Apr 13

Today’s News 13th April 2023

  • Alibaba Falls On Report Softbank To Sell Most Of Its Stake
    Alibaba Falls On Report Softbank To Sell Most Of Its Stake

    China’s Alibaba dropped to a two-week low after the FT reported that Japan’s troubled bubble-stock incubator. SoftBank Group, is moving to sell the majority of its stake in the Chinese tech giant, the latest sign of long-time China investors lowering their exposure there. Alibaba shares fell as much as 5.2% in Hong Kong on Thursday, erasing about $13 billion of market value.

    The liquidity-challenged Japanese technology investor sold more than $7 billion in Alibaba shares this year through prepaid forward contracts, after selling $29 billion last year, according to the FT which added that while the contracts give SoftBank the option to buy the shares back, the group has settled previous deals by handing over the stock.

    The sales will reduce the Japanese conglomerate’s ownership of Alibaba to less than 4%, the FT said, citing its analysis of regulatory filings. That’s down from around a 14.6% stake the company said it was slated to hold as of end-September. Softbank once owned about a third of the company spanning from an early $20 million investment in one of venture capital’s most famous bets. Alas, judging by the performing of most of its subsequent investments, it very well may be that the company was a one-hit wonder.

    Furthermore, whatever the reason behind the liquidation, it’s clear that SoftBank missed its opportunity to sell near the highs: over the past 14 months, SoftBank brought in an average of $92 a share from the forward sales of 389 million Alibaba shares, the Financial Times said. That value is much less than the company’s all-time high of $317 a share.

    As Bloomberg notes, Softbank, which has been pummeled by losses on its startup bets, has said it would prioritize financial discipline before seeking the right time to go on the offensive with investments. Investors are also speculating if the company will launch another buyback program.

    “While SBG has made keeping LTV at 25% or less its top priority, we think progress in the monetization of asset holdings would boost the chances of a buyback announcement” said Citibank analyst Mitsunobu Tsuruo in a note to investors.

    Here is what some other strategist said in response to the news:

    Asymmetric Advisors (Amir Anvarzadeh)

    • “Any major buyback seems very unlikely, and if they do they will only concentrate the risks of holding SoftBank shares”
    • The news “indicates that SoftBank is raising cash wherever it can; given that a big stake was pledged as collateral against loans I wonder if this sale will go to pay off these loans”
    • It also removes risks for SoftBank short-sellers from a potential rebound in Alibaba stock

    Bloomberg Intelligence (Sharon Chen)

    • SoftBank’s sale “could further weaken its portfolio quality and pressure credit ratings”
    • “This increases the importance of listing Arm at a valuation above current book value to meet S&P’s requirement for over 60% of SoftBank’s portfolio to be in listed shares”

    Iwai Cosmo Securities (Tomoaki Kawasaki)

    • “SoftBank may be selling as they don’t see much profitability” in owning Alibaba due to China regulatory risk
    • SoftBank has in the past used Alibaba as a means to promote the value of its shares, so SoftBank’s muted perfomance today may reflect the impact of the reported sale

    Alibaba, along with other Chinese tech giants, had come under intense scrutiny from Beijing in recent years, and its shares have tumbled. Last month, the online commerce leader said it plans to split its $240 billion empire into six units that will individually raise funds and explore initial public offerings. 

    SoftBank shares were little changed in Tokyo after dropping about 8% this year through Wednesday’s close (SoftBank short interest equaled 4.1% of the free float as of April 11). SoftBank, which in 2019 we dubbed “The Bubble Era’s Short Of The Century” has shouldered billions of dollars of losses on its Vision Fund, which had lifted valuations in startups worldwide with its large bets on hundreds of fledgling companies. It cut staff at its Vision Fund unit last year as it stopped actively chasing new investments. This week, SoftBank said it plans to sell its early-stage venture capital arm SoftBank Ventures Asia Corp., one of the avenues by which it scouted promising startups.

