the era of commodity-based currencies.

  Driving his argument was the imposition of currency sanctions against Russia. In his 3 March article, he posed the question: is the OTC commodity derivatives market the gorilla in the room?[iii] His concern was over margin calls faced by producers and others in the physical commodity business hedging physical product by carrying short positions in the futures markets. As if on cue, Trafigura, the big commodities trader, had to be refinanced within weeks of Pozsar’s note having received massive margin calls on its OTC positions.[iv]

  Since Pozsar’s note, Saudi Arabia has signalled the death of the petrodollar by aligning itself with the Russia-China axis, and is scheduled to join the BRICS organisation next year. Members of the Eurasian Economic Union are planning a new trade settlement currency, said to be linked at least partly to commodities. And Moscow is setting up a new gold exchange to handle Russian and other nations’ refined gold, which will almost certainly adopt China’s 99.99% gold kilo standard.

  Undoubtedly, the movement towards commodity-linked currencies, the decline of the dollar’s hegemony, and of western financial markets will have a major impact on commercial banking. One wonders how many of the banks weaned on financial activities can make the transition back to traditional lending. And if global supply chains are a thing of the past, will they be prepared to provide the credit for investment in replacement component production in the advanced economies?

  As a subset of commodity derivatives, the London Bullion Markets’ forward contracts were estimated to be $781bn on 31 December 2021, of which gold forwards and swaps represented $528bn. At that date, this was the equivalent of 8,975 tonnes compared with 1,595 tonnes in the main gold contract on Comex — a ratio of 5.6 to one

  

  The other side of the LBMA banks’ derivative positions is unallocated customer accounts, originally devised and expanded as a means of diverting demand for gold that would have otherwise driven up the price of bullion. The trend towards increasing quantities of paper bullion relative to the physical is likely to be reversed, because suppression of the gold price is now leading to accelerating demand for physical bullion. 

  While Keynesian hedge fund managers claim that higher interest rates are bad for the gold price, rising interest rates are bound to render derivative trading unprofitable for banks which find themselves both short of derivatives, and technically short to their unallocated bullion account holders. As quickly as the London bullion market developed in the 1980s, it is likely to diminish as interest rates increase.

  Economic consequences of contracting bank credit

  Today, the priority for commercial banks is to reduce their balance sheets to more normal conservative levels in their shareholders’ interests. Without considering secondary factors, the likely consequences of a severe credit contraction for the nominal GDP statistic could be to reduce it by a third or more in major jurisdictions. Realistically, central banks will have no option but to finance the losses of tax revenue and the increased welfare burdens falling on their government’s shoulders. The expansion of central bank currency and credit will replace the contraction of commercial bank credit.

  Empirical evidence suggests that a population is more alert to the inflationary implications of central bank credit expanding than that of commercial bank credit. Essentially, if the public deems the currency to be stable, it will respond to higher prices when it is the result of bank credit expansion by moderating their spending. But if the public sees the currency as being unstable, they will vary their spending, and therefore their liquidity reserves accordingly.

  Clearly, the political imperative will be to replace lost commercial bank credit with central bank credit. Nor can we rule out “helicopter drops” in an attempt to stimulate recovery. But having tried these measures during the covid pandemic, the public reaction to central bank debasement in a deep recession is almost certain to be less tolerant. 

  Central banks, which are already ceding control of interest rates to market forces will find they continue to rise as currencies’ purchasing powers continue to quicken their collapse.

  Conclusion

  

  As dealers in credit, banks face the most difficult times in living memory. Austrian economists have long understood that the business cycle is driven by a cycle of bank credit. The root of the credit cycle has been ignored by statist economists and policymakers who respond by suppressing the evidence. This has been going on with increasing intensity since the 1980s, when the Fed under Paul Volcker broke with interest rate suppression to slay the 1970s inflation dragon.

  Since then, the era of pre-Bretton Woods price stability has been replaced by the fiat dollar as the reserve currency, with demand for it engineered by Triffin’s dilemma: balancing the export of dollars through budget and trade deficits with global demand for it. The expansion of derivative markets served to conceal the inflationary effects by shifting the supply of dollar credit into financial markets, away from non-financial activities. This lessened the consequences of currency expansion on the prices of goods and services, allowing the monetary authorities to suppress interest rates without apparent ill effects.

  That period has now ended, and The Great Unwind of all the distortions accumulated over the last four decades has begun. No one in government and central banking circles saw it coming, and they are still in denial.

  Commercial bankers are becoming acutely aware of the dangers to their business models. At the moment, they have only a growing fear of the consequences of interest rates seemingly out of control. Having been protected from free markets by central banks and their regulators, this loss of statist control is immensely worrying for them.

  It is now dawning on commercial bankers that they have been left high and dry, with over-leveraged balance sheets, loan business rapidly souring, loan collateral falling in value, and a derivative merry-go-round about to implode. They must stop pandering to regulators and public opinion, and now protect their shareholders from The Great Unwind by dumping credit obligations as rapidly as possible ahead of the wider banking crowd.

  From banking deregulation in the mid-eighties, it took nearly four decades to get to this point. The Great Unwind might take only as many months. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 22:20

• Dear Liberals, How Many Of These MSM Hoaxes Did You Fall For?
  Dear Liberals, How Many Of These MSM Hoaxes Did You Fall For?

  How many recent mainstream media hoaxes did you fall for? … and/or still believe?

  • Russian collusion

  • Trump called neo-nazis “fine people”

  • Jussie Smollett

  • Bubba Wallace garage pull

  • Covington kids

  • Governor Whitmer kidnapping plot

  • Kavanaugh rape

  • Trump pee tape

  • COVID lab leak was a conspiracy theory

  • Border agents whipped migrants

  • Trump saved nuclear secrets at Mar-a-Lago

  • Steele Dossier

  • Russian bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan

  • Trump said drinking bleach would fight COVID

  • Muslim travel ban

  • Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation

  • Andrew Cuomo best COVID leadership

  • Trump built cages for migrant kids

  • “Austere religious scholar”

  • Trump overfed Koi fish in Japan

  • Build Back Better will pay for itself

  • Trump tax cuts benefited only the rich

  • Cloth masks prevent COVID

  • If you get vaccinated you won’t catch COVID

  • SUV killed parade marchers

  • Trump used teargas to clear a crowd for a bible photo

  • “Don’t Say Gay” was in a bill

  • Putin price hike

  • Ivermectin is a horse dewormer and not for humans

  • “Mostly peaceful” protests

  • Trump overpowered secret service for wheel of “The Beast”

  • Officer Sicknick was murdered by protesters

  • January 6th was an insurrection

  • BYU students hurled racist insults at Duke volleyball player

  • And don’t forget “democracy is under threat…”

  

  h/t The Automatic Earth

  h/t Mitch P.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 22:00

• School Choice Is About To Revolutionize K-12 Education
  School Choice Is About To Revolutionize K-12 Education

  Authored by Brian McGlinchey via starkrealities.substack.com 

  Since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, America’s parents have shifted nearly 2 million students from public schools to alternatives that include private schools and home schooling. For public schools, that represents a loss of about 4% of their enrollment.

  Expect the exodus to grow larger, as the United States is undergoing a major change in philosophy regarding publicly-funded K-12 education, away from funding government-run school systems and toward funding individual students—with parents getting to choose where their children learn.

  In June, Arizona put itself at the leading edge of that shift: Every Arizona family can now direct about $7,000 a year per student toward the education solution of their choice. Funds can be used for private schools, home schooling, tutoring and online learning.

  

  Arizona also provides free choice among public schools — rather than being forced into a particular school by neighborhood, parents who prefer public schools can pick whichever one they want, first-come first-served.