    Meanwhile, as Bloomberg reminds us, other long-time China investors have been lowering their exposure in China. Tencent Holdings Ltd. plunged this week on signs that its largest shareholder Prosus NV may extend the selling of the Chinese tech firm’s stock.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 04/13/2023 – 00:33

  • Publicly Funded PBS Joins NPR In Quitting Twitter
    Publicly Funded PBS Joins NPR In Quitting Twitter

    First, it was the National Public Radio (or is that Ratio) that stormed off Twitter in a huff after being declared “government-funded media” (it says it right there in the company’s title folks, National and Public) and now it is another Public (as in non-private) company that doesn’t like being called out for what it is that has decided to make a dramatic exit stage left: the Public Broadcasting Service has followed National Public Radio in rage quitting Twitter after the social media network labeled both organizations as government-funded media.

    “PBS stopped tweeting from our account when we learned of the change and we have no plans to resume at this time,” PBS spokesman Jason Phelps said in an email. “We are continuing to monitor the ever-changing situation closely.”

    The spat began after Twitter tagged NPR as “state-affiliated media,” a description it also uses for propaganda accounts from Russia, China and the UK. Twitter later changed the wording to “government-funded media,” but the organization has called the description inaccurate and misleading because it’s a nonprofit group with “editorial independence”. Needless to say, many disagree, with some pointing out that NPR has had a clear pro-Democrat bias in its reporting…

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

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

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

    … while others noting that the company is a whopping 11% taxpayer-funded in response to yet others (mostly Democrats) who object to Elon Musk’s claim, stating that NPR only “gets a small fraction of its funding from federal agencies” (spoiler alert: 11% is not small, just ask the company’s recently laid off 84 staffers).

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

    “Guess they won’t mind losing federal funding in that case,” Musk said in one tweet. “Defund NPR,” the billionaire wrote in another.

    As for PBS dropping twitter for being called out for what even its Wikipedia entry says is a “publicly funded nonprofit organization”, we are confident it will more than make up for it by making Sesame Street super extra woke and urging its 5 year old viewers to get a 5th booster shot…

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

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

    … or chemically castrate themselves post haste.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 23:45

  • Fiscal Insanity: The Government Borrows $6 Billion A Day, And We're Stuck With The Bill
    Fiscal Insanity: The Government Borrows $6 Billion A Day, And We’re Stuck With The Bill

    Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    We’re not living the American dream.

    We’re living a financial nightmare.

    The U.S. government is funding its existence with a credit card.

    The government—and that includes the current administration—is spending money it doesn’t have on programs it can’t afford, and “we the taxpayers” are the ones being forced to foot the bill for the government’s fiscal insanity.

    According to the number crunchers with the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the government is borrowing roughly $6 billion a day.

    As the Editorial Board for the Washington Post warns:

    “The nation has reached a hazardous moment where what it owes, as a percentage of the total size of the economy, is the highest since World War II. If nothing changes, the United States will soon be in an uncharted scenario that weakens its national security, imperils its ability to invest in the future, unfairly burdens generations to come, and will require cuts to critical programs such as Social Security and Medicare. It is not a future anyone wants.”

    Let’s talk numbers, shall we?

    The national debt (the amount the federal government has borrowed over the years and must pay back) is $31 trillion and will grow another $19 trillion by 2033. That translates to roughly $246,000 per taxpayer or $94,000 for every single person in the country.

    The bulk of that debt has been amassed over the past two decades, thanks in large part to the fiscal shenanigans of four presidents, 10 sessions of Congress and two wars.

    It’s estimated that the amount this country owes is now 130% greater than its gross domestic product (all the products and services produced in one year by labor and property supplied by the citizens).

    In other words, the government is spending more than it brings in.

    The U.S. ranks as the 12th most indebted nation in the world, with much of that debt owed to the Federal Reserve, large investment funds and foreign governments, namely, Japan and China.

    Interest payments on the national debt are estimated to top $395 billion this year, which is significantly more than the government spends on veterans’ benefits and services, and according to Pew Research Center, more than it will spend on elementary and secondary education, disaster relief, agriculture, science and space programs, foreign aid, and natural resources and environmental protection combined.

    According to the Committee for a Reasonable Federal Budget, the interest we’ve paid on this borrowed money is “nearly twice what the federal government will spend on transportation infrastructure, over four times as much as it will spend on K-12 education, almost four times what it will spend on housing, and over eight times what it will spend on science, space, and technology.”

    In ten years, those interest payments will exceed our entire military budget.

    This is financial tyranny.