  Defenders of the status quo typically characterize school-choice laws as “taking money away” from public schools, recoiling at the very idea that government money would be spent anywhere other than a government institution.

  However, that’s already how the great majority of publicly-funded education and other entitlements work, without uproar.

  “We have Pell Grants for low-income students for higher eduction, we have the Head Start program for pre-K where you can pick public, private, religious or non-religious,” said Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, on Michael Malice’s “Your Welcome” podcast.

  “We have food stamps where the money goes to the person and you can pick Walmart or Trader Joe’s…it doesn’t go to a residentially-assigned, government-run grocery store. That would be absolutely ridiculous.”

  Meanwhile, those who say school choice programs will drain public schools of huge sums of money are implicitly asserting that, were it not for a system that protects public schools from competition — by granting them a monopoly on the use of public K-12 funds — a great many more parents would send their children elsewhere.

  For decades, public school monopolies have been protected by a particular, self-reinforcing power dynamic:

  • Powerful teacher unions overwhelmingly favor Democratic politicians. Exhibit A: Democrats have received 99.94% of congressional contributions from the American Federation of Teachers in 2022.

  • Democratic politicians protect public school monopolies by opposing voucher and other school choice programs, while relentlessly pushing for increased public school funding

  • Increased funding enables the hiring of more public school staff

  • Larger staffs mean more union dues, enriching teacher unions and increasing their political power…and the cycle repeats

  Today, however, there are large cracks in the foundation of this monopoly-protecting fortress, and the government response to the Covid-19 pandemic has been a big factor.

  With public schools closed to in-person instruction, parents were suddenly much more engaged in their children’s education, and many didn’t like what they were seeing as they observed remote teaching.

  As the pandemic ground on, relentless union opposition to school re-openings, and the insistence on masking children despite the many collateral harms of doing so, made it all too clear to enlightened parents that public teacher unions — and public school boards — can’t be trusted to always put children’s interests first.

  

  Though the government’s destructive responses to the pandemic are now largely behind us, the impact on parent attitudes about public schools is still growing, as a steady stream of reports illuminates the massive learning setbacks experienced by K-12 victims of school shutdowns.

  At the same time, new data shows that students in private schools — which were much more eager to provide in-person instruction — fared significantly better.

  The ongoing culture wars are another reason more people are embracing the idea of funding students rather than systems.

  Parents understandably have strongly differing ideas about what’s appropriate for the classroom. Rather than forcing opposing parents into the same school and having them fight at board meetings about which curriculum will be forced onto everyone, each family should be free to seek out a school arrangement that best matches their own philosophy — and use public money to do so.

  

  Many politicians who oppose school choice are themselves private school products or send their own children to private schools. One of the most notorious such hypocrites is Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren.

  Pandering to teacher unions as a presidential candidate, Warren said she not only wanted to stop school choice programs, but also end federal funding for charter schools and make it harder to open new ones.

  Yet Warren sent her son to private schools — including one on Philadelphia’s wealthy Main Line where total fees today are $42,600. Worse, she actually denied it when confronted about her hypocrisy by a group of black Atlanta activists, who know the worst-performing public schools tend to be in poor, minority communities — and that wealthier people like Warren have the disposable income to afford private schools without using government money.

  Nebraska state senator Justin Wayne, a black Democrat who supports school choice, knows all that too. Wayne told his colleagues he’d vote against school choice if they moved their children to a school in his neighborhood “so we can go through the transformation — that you keep telling my community to wait for — together.”

  BREAKING: Nebraska Senator Justin Wayne (D) again calls out his colleagues for sending their kids to private school while opposing school choice for others. pic.twitter.com/WiXAmcBRN8

  — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) January 11, 2022

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

  Arizona’s 2022 expansion is distinguished from other school-choice experiments by its universality — all children are eligible to use a stipulated amount of state school dollars for education at a public school, private school or home school, regardless of where they live or the incomes of their parents.

  Having witnessed what Arizona has done, activist parents in other states are now pressuring their own legislatures. As they do, they’re backed by polls showing 72% of Americans now support school choice programs, including 82% of Republicans and 68% of Democrats.

  Look for the school choice movement to take a major step forward in 2023 — most impactfully in Texas. The Lone Star State’s public school population is a close second in size to California’s, and nearly double the third largest, which is Florida’s.

  In the wake of Arizona’s school choice expansion, Governor Greg Abbott said he too wants to let parents “send their children to any public school, charter school or private school with state funding following the student,” and the next biennial legislature section starts on Jan. 10.

  While private school enrollments will surge, the rise of school choice will also stimulate a novel education approach that existed before the pandemic but was greatly popularized by it — learning pods.

  When parents were let down by public school closures — with working parents suddenly scrambling to manage day-long supervision of their children — many of them formed collaborative learning pods, where small groups of children would gather at a single home to do schoolwork together and have social interaction.

  Before the pandemic, other parents had already used a pod approach to home-schooling. As school choice programs allow the use of state money to cover the cost of home schooling, look for pods to proliferate.

  Those pods won’t all be led by parents. The concept could turn into an ideal career alternative for public school teachers yearning to break free from public school system bureaucracy.

  Consider the math in Arizona for a former public school teacher who sets out on her own and assembles a pod of 15 children to teach. With parents able to tap up to about $7,000 per student per year for education, that teacher could charge $105,000 for her services with no out-of-pocket expense for the parents. In 2021, public school teacher salaries in Arizona ranged between $40,554 and $68,910.

  Particularly for middle and high schools, where deeper subject-matter knowledge is required, groups of specialist teachers could collaborate to form their own “micro-schools.”

  Of course, when comparing income, teachers will have to factor in expenses and the loss of public school system employee benefits — as well as intangible changes in quality-of-life they realize by leaving a public school system behind.

  Parents will have their own pros and cons to consider, which is one reason why school choice shouldn’t be equated with the wholesale destruction of public schools. Indeed, it’s likely to bring about long-needed improvements — especially when programs like Arizona’s let parents who stay in the public system choose which public school their child attends.

  “Twenty-five of 27 studies suggest that…school-choice competition leads to better outcomes in the public schools,” said DeAngelis. “Why? Because school choice is a rising tide that lifts all boats. Competition works.”

  * * *

  Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com

  Stark Realities: Invigoratingly unorthodox perspectives for intellectually honest readers 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 21:40

• Take A Rare Glimpse Inside China's Zero-Covid Madhouse
  Take A Rare Glimpse Inside China’s Zero-Covid Madhouse

  The western world has been given a rare, intimate look inside the confines of a Chinese Covid-19 concentration camp, after Financial Times Shanghai correspondent Thomas Hale was ensnared by the President Xi Jinping’s zero-Covid regime.  

  It’s not that Hale had tested positive. Merely being designated as a “close contact” was enough to sentence him to 10 days of confinement on a secret island camp identified only as “P7.”

  Hale provides a primer on framework of China’s system works: 

  “PCR testing in China is an almost daily ritual and testing booths are common on many street corners. They look vaguely like food stalls, except they’re larger and cube-shaped and a worker inside sits behind Plexiglas cut with two arm holes.

  They are merely the surface machinery of a vast monitoring system. China’s digital Covid pass resembles track-and-trace programmes elsewhere, except it’s mandatory and it works. Using Alipay or WeChat, the country’s two major apps, a QR code is linked to each person’s most recent test results. The code must be scanned to get in anywhere, thereby tracking your location. Green means you can enter; red means you have a problem.”

  Hale’s journey into Covid madness started with an innocent outing at a Shanghai bar. Apparently, someone who’d also been at the bar tested positive. Via the tracking system, the authorities knew Hale had been there too.

  Hale had “won” some kind of terrible lottery: On the day he was in the bar, there were only 18 cases in all of Shanghai that day — a city of 26 million people.

  A few days after his bar outing, authorities called to confirm he’d been at the bar. The next day, a caller from the Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention alerted him that authorities were on their way. Hale was about to be “taken away” — an expression Chinese use when describing the phenomenon.

  Next, a hotel staffer called to say he couldn’t leave, and that the hotel was in lockdown due to his mere presence in it. Then came the men in hazmat suits, who escorted him down a deserted hallway to a staff elevator and out through the cordoned-off hotel entrance. He was directed to board a small bus driven by another man in a hazmat suit. 

  Hale joined the other condemned passengers — none of whom had actually tested positive. His hopes that he’d be taken to a quarantine hotel were dashed. A drive of more than an hour ended on a small road in the middle of a field, with several large buses queued up ahead of his.

  The driver got out, locked the bus behind him and wandered off. A fellow passenger was surprised to hear that Hale was from the UK: “They brought you here? With a foreign passport?” Hours of waiting on the increasingly chilly bus went by, until it finally moved again at 2 am. 

  As he was trudging along to his assigned quarters, a fellow detainee pointed to three rows of wire above the perimeter fences, beyond which were only tall trees. 

  

  Hale’s new home was a box similar to a shipping container, elevated by short stilts. His and every door was monitored by a camera. There was no hot water. 

  “Inside my 196-sq-ft cabin there were two single beds, a kettle, an air-conditioning unit, a desk, a chair, a bowl, two small cloths, one bar of soap, an unopened duvet, a small pillow, a toothbrush, one tube of toothpaste and a roll-up mattress roughly the thickness of an oven glove

  The floor was covered in dust and grime. The whole place shook when you walked around, which I soon stopped noticing. The window was barred, though you could still lean out. There was no shower.

  …The bed was made of an iron frame and six planks of wood, and the mattress was so thin you had to lie completely flat. The bed frame, meanwhile, was impossible to lean against.” 

  

  He was pleasantly surprised, however, to find the internet connection was 24 times speedier than what he had at his hotel. Like Hale, the camp staff were prohibited from leaving or receiving deliveries there. A worker said he earned the equivalent of about $32 a day. 

  

  Hale tried to see if his status as a foreign journalist might spring him from detention. The worker he approached with that question was baffled by the mere premise…but we can’t blame Hale for trying. 

  Hale describes key aspects of daily life in Covid detention: 

  • Every morning, he was awakened by a “lawnmower-like noise,” as an industrial-grade machine sprayed the cabin windows and front steps with disinfectant
  • Around 9 am, two workers came to administer PCR tests. A positive result would have meant being taken to a different type of detention  
  • Meals were delivered at 8 am, noon and 5 pm
  • Hale pursued a strict routine of language study, writing, exercise, music, online chess, and then reading or watching Amazon Prime entertainment

  The routine served him well. Over time, he noticed his neighbors stopped eating breakfast, while some could be heard pacing their shaky boxes at night. 

  He did endure some psychological discomfort, in the form of not knowing when he’d get out. He was originally told seven days but it ended up being 10. 

  Upon his release and return to civilization, Hale savored the hot water of the hotel’s shower and the softness of its bed. When he went out for a celebratory meal, however, he faltered — pacing the street as he contemplated the fact that entering China’s contact-tracing matrix brought the peril of a return to confinement. 

  He settled on takeout from a steak restaurant, where an employee said there’d be no need for his code to be swiped — if he ordered takeout. 

  * * *

  Check out Hale’s full tale at the Financial Times (subscription required) 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 21:20

• Opponents Setting Out Unintended Consequences Of Oregon’s Gun Control Measure
  Opponents Setting Out Unintended Consequences Of Oregon’s Gun Control Measure

  Authored by Scottie Barnes via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  If voters approve a pending ballot measure, Oregon would have the strictest gun laws in the nation—which opponents claim would virtually end the legal sale of firearms in the state.

  

  The “Reduction of Gun Violence Act” (Measure 114) would require a permit to obtain any type of firearm.

  Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds would be outlawed. Commonly used pump shotguns would be banned. And state police would be required to maintain an electronically searchable, publicly available database of all permit applications.

  Backers of the measure, including a coalition of faith-based leaders and Ceasefire Oregon, say the new restrictions would help prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands, as well as reduce gun homicides, suicides, and trafficking.

  The ballot measure is currently polling at 51 percent.

  But opponents say the measure was poorly written and the explanatory language in the voters’ pamphlet was misleading.

  They argue that the measure would create a bureaucratic nightmare that would only impact law-abiding gun owners, be impossible to comply with, violate the Second Amendment, and put an onerous burden on law enforcement.

  And, though the pamphlet says the “financial impact is ‘indeterminate,” opponents claim it would cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

  “The main problem with the ‘Reduction of Gun Violence Act’ is it doesn’t address violent crime,” Aiobheann Cline, National Rifle Association of Oregon state director wrote. “That’s because it ignores criminals who break the law and instead penalizes law-abiding citizens.”

  “The law fails to mandate sentences for gun-related criminals or put an end to the soft-on-crime policies that have made many Oregon cities into nightmares,” she added.

  The Oregon State Sheriff’s Association (OSSA) cites the burden it would place on financially-strapped law enforcement agencies.

  The measure would enact a law that requires a permit issued by a local law enforcement agency in order to purchase any type of firearm. Applicants would have to pay a fee, be fingerprinted, complete safety training, and pass a criminal background check.

  “This measure will require law enforcement agencies to create and operate a massive permit-to-purchase and training program out of local budgets,” explained OSSA president and Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson in a video message shared on social media.

  “It will move very scarce resources away from protecting our communities to doing background checks and issuing permits at a time when crime is skyrocketing and law enforcement numbers are at their lowest in decades.”

  Leonard Williamson, an Oregon trial attorney who specializes in firearms law and who served on the explanatory statement committee shares OSSA’s concerns.

  “In order to obtain the permit, an applicant would have to show up with a firearm to demonstrate the ability to load, fire, unload, and store the firearm,” he told The Epoch Times.

  “But you can’t get a firearm without the permit. And under Oregon’s highly restrictive gun storage laws, no one can legally loan a firearm to another. That creates an impassable barrier.”

  The permit and training programs also create an unfunded mandate with no enforcement measures, opponents claim.

  “The measure calls upon the Oregon State Police to come up with these [permitting and training] programs, but there’s no consequence if they don’t and there’s no timeframe for coming up with them,” explained H.K. Kahng, an engineer and NRA firearms instructor.

  Nelson said that implementing the measure would cost local law enforcement agencies just over $49 million annually, with expected permit fees covering only $19.5 million. That means local law enforcement would need to shift about $30 million of their budgets to fund the programs.

  Amy Patrick, the policy director for the Oregon Hunters Association, told The Epoch Times that it will take at least two years to set up the permitting system.

  “In the meantime, federal, firearm license, gun sales would cease until purchase permits could be issued, potentially putting gun shops out of business,” she claims.

  In Oregon, the sporting arms and ammunition industry is responsible for 3,668 jobs with an average wage of $59,541 and total economic contribution to the state of $1.78 billion annually, Michael Findlay, the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s director of government affairs told The Epoch Times.

  Loss of that revenue could have a devastating impact on fish and wildlife conservation funding through the Pittman-Robertson Act.

  Enacted in 1937, that act collects an 11 percent federal excise tax on all firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment. Those funds are then remitted to states.

  Oregon is among the top 10 recipients of those funds.