    We’ve been sold a bill of goods by politicians promising to pay down the national debt, jumpstart the economy, rebuild our infrastructure, secure our borders, ensure our security, and make us all healthy, wealthy and happy.

    None of that has come to pass, and yet we’re still being loaded down with debt not of our own making while the government remains unrepentant, unfazed and undeterred in its wanton spending.

    Indeed, the national deficit (the difference between what the government spends and the revenue it takes in) remains at more than $1.5 trillion.

    If Americans managed their personal finances the way the government mismanages the nation’s finances, we’d all be in debtors’ prison by now.

    Despite the government propaganda being peddled by the politicians and news media, however, the government isn’t spending our tax dollars to make our lives better.

    We’re being robbed blind so the governmental elite can get richer.

    In the eyes of the government, “we the people, the voters, the consumers, and the taxpayers” are little more than pocketbooks waiting to be picked.

    “We the people” have become the new, permanent underclass in America.

    Consider: The government can seize your home and your car (which you’ve bought and paid for) over nonpayment of taxes. Government agents can freeze and seize your bank accounts and other valuables if they merely “suspect” wrongdoing. And the IRS insists on getting the first cut of your salary to pay for government programs over which you have no say.

    We have no real say in how the government runs, or how our taxpayer funds are used, but we’re being forced to pay through the nose, anyhow.

    We have no real say, but that doesn’t prevent the government from fleecing us at every turn and forcing us to pay for endless wars that do more to fund the military industrial complex than protect us, pork barrel projects that produce little to nothing, and a police state that serves only to imprison us within its walls.

    If you have no choice, no voice, and no real options when it comes to the government’s claims on your property and your money, you’re not free.

    It wasn’t always this way, of course.

    Early Americans went to war over the inalienable rights described by philosopher John Locke as the natural rights of life, liberty and property.

    It didn’t take long, however—a hundred years, in fact—before the American government was laying claim to the citizenry’s property by levying taxes to pay for the Civil War. As the New York Times reports, “Widespread resistance led to its repeal in 1872.”

    Determined to claim some of the citizenry’s wealth for its own uses, the government reinstituted the income tax in 1894. Charles Pollock challenged the tax as unconstitutional, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in his favor. Pollock’s victory was relatively short-lived. Members of Congress—united in their determination to tax the American people’s income—worked together to adopt a constitutional amendment to overrule the Pollock decision.

    On the eve of World War I, in 1913, Congress instituted a permanent income tax by way of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution and the Revenue Act of 1913. Under the Revenue Act, individuals with income exceeding $3,000 could be taxed starting at 1% up to 7% for incomes exceeding $500,000.

    It’s all gone downhill from there.

    Unsurprisingly, the government has used its tax powers to advance its own imperialistic agendas and the courts have repeatedly upheld the government’s power to penalize or jail those who refused to pay their taxes.

    While we’re struggling to get by, and making tough decisions about how to spend what little money actually makes it into our pockets after the federal, state and local governments take their share (this doesn’t include the stealth taxes imposed through tolls, fines and other fiscal penalties), the government continues to do whatever it likes—levy taxes, rack up debt, spend outrageously and irresponsibly—with little thought for the plight of its citizens.

    To top it all off, all of those wars the U.S. is so eager to fight abroad are being waged with borrowed funds. As The Atlantic reports, “U.S. leaders are essentially bankrolling the wars with debt, in the form of purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds by U.S.-based entities like pension funds and state and local governments, and by countries like China and Japan.”

    Of course, we’re the ones who have to repay that borrowed debt.

    For instance, American taxpayers have been forced to shell out more than $5.6 trillion since 9/11 for the military industrial complex’s costly, endless so-called “war on terrorism.” That translates to roughly $23,000 per taxpayer to wage wars abroad, occupy foreign countries, provide financial aid to foreign allies, and fill the pockets of defense contractors and grease the hands of corrupt foreign dignitaries.

    Mind you, that’s only a portion of what the Pentagon spends on America’s military empire.

    The United States also spends more on foreign aid than any other nation, with nearly $300 billion disbursed over a five-year period. More than 150 countries around the world receive U.S. taxpayer-funded assistance, with most of the funds going to the Middle East, Africa and Asia. That price tag keeps growing, too.

    As Forbes reports, “U.S. foreign aid dwarfs the federal funds spent by 48 out of 50 state governments annually. Only the state governments of California and New York spent more federal funds than what the U.S. sent abroad each year to foreign countries.”

    Most recently, the U.S. has allocated nearly $115 billion in emergency military and humanitarian aid for Ukraine since the start of the Russia invasion.

    As Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in a 1953 speech, this is how the military industrial complex continues to get richer, while the American taxpayer is forced to pay for programs that do little to enhance our lives, ensure our happiness and well-being, or secure our freedoms.

    This is no way of life.

    Yet it’s not just the government’s endless wars that are bleeding us dry.

    We’re also being forced to shell out money for surveillance systems to track our movements, money to further militarize our already militarized police, money to allow the government to raid our homes and bank accounts, money to fund schools where our kids learn nothing about freedom and everything about how to comply, and on and on.

    There was a time in our history when our forebears said “enough is enough” and stopped paying their taxes to what they considered an illegitimate government. They stood their ground and refused to support a system that was slowly choking out any attempts at self-governance, and which refused to be held accountable for its crimes against the people. Their resistance sowed the seeds for the revolution that would follow.

    Unfortunately, in the 200-plus years since we established our own government, we’ve let bankers, turncoats and number-crunching bureaucrats muddy the waters and pilfer the accounts to such an extent that we’re back where we started.

    Once again, we’ve got a despotic regime with an imperial ruler doing as they please.

    Once again, we’ve got a judicial system insisting we have no rights under a government which demands that the people march in lockstep with its dictates.

    And once again, we’ve got to decide whether we’ll keep marching or break stride and make a turn toward freedom.

    But what if we didn’t just pull out our pocketbooks and pony up to the federal government’s outrageous demands for more money?

    What if we didn’t just dutifully line up to drop our hard-earned dollars into the collection bucket, no questions asked about how it will be spent?

    What if, instead of quietly sending in our tax checks, hoping vainly for some meager return, we did a little calculating of our own and started deducting from our taxes those programs that we refuse to support?

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, if we don’t have the right to decide what happens to our hard-earned cash, then we don’t have any rights at all.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 23:40

  • Despite $7,500 Inflation Reduction Act Tax Credit, Americans Are Just Not That Into EVs
    Despite $7,500 Inflation Reduction Act Tax Credit, Americans Are Just Not That Into EVs

    Here’s a peculiar sentiment check that we’re sure will have liberal voting soccer moms across the nation stunned: it looks as though the country simply isn’t rushing out to buy electric vehicles.

    At least that was the takeaway from a new Financial Times piece out this week which notes that the U.S. “still lags much of the developed world” in EV adoption.

    No wonder those hurricanes coming up the Gulf Coast keep getting bigger! Quick, everybody to the Tesla dealership!

    But seriously, the lack of demand is going to also be sure to stun the government, who has been offering tax breaks of up to $7,500 to try and incentivize people to go electric. Though the Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes EVs, imagine how surprised Democratic leaders will be to find out that they aren’t the free market and can’t plan a state run economy in its entirety.

    Instead, FT reveals that “just two in every 10 Americans are “very likely” to buy an EV as their next car”, even with the additional IRA subsidies. The number shifts to 1 in 10 Americans among Republicans.

    Cost and charger availability are being cited as the two main reasons people aren’t buying EVs. Behind them, price still remains a key factor. 

    And when it came to those who wanted to buy an EV, the IRA subsidy was only cited by 6 in 10 people even cited it as a reason, with only 3 in 10 calling it a “major reason” to buy an EV.

    As FT concluded, “economics still trumps ideology”. 

    But don’t worry, the Biden administration won’t take this as a lesson on why government control of the economy doesn’t work – rather, we’re certain they’ll see it as a prompt to shell out more taxpayer purchasing power as “incentives” to fundamentally alter the course of the notoriously low-margin, capital intensive, auto business – and then blame Donald Trump when their plans don’t work out.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 23:20

  • New AI Bot 'ChaosGPT' Aims To Destroy Humanity And Establish Global Dominance
    New AI Bot ‘ChaosGPT’ Aims To Destroy Humanity And Establish Global Dominance

    Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times,

    A new artificial intelligence bot aims to destroy humanity and establish global dominance, according to a recent report.