  “Pittman-Robertson funding brought $44 million to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in the last biennium,” Patrick explained. “Those funds are specifically used for fish and wildlife conservation.”

  A record setting high of more than $1 billion was collected in the past year and has yet to be distributed to the states, Findlay added.

  Those economic contributions to the state budget would cease unless a court grants a legal injunction.

  “I don’t think you’ll find any precedent in U.S. history in which a citizen has to go through so many hoops to exercise Constitutional rights,” Williamson said. “This is the first of its kind and, if it passes, it will wind up in court.”

  Taxpayers will pay for the litigation.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 21:00

• Scholz's China-Appeasing Visit With Xi Triggers Backlash In Europe
  Scholz’s China-Appeasing Visit With Xi Triggers Backlash In Europe

  German Chancellor Olaf Scholz met with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday in Beijing, where the German leader was on the ground for just 11 hours, and he focused his talking points on the war in Ukraine and containing Russian aggression. But looming large was the symbolism and controversial messaging back home of such a high-level visit, Scholz’s first as German chancellor. After all, he arrived with a team of top CEOs by his side. As CNN put it, the message is clear: “business with the world’s second-largest economy must continue”…

  Accompanying Scholz on the whirlwind visit was a “delegation of 12 German industry titans, including the CEOs of Volkswagen (VLKAF), Deutsche Bank (DB), Siemens (SIEGY) and chemicals giant BASF (BASFY), according to a person familiar with the matter. They were expected to meet with Chinese companies behind closed doors,” CNN continued in describing the optics. They also were given a rare exemption to China’s typically strict quarantine and Covid measures for anyone entering the country.

  Scholz’s trip, despite being only a day-long, marked the first time a European head of state has visited China since Russia launched its invasion. It was further Scholz’s first major foreign trip as Germany’s chancellor, and comes just after Xi secured a third term as Communist party secretary and president of China. 

  

  “We are seeing discussions in China tending more towards autonomy and less economic ties. And these views are ones that need discussing,” Scholz told a press briefing in Beijing. The trip was seen as an attempt to maintain cozy relations with China after key pillars of a successful German economic machine evaporated this year – namely cheap energy from Russia and a prior relaxed approach to security spending.

  But as Politico points out, “To his critics, he’s making exactly the same mistakes of overreliance on China as Berlin previously made with Russia.”

  Foremost among them is German Foreign Minister and Greens party member Annalena Baerbock, who didn’t hide her disapproval and discomfort with Scholz’s meeting in stating just ahead of the trip, “The federal chancellor has decided the time of his trip. Now it is crucial to make clear in China the messages that we laid down together in the coalition agreement,” as cited in Der Spiegel newspaper. She and others are piling on pressure for a new, more assertive stance toward China.

  “As is well known, we clearly stated in the coalition agreement that China is our partner on global issues, that we cannot decouple in a globalized world, but that China is also a competitor and increasingly a systemic rival,” said Baerbock. She added: “And that we will base our China policy on this strategic understanding and also align our cooperation with other regions in the world.”

  Seeking to defend himself against such growing criticisms, also as the EU is seeking to put pressure on Beijing to turn more definitively against Russia’s war aims in Ukraine, Scholz wrote in an op-ed this week, “When I travel to Beijing as German chancellor, then I do so also as a European” – suggesting the trip in no way compromised the EU’s united front. 

  However, he acknowledged, “It is here that new centers of power are emerging in a multipolar world, and we aim to establish and expand partnerships with all of them.” And he noted, “Thus, in recent months, we have carried out in-depth coordination at the international level — with close partners such as Japan and Korea, India and Indonesia, and countries in Africa and Latin America too. At the end of next week, I will travel to Southeast Asia and the G20 summit, and while I’m visiting China, Germany’s federal president will be in Japan and Korea.”

  The op-ed just written by Olaf Scholz 🔽 is worth a read.

  Biggest bombshell: “New centers of power are emerging in a multipolar world, and we aim to establish and expand partnerships with all of them”

  👉 New – multipolar – world order is now reality.https://t.co/jSqpagD6MC

  — Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) November 4, 2022

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

  Following the Friday meeting with President Xi, Scholz said he urged the Chinese side to remove barriers for closer economic ties: 

  Scholz said he had told Xi that China was becoming “more difficult” for German companies, in terms of market access, the protection of intellectual property and the “interruption of economic relationships” as the country moved towards “autarky”. He said he had told his hosts “how important it is in our view to rectify these imbalances”.

  Scholz later told reporters that he and Xi had discussed what could be done to ensure a “level playing field” for German investors in China. In his press statement, premier Li Keqiang acknowledged Germany and China had “differences” and said these had been discussed. “But we still respect each other,” he said.

  And on the foreign policy front, Scholz urged President Xi Jinping the Beijing must use its “influence” on Moscow to halt the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. “I told President (Xi) that it is important for China to use its influence on Russia,” Scholz said in a statement after the meeting. “Russia must immediately stop the attacks under which the civilian population is suffering daily and withdraw from Ukraine.”

  Scholz reminded the Chinese leader that all major global powers, including the West, had vowed to respect the UN charter and “principles such as sovereignty and territorial integrity,” which is being violated by Russia in Ukraine, according to the statement. 

  The two leaders also talked about the deeply alarming possibility of nuclear escalation, as well as the newly restored but tenuous Ukraine grain export deal. Sholz at a news conference lashed out at the Kremlin, saying “Hunger must not be used as a weapon.” 

  when Xi meets Scholz
  he does not even address him as name or title for the ’greeting‘
  he just said “哎你好 Ah hello”

  pic.twitter.com/QEUT0REVhO

  — 巴丢草 Bad ї ucao (@badiucao) November 4, 2022

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

  Chinese state media affirmed that Xi Jinping called on all world powers to “reject the threat of nuclear weapons and advocate against a nuclear war to prevent a crisis on the Eurasian continent” – while leaving his words somewhat vague regarding Russia or Putin and the West’s accusations of nuclear saber-rattling. Both agreed that nuclear threats and potential use related to the Ukraine crisis must be out of the question:

  …Scholz told reporters he was “glad” that he and Xi had “reached an understanding . . . that there can be no escalation through the use of tactical nuclear weapons”.

  “Everyone here in China knows that an escalation of the war would have consequences for us all,” he added. In an earlier statement to the press after the talks, Scholz said he and Xi agreed that “nuclear-threatening gestures are irresponsible and extremely dangerous”.

  Just days prior to Russia’s late February invasion of Ukraine, Beijing and Moscow signed a “no-limits partnership” intended to deep political and economic ties.

  ‼️🇨🇳 Compare how Xi Jinping communicates with a leader he respects and how he communicates with Scholz. #Germany #ChinaScholz pic.twitter.com/YT8UQmJqLT

  — Maimunka News (@MaimunkaNews) November 4, 2022

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

  Interestingly, even as Scholz told Xi that Germany supports ‘one China’ rule, he took the opportunity to issue warnings “I have … made it clear that any change in Taiwan’s status quo must be peaceful or by mutual agreement,” Scholz said alongside China’s outgoing premier Li Keqiang at a press event. 

  But then, “Scholz warned China against military intervention in Taiwan and called for the protection of human rights in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, stressing that all United Nations members have agreed to protect the rights of ethnic minorities and so calling for those protections now is not an interference in China’s internal affairs,” according to a US media report on the visit.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 20:40

• Twitter Employees File Lawsuit Over Mass Layoffs
  Twitter Employees File Lawsuit Over Mass Layoffs

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Twitter has been sued by multiple staff members over an alleged violation of federal law, with workers claiming they were not given enough notice regarding planned layoffs.

  

  Employees who had worked at Twitter’s offices in San Francisco, California, and Cambridge, Massachusetts filed a class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco) on Thursday.

  The lawsuit comes amid reports that Twitter will start laying off staff members from its global workforce of 7,500 employees on Friday morning, following Elon Musk’s takeover of the social media platform. It is unclear how much of Twitter’s workforce Musk plans to lay off.

  In their lawsuit, plaintiffs, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others “similarly situated,” allege that the move amounts to a violation and “anticipated further violation” of the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, as well as the California WARN Act.

  The federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act is a U.S. labor law requiring that employers with 100 or more employees provide 60 calendar-day advance notice to employees regarding mass layoffs.

  The California WARN act, short for Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, is slightly more strict. It requires employers to provide workers with at least sixty days’ notice before mass layoffs, although under that law, a mass layoff is defined as “the layoff of 50 or more employees in a 30-day period.”

  Employers who fail to do so may be sued for damages and could be liable for employee back pay and benefits.

  

  No ‘Advanced Written Warning’

  “It has been widely reported that Twitter plans to lay off about 3,700 employees, approximately 50 percent of its total workforce,” plaintiffs wrote in Thursday’s lawsuit, referencing multiple reports regarding the planned layoffs.

  “Twitter began the layoffs with a few employees,” the lawsuit states, alleging that one of the plaintiffs was terminated on Nov. 1 without being provided with “advanced written warning, as required by the federal WARN Act and California WARN Act.”

  The lawsuit also states that three other plaintiffs in the lawsuit were allegedly locked out of their Twitter accounts on Nov. 3, which they “understood to signal that they were being laid off.”

  “Plaintiffs are very concerned that Twitter will continue these layoffs without providing the requisite notice,” the lawsuit noted while stating that Musk’s eclectic vehicle company Tesla also “recently engaged in mass layoffs without notice.”

  That company (Tesla) “attempted to obtain releases from laid-off employees without informing them of their rights under the federal or California WARN Acts. A federal court subsequently ordered the company to provide employees notice of the claims that had been filed on their behalf,” the lawsuit states.

  “Plaintiffs file this action seeking to ensure that Twitter complies with the law and provides the requisite notice or severance payment in connection with the anticipated layoffs and that it not solicit releases of claims of any employees without informing them of the pendency of this action and their right to pursue their claims under the federal or California WARN Act,” plaintiffs wrote.

  Plaintiffs are also seeking immediate injunctive relief, and ask that the court issue a declaratory judgment to prevent Twitter from avoiding the requirements of the WARN Act and the California WARN Act.

  

  Layoffs Will ‘Place Twitter on a Healthy Path’

  “We filed this lawsuit tonight in an attempt the make sure that employees are aware that they should not sign away their rights and that they have an avenue for pursuing their rights,” Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney who filed Thursday’s complaint, told Bloomberg in an interview.

  “We will now see if he is going to continue to thumb his nose at the laws of this country that protect employees,” Liss-Riordan added, referencing Musk. “It appears that he’s repeating the same playbook of what he did at Tesla.”

  An internal company message shared among Twitter employees this week, which was published in full by Business Insider, informed workers that layoffs will be announced on Friday morning.

  “Team, In an effort to place Twitter on a healthy path, we will go through the difficult process of reducing our global workforce on Friday,” the message reportedly states.

  “We recognize that this will impact a number of individuals who have made valuable contributions to Twitter, but this action is, unfortunately, necessary to ensure the company’s success moving forward.”

  According to the message, Twitter will temporarily close its offices on Friday, and all badge access will be suspended during the process.

  Earlier this week, billionaire Musk denied a report by The New York Times that he planned to lay off some Twitter employees before Nov. 1, when employees were scheduled to receive stock grants as part of their compensation. However, the businessman has remained tight-lipped regarding how much of Twitter’s workforce he allegedly plans to remove.

  The Epoch Times has contacted attorneys for the plaintiffs and Twitter for comment.

  Caden Pearson contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 20:20

• Don Lemon's New Morning Show Debuts, Immediately Bombs In Ratings
  Don Lemon’s New Morning Show Debuts, Immediately Bombs In Ratings

  We’re not quite sure what new CNN boss Chris Licht was thinking when he finally had his shot to revamp the network and try to save some of its dying credibility. 

  On one hand, he made the savvy move of canning torturous anchors and useless shows, like Brian Stelter’s “Reliable Sources”. On the other hand, he also “rearranged deck chairs” in keeping Don Lemon on the network, but moving him to morning programming.

  Recall, when the decision took place, we wrote about how Lemon had an on-air meltdown about being demoted from his primetime spot to compete with other liberal morning show drivel, including “Morning Joe”.

  And Lemon can’t even do that.

  A new report from the NY Post claims that Lemon’s new show, hosted by him and  Poppy Harlow and Kaitlan Collins “bombed” in its debut. “CNN This Morning” posted just 387,000 viewers, the report says. This compares to “Morning Joe”, which posted 793,000 viewers in the same time period. 

  

  Fox & Friends topped the same spot with 1.5 million viewers.

  As the NY Post reported, “No show across CNN, MSNBC and Fox News ranked lower than Lemon’s program on Tuesday.”

  To add insult to injury, CNN This Morning even failed to reach the 404,000 average viewers of “New Day”, the show it replaced. 

  CNN offered up the following excuse to The Post: “There’s not a morning show on television today that was a ratings success on day one. Reporting on ratings failures or successes of an entirely new program after a single day is absurd and cheap.”

   “That’s not the way this works. We’re entirely focused on developing a smart, compelling and relevant show that’s already having outsized impact. Anyone pushing an alternative narrative knows what a threat this talent lineup is,” they concluded.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 20:00

• Beijing Urges Countries Around South China Sea To 'Jointly Resist' The US
  Beijing Urges Countries Around South China Sea To ‘Jointly Resist’ The US

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has called on other claimants to the South China Sea to “jointly resist” US pressure in the region, The South China Morning Post reported on Thursday.

  China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia all have overlapping claims to the South China Sea. The US has inserted itself into the maritime dispute and formally rejected most of Beijing’s claims in 2020, which has been reaffirmed by the Biden administration.

  

  The US rejected China’s claims under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), an international treaty that defines the rights of nations to territorial waters. While using UNCLOS to reject Beijing’s claims, the US is not a party to the treaty as it has never been ratified by the Senate.

  “Some countries not only refuse to accede to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea but also concoct the Indo-Pacific strategy to compile exclusive small circles, engage in close provocations at sea, show off forces, endanger the peace and tranquility of the sea. This should be jointly resisted,” Wang said, referring to the US.

  The Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific Strategy was released earlier this year, and the document calls for a greater US presence in the region to counter China with a focus on building alliances and boosting partnerships. Wang has previously said that such an effort could lead to a Ukraine-style “tragedy.”

  Another aspect of the US involvement in the South China Sea dispute is US naval operations in the disputed waters. Since the Obama administration, the US has sailed warships close to Chinese-controlled islands in the waters, raising tensions with Beijing.

  The US has also cited a 2016 international tribunal ruling made under UNCLOS that sided with the Philippines in its maritime dispute with China over claims in the South China Sea. Wang hit out at the ruling on Thursday, calling it “the abuse of arbitration.”

  China has been consistent in issuing ‘resist US hegemony’ messaging over the past number of months:

  We believe more countries will stand up like #China, resolutely resist all kinds of illegal unilateral sanctions, long-arm jurisdiction and political set-up, jointly safeguard international fairness and justice. https://t.co/0818Q3wLlu

  — 曹 毅 CAO Yi أبو وسيم (@CaoYi_MFA) September 27, 2021

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

  The US and the Philippines recently held war games where around 3,500 troops stormed a beach in the South China Sea near a disputed reef. Manila and Washington are treaty allies, and the US has warned China repeatedly that their mutual defense treaty applies to attacks on Philippine vessels in the South China Sea.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 19:40

• GMC Hummer EVs "Sold Out For Two Years," Selling At Auction For Double List Price
  GMC Hummer EVs “Sold Out For Two Years,” Selling At Auction For Double List Price

  The revival of the Hummer brand as GMC’s high-end EV has been a smashing hit. Demand is so high that pickup and SUV models are “sold out for two years or more,” according to the auto blog GM Authority. 

  The Detroit-based automaker has received 90,000 reservations for both versions of the Hummer EV. GM Authority said all new orders had been halted since last month. 

  For reference, GM has only produced 2,570 units of the Hummer EV Pickup as of September 2022, a far-cry from the 90,000 units needed just to meet reservations. 

  However, production has been picking up as of late, as GM produced 700 Hummer EV Pickups in September, which represents almost 30 percent of all units built. 

  In order to meet demand, this growth needs to continue, which will be facilitated by the opening of the first Ultium Cells plant in Ohio. 

  Unfortunately, GM has also announced that Hummer EV production will idled for November as the plant undergoes upgrades to produce future products. — GM Authority

  It’s hard to say whether GM can ramp up supply to meet the orders in 2023. Some of these 1,000 horsepower vehicles have been auctioned off at mindboggling prices in the last several months. 

  

  A Hummer EV sold for a whopping $324,500 at Barrett-Jackson’s Las Vegas event in July. Another sold at Barrett-Jackson in Houston for $225,000 on Oct. 22. Others were recently auctioned off at Bring A Trailer website between $164,000 to $275,000. The list price for the full-size truck is $112,000. 

  

  Supplies of the Hummer EV are set to worsen before they improve, which may keep secondary market prices elevated. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 19:20

• Pennsylvania Taxpayers Have Paid $16 Million For Childhood Sex Reassignment Treatments
  Pennsylvania Taxpayers Have Paid $16 Million For Childhood Sex Reassignment Treatments

  Authored by Beth Brelje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Switching genders is expensive. But low-income children in Pennsylvania are covered under medical assistance through the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

  

  Pennsylvania taxpayers have unknowingly paid more than $16 million under Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration to fund sex reassignment and gender transition services for children.

  Each year since 2015, when Wolf took office, state spending on childhood sex change treatments has increased, data obtained by the Pennsylvania Family Institute shows.

  In 2015, Pennsylvania paid $78,000 for services related to sex reassignment for children under 18. In 2021, the state spent $3.9 million.

  The Pennsylvania Department of Human Services (PA DHS) provided data to the Pennsylvania Family Institute through a Right to Know request seeking records reflecting the amount of money Pennsylvania has spent for minors through CHIP to receive “services related to sex reassignment and transition related services and drugs, from 2015 to present.”

  “This level of state-endorsed harm upon children is reprehensible,” Alexis Sneller of the Pennsylvania Family Institute said in a statement. “While we knew the Wolf administration was funding services related to these irreversible procedures on minors, now seeing the exact numbers–millions spent towards these detrimental acts—is still shocking.”

  Taxpayer Funded Treatments

  The data includes basic codes and descriptions for each treatment, but it’s unclear how many treatments were used for each patient, so the total number of minors who received the medications and procedures is unknown.

  Treatments listed in the data include androgenic agents, which are used in the transition from female to male; and estrogenic agents, which are feminizing hormones powerful enough to cause a male to develop breasts.

  Some girls were given Yuvafem, a vaginal insert tablet used to reduce symptoms of menopause, and Estring, another menopause insert in the form of a flexible ring that continuously releases estrogen. The Estring safety indications include a warning that using the product may increase the chance of developing dementia, and that estrogens should be used at the lowest dose possible and only for as long as needed.

  Many treatments are hormones in the form of gels, creams, patches, and pills normally used for women in menopause and post-menopause. Others are testosterone replacements, normally used in men who don’t make enough on their own.

  All are being prescribed for off-label use.

  “Since no drugs are specifically for sex reassignment or transition related services, pharmacy claims were only included where the recipient had a previous gender identity disorder diagnosis or personal history of sex reassignment diagnosis within the specified service dates,” the PA DHS said in a note included in the answer to the Right to Know request. “Data is limited to recipients aged 18 and younger.”

  The data is from Jan. 1, 2015, to Oct. 21, 2022.

  Homeless Kids Get Gender Treatment

  During a Pennsylvania House Health Committee hearing, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s (CHOP) gender clinic co-founder Nadia Dowshen testified that her clinic receives referrals from foster care and homeless shelters.

  “We’re really getting referrals from a variety of resources,” Dowshen testified. “We’re getting a lot more referrals from institutions and other youth serving professionals working with youth in other capacities, sometimes from within the foster care system, or the mental health system, or through homeless shelters for youth who are in need of support.”

  In another presentation, Dowshen praised Dr. Rachel Levine, calling the former Pennsylvania secretary of health “a wonderful advocate … doing amazing work to make sure young people have coverage of these medications.”

  Levine is a transgender individual who served in Pennsylvania until President Joe Biden appointed Levine as assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Levine is a former professor of pediatrics and psychiatry at the Penn State College of Medicine and a longtime advocate of “gender affirming care,” which includes puberty blockers, hormone treatments, and surgeries with life-altering consequences for children and adolescents who want to change their bodies and live as the opposite sex.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 19:00

• China Bans Celebs With 'Lapsed Morals' From Endorsing Products
  China Bans Celebs With ‘Lapsed Morals’ From Endorsing Products

  The Chinese government is now barring celebrities with “lapsed morals” from making product endorsements — and blocking all celebrities from endorsing health, education and financial products. Authorities said the new restrictions are “guided by Xi Jinping thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era.”

  The socio-economic move comes on the heels of the Chinese Communist Parties twice-a-decade congress, in which President Xi Jinping was elected to an unprecedented third team as party chairman and unveiled a new leadership team stacked with loyalists as he further consolidates his power.  

  “The latest clampdown was announced as the Chinese president intensifies his drive to reform social values and youth culture in the world’s most populous country, under the banner of common prosperity’,” reports the Financial Times. 

  “Celebrities should consciously practice socialist core values ​​in their advertising endorsement activities, and endorsement activities should conform to social morals and traditional virtues,” the new regulations say. 

  

  Moving forward, companies are barred from using any celebrity to promote healthcare, medical equipment, baby formula, private tutoring, tobacco products and e-cigarettes. The rules encompass social media, commercials, livestreaming, interviews and other such avenues. 

  Celebrities with “lax morals” are off limits for any product advertising. That includes those who’ve engaged in illegal activities such as drunkenness, drug use, fraud and tax evasion.

  “The media is lax, allowing illegal and immoral stars to participate in advertising endorsements,” said Chinese authorities. “The chaos in the field of advertising endorsements has seriously infringed upon the rights and interests of consumers, disrupted the market order and polluted the social atmosphere, and the people have expressed strong reactions.”

  Last week, Xi urged China’s younger generation to “abandon the finicky lifestyle and complacent attitude.” He did so against the symbolic backdrop of the Hongqi or “red flag” canal — a 44-mile irrigation canal initiated in 1960 during China’s “Great Leap Forward.” Spanning mountains and rocky terrain, it was built by hand with simple tools over the ensuing 9 years. 

  

  “We need to educate people, especially the youths, with the Hongqi canal spirit that China’s socialism is won by hard work, struggles and even sacrifice of lives. This was not only true in the past but also true in the new era,” said Xi. 

  At a time when China is struggling with high youth unemployment, Xi’s remarks are seemingly meant to combat a sort of stagnation that’s setting in among Chinese youth. It’s encapsulated by a recently-popularized phrase in China: “tang ping,” which means “lying flat.” Similar to the American notion of “quiet quitting,” tang ping represents a lifestyle that embraces low expectations for professional and financial success.

  Speaking about the new endorsement regulations, Zhang Guohua, president of a Chinese advertising association, said, “This does not mean that celebrity endorsements will be limited, but everyone will be more cautious, and the artists will be more responsible and self-disciplined.” Speaking of celebrities, he added, “You have such an industry status and influence, so you should be cautious in your words and deeds.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 18:40

• Arizona County Sued Over Planned Hand Count of Ballots
  Arizona County Sued Over Planned Hand Count of Ballots

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

  Officials in an Arizona county have been sued over their plan to hand count ballots cast in next week’s midterm election.

  

  The Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans said Cochise County officials are poised to violate the law with the hand count and have asked a state judge to block the plan.

  A.R.S. Section 16-602(F), the plaintiffs said, outlines that hand counts may only be conducted with specific parameters, including counting a sample of no more than 5,000 ballots.

  “Arizona law thus clearly and expressly prohibits county officials from conducting a hand count audit of ballots beyond the limited sample size allowed by statute, let alone all early ballots cast in the election,” they said.

  The plan to count more votes violates the law, according to the suit.

  The Cochise County’s Board of Supervisors, Cochise County Recorder David Stevens, and Cochise County Elections Director Lisa Marra were named as defendants.

  The board’s 2–1 vote in October ran along party lines. Republican Supervisors Peggy Judd and Tom Crosby approved the hand count. Democrat Supervisor Ann English voted against it.

  County lawyers told the board that the hand count would be illegal.

  Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat running for governor, initially said the plan was against the law but later said the board committed to only counting some of the ballots and to delivering the results on time.

  Members of the board said in an Oct. 26 meeting that the hand count would follow state law, but that they interpreted state law as allowing a full hand count in contested races.

  Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said that an expanded hand count of 100 percent of the ballots is legal, provided the hand count was limited to “five contested statewide and federal races appearing on the 2022 General Election ballot.”

  Board members said at a Nov. 1 special meeting that they were aware of the lawsuit but that it hadn’t been served yet.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 18:20

• Something Has Snapped: Unexplained 2.3 Million Jobs Gap Emerges In Broken Payrolls Report
  Something Has Snapped: Unexplained 2.3 Million Jobs Gap Emerges In Broken Payrolls Report

  A simplistic, superficial take of today’s jobs report would conclude that the red hot jump in nonfarm payrolls indicates a “strong hiring market” (just ignore the jump in the unemployment rate). Nothing could be further from the truth.

  Recall that back in August and September, we showed that a stark divergence had opened between the Household and Establishment surveys that comprise the monthly jobs report, and since March the former has been stagnant while the latter has been rising every single month. In addition to that, full-time jobs were plunging while part-time jobs were soaring.

  Fast forward to today when the inconsistencies not only continue to grow, but in some cases have becoming downright grotesque.

  Consider the following: the closely followed Establishment survey came in above expectations at 261K, above the 195K expected, and down modestly from last month’s upward revised 319K…

  

  … numbers which confirm that at a time when virtually every major tech company is announcing mass layoffs…

  Layoffs announced in the last day:

  – Lyft 13% of workers
  – Opendoor 18%
  – Stripe 14%
  – Chime 12%
  – Twitter 50%
  – Morgan Stanley (% unknown)

  — Genevieve Roch-Decter, CFA (@GRDecter) November 3, 2022

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

  … the BLS has a single, political agenda – not to spoil the political climate less than a week ahead of the payrolls by painting a “suboptimal” labor market picture.

  Alas, there is only so much the Department of Labor can hide under the rug because when looking at the abovementioned gap between the Household and Establishment surveys which we have been pounding the table on since the summer, it just blew out by a whopping 589K, the most since June’s 608K, as a result of the 261K increase in the number of nonfarm payrolls (tracked by the Household survey) offset by a perplexing plunge in the number of people actually employed which tumbled by 328K (tracked by Establishment survey).

  

  What is even more perplexing, is that despite the continued rise in nonfarm payrolls, the Household survey continues to telegraph growing weakness, and as of Oct 31, the gap that opened in March has since grown to a whopping 2.3 million “workers” which may or may not exist anywhere besides the spreadsheet model of some BLS political activist!

  

  Showing this another way, there were 158.5 million employed workers in March 2022… and 158.6 million in October 2022 an increase of just 150K, during a period in which the number of payrolls (which as a reminder is the number the market follows) reportedly increased by 2.5 million!

  

  As an aside, it appears this is not the first time the “apolitical” Bureau of Labor Statistics has pulled such a bizarre divergence off: it happened right before Obama’s reelection:

  

  And then again: right before Hillary’s “100% guaranteed election (because one wouldn’t want a soft economy to adversely impact her re-election odds).

  

  It gets better: digging in even deeper into the far more accurate and nuanced Household Survey, we find that the October plunge in Employment was the result of a massive collapse in full-time jobs offset by a modest increase in part-time jobs:

  

  In fact, as shown below, since March, the US has lost 490K full-time employees offset by an almost identical gain of 492K part-time employees, while 126K workers were forced to get more than one job over the same period.

  

  Finally, the cherry on top: the number of Unemployed workers – also tracked by the Household Survey – jumped by 306K, rising to 6.059 million, the highest since February!

  

  So what’s going on here? The simple answer: there has been no change in the number of people actually employed, but due to deterioration in the economy, more people are losing their higher-paying, full-time jobs, and switching into much lower- paying, benefits-free part-time jobs, which also forces many to work more than one job, a rotation which picked up in earnest some time in March and which has only been captured by the Household survey. Meanwhile the Establishment survey plows on ahead with its politically-motivated approximations, seasonal adjustments, and other labor market goalseeking meant to make the Biden admin look good at least until after the midterms .

  And since the Establishment survey is far slower to pick up on the nuances in employment composition, while the Household Survey has gone nowhere since March, the BLS data engineers have been busy goalseeking the Establishment Survey (with the occasional nudge from the White House especially with midterms looming) to make it appear as if the economy is growing strongly, when in reality all they are doing is applying the same erroneous seasonal adjustment factor that gave such a wrong perspective of the labor market in the aftermath of the covid pandemic (until it was all adjusted away a year ago). In other words, while the labor market is already cracking, it will take the BLS several months of veering away from reality before the government bureaucrats accept and admit what is truly taking place.

  As we said back in August, “We expect that “realization” to take place just after the midterms, because the last thing the Biden administration can afford is admit the labor market is crashing in addition to the continued surge in inflation.” We still hold on to this prediction: expect big negative payroll prints as soon as December.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 17:44

• Polls Of Midterm Voters Are Prone To 'Bandwagon Effect,' Are Unreliable: Experts
  Polls Of Midterm Voters Are Prone To ‘Bandwagon Effect,’ Are Unreliable: Experts

  Authored by Michael Washburn via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours)

  Polls of prospective voters, which have been widely cited throughout the 2022 midterm races, are based on flawed methodology, and their use as a tool to achieve the outcome desired by the mainstream media has been conspicuous during this election cycle, political strategists and polling experts have told The Epoch Times.

  

  Whatever limited use polls may have, one of their likely consequences, in the current politicized environment, is the “bandwagon effect.” This describes a phenomenon where the media misuse polls to demoralize political opponents and their supporters and to suggest to undecided voters that they are out of step with majoritarian and mainstream sentiment if they do not get on board with the candidate or candidates whom the polls favor, one expert said. Hence polls favoring candidates whom the media want to win become self-fulfilling prophecies.

  Poll results from such sources such as FiveThirtyEight and RealClearPolitics, along with those in mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times, have consistently favored Democrat candidates in the closely watched Senate and gubernatorial races, though the margins have shrunken since the summer.

  For example, FiveThirtyEight’s latest polling averages for the Pennsylvania Senate race show Democrat John Fetterman, the state’s lieutenant governor, ahead of Donald Trump-endorsed Republican Dr. Mehmet Oz by a slight margin, 46.9 percent to 46 percent, even after an Oct. 25 debate in which Fetterman gave a halting and confused performance that came in for harsh criticism from commentators on both sides of the aisle. On Aug. 10, the same source showed Fetterman with a roughly 12-point lead over Oz, 49.2 percent to 37.3 percent.

  In Georgia’s closely-watched Senate race between Democrat incumbent Raphael Warnock and Trump-endorsed Republican challenger Hershel Walker, FiveThirtyEight’s latest data show a race nearly as tight, with Warnock enjoying 46.7 percent support and Walker 45.4 percent. On July 31, Warnock had a reported three-point lead, 47.2 percent to 44.2 percent.

  

  FiveThirtyEight’s projections are largely aligned with those put forward in mainstream and legacy media organs. On Oct. 31, the New York Times published the findings of a poll that the newspaper undertook in partnership with Siena College.

  According to the poll, Fetterman still commands a marked lead over Oz, 49 percent to 44 percent, the Oct. 25 debate notwithstanding, and Warnock is well ahead of Walker, 49 percent to 46 percent. In Arizona’s intensely followed Senate race, the same poll gives Democrat Mark Kelly a considerable lead over Republican challenger Blake Masters, 51 percent to 45 percent.

  The Dobbs Bump

  Pundits and pollsters who favor Democrats in these races are engaging, to one or another degree, in wishful thinking, believes Lonny Leitner, vice president of the government affairs firm LS2 Group, which has offices in Iowa and Minnesota.

  The bounce in opinion polls that Democrat candidates enjoyed well into the summer and early fall was largely a function of some voters’ wariness over the Supreme Court’s June 24 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, Leitner believes. It is a mistake to construe that short-term reaction as a broad endorsement of Democrat candidates and their views on issues as varied as crime, inflation, border security, the Ukraine crisis, and other issues.

  “I think we are seeing that the Democrats peaked too soon as they got a big bounce this summer shortly after the Supreme Court decision re. Roe v. Wade. Polls show that abortion isn’t even the top-three issue for the majority of Americans when asked. Everything is coming back to inflation, the economy, gas prices, and crime,” Leitner said.

  But a larger mistake made by pollsters is a methodological one, Leitner argued. Often, polls sample a relatively tiny portion of the electorate. The New York Times-Siena College poll cited above is an example. Its results for the Georgia and Arizona races were based on answers given by a reported 604 potential voters in each state, out of total voting-age populations of 8,275,264 and 5,662,328, respectively, and in Pennsylvania, only a reported 620 voters gave their input to the pollsters, out of a voting-age population of 10,018.510.

  These statistically minuscule slivers of the states’ voting-age populations thus cannot be expected to provide reliable samples on which to generalize about the likely outcome of critical races, and the numbers of respondents here are actually at the high end, with many polls sampling four to five hundred prospective voters or even fewer.

  

  Preaching to the Choir

  Another problem, Leitner said, is that polls often sample voters registered with one or another party, which limits still further their pools of respondents and renders their results practically meaningless.

  “People who are looking at polls where the sample is [made up of] registered voters are wasting their time, because those polls are designed to make Democrats look good. People need to focus on polls that have a larger sample, like 1,000 voters, and they need to be ‘likely voters’ versus registered voters,” Leitner said.

  Moreover, polls often fail to take into account the momentum generated by successful candidates in races outside the scope of the polls, which can carry over into the races that the polls do address, the analyst posited. This is particularly the case for independents and voters who have not yet made up their minds.

  “When looking at those polls, you will see that Republican candidates from Oregon to Arizona to North Carolina are getting some wind at their backs largely because the GOP base is coming home and undecided voters who aren’t necessarily Republicans know they don’t want Joe Biden and the Democrats,” he said.

  Leitner sees this spillover effect as potentially playing a decisive role in Georgia, where even polls normally unfavorable to GOP candidates give Governor Brian Kemp a five-point-plus lead over opponent Stacey Abrams. Kemp’s success may help Walker win the Senate contest and tip the balance in that body in favor of the GOP, Leitner suggested.

  In Leitner’s view, this dynamic could play out in reverse in Wisconsin, where the success of GOP senatorial candidate Ron Johnson, who currently enjoys a three-point lead over Democrat Mandela Barnes, may end up helping Republican insurgent Tim Michaels defeat incumbent Democrat Governor Tony Evers.

  Chronic Polling Woes

  The flawed methodology and partisan misuse of polls have led many voters and political observers to doubt their legitimacy or discount them entirely, and the problems that led to wildly inaccurate predictions in the past—such as the New York Times issuing a forecast days before the 2016 election that Hillary Clinton had a 91 percent chance to become president, and Donald Trump only a nine-percent chance—persist to this day, some believe.

  “The pollsters claim they fixed their polling for 2022, but I doubt it. There appears to be a bias towards the Democrats by the major media polls, but we won’t really know until the votes are counted. The thing about polling is that it is an estimation, which is always a bit uncertain. But the major media polls’ errors always seem to favor the Democrats,” Keith Naughton, the principal of Silent Majority Strategies, a political consultancy based in Germantown, Maryland, told The Epoch Times.

  “I think the Democrats could be in for a rude awakening by pinning their hopes on unreliable polls that tell them what they want to hear. Bad polling does not help anyone, it just damages the credibility of the media even more,” he added.

  Mixed Blessings

  Even experts who see the utility of polling in the context of political races acknowledge that there are things that the media could do to improve their methodology, and avoid shunting aside or denying the existence of constituencies that do not fit into their vision.

  “I’m a proponent of polling. I think it’s incumbent on those who study democracy to make a solid effort to ascertain what people think,” Daron Shaw, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, told The Epoch Times.

  “There are people who do it earnestly and do it well. There may be some hacks, but more often than not, you’re talking about people who are credentialed and making a good-faith effort to find out what’s going on,” he added.

  Yet even the most sophisticated methodologies come up against the fact that some constituencies are simply more responsive than others, and it just so happens that some of the prospective voters least likely tell pollsters anything tend to lean Republican, Shaw acknowledged.

  “Scientifically, it’s absolutely solid, but there are enormous challenges to polling effectively in modern contexts,” he said.

  As an example of the difficulties pollsters come up against, Shaw pointed to the constituency that Trump set out to galvanize in 2016 and 2020.

  “Trump and others told us they were going to go out and identify those voters, less well-educated whites, who feel that they’ve been left behind. ‘We’re going to find those voters and register them.’ And people who followed voting in the Upper Midwest said, ‘Good luck,‘” Shaw said.

  But the Trump campaign was aggressive in pitching to these voters, and was successful. “The numbers are fairly indisputable,” he noted.

  These efforts led to a high turnout for Trump in 2016 among blue-collar whites, many of whom, Shaw observed, were part of a constituency that had voted Democrat going back to the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 11/04/2022 – 17:40