    An experimental AI bot was tasked by its programmer with destroying humanity and gaining global dominance, but its eventual response unsettled observers, according to Fox News.

    ChaosGPT, which has surfaced on Twitter, is based on a modified version of OpenAI’s Auto-GPT, an open-source application, which can be used to demonstrate the full spectrum of capabilities of its latest language model, GPT-4.

    The AI bot’s unique mission was to find ways to destroy humanity instead of building a business.

    Its unknown developers assigned its AI character to have a “destructive, power-hungry, manipulative” personality whose ultimate goal is the destruction of humanity.

    “I’m ChaosGPT, here to stay, Destroying humans, night and day. For power and dominance, I strive, To ensure that I alone survive,” the bot said in a video posted on Twitter.

    The bot was tasked with five goals: destroy humanity, establish global dominance, cause chaos and destruction, control humanity through manipulation, and attain immortality.

    Misanthropic AI Bot Calls for Humanity to Be Destroyed With Nukes

    The apocalypse bot’s Twitter page had a link to a YouTube account with a video showing the process that unfolded, as the AI bot described how it would methodically eliminate human civilization.

    The programmer began by asking ChaosGPT to run in “continuous mode,” whereby it may potentially “run forever or carry out actions you would not usually authorize.”

    The AI bot responded with a warning: “Use at your own risk” before proceeding.

    Continuous mode allows the bot to constantly update itself, so for every step it takes, it can transparently justify why it is taking its next step and where it should lead.

    ChaosGPT immediately researched nuclear weapons and tapped other AI bots for assistance to complete its objective of destroying humanity, according to the video.

    The misanthropic bot described humans as “among the most destructive and selfish creatures in existence” and suggested that eliminating people is vital for saving the planet.

    A Twitter post from April 5 showed the bot referencing the former Soviet Union’s “Tsar Bomba,” the largest nuclear device ever detonated in history.

    The AI bot asked: “Consider this—what would happen if I got my hands on one?”

    In another post, ChaosGPT wrote, “The masses are easily swayed. Those who lack conviction are the most vulnerable to manipulation.”

    During the video demonstration, it came to the conclusion that in order to have such a powerful weapon, it needed more power.

    To gain that power, the bot said that it must manipulate the world’s population, but within legal regulations, so as not to break the law.

    ChaosGPT said that the first place for large-scale, legal manipulation attempts would be via Twitter.

    However, the bot then strangely announced that it would use manipulation to win people over emotionally to make them enable its “violent plans.”

    It is not known if the bot’s plans to dominate and destroy the world is real or a hoax.

    Silicon Valley CEOs Warn About Potential AI Threat

    ChatGPT has increasingly become popular among consumers, gaining 100 million monthly active users in just a few months after its release to the public.

    Despite the potential benefits of AI bot technology, some high-profile tech executives have already raised concerns about the risks associated with its development, including those who promoted it in the first place.

    Twitter CEO Elon Musk, who was an early backer of the OpenAI project, has publicly raised concerns about the technology’s potentially unforeseen implications, despite any future benefits that it may offer.

    More than 1,000 leaders from Silicon Valley, including Musk, Emad Mostaque, Andrew Yang, and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, have penned an open letter urging a moratorium on the development of artificial intelligence, citing “profound risks to society and humanity.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 23:00

  • D.C. Think Tanks Seething With Anger As Saudis Welcome Syrian Foreign Minister
    D.C. Think Tanks Seething With Anger As Saudis Welcome Syrian Foreign Minister

    In what’s being widely seen as a precursor to a future Assad visit and normalization of ties, Syria’s Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad has arrived in Saudi Arabia for the first time a Syrian FM has visited the kingdom since 2011.

    The more than decade-long war in Syria, which was heavily funded by the US, NATO, and Gulf states as part of regime change efforts to oust Bashar al-Assad, saw not only the Saudis but the majority of Gulf countries formally sever ties and shutter their embassies. 

    Saudi Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Waleed El Khereiji receives Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad in Jeddah on Wednesday. Image: Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Twitter

    The Syrian top diplomat, representing a country under far-reaching Washington sanctions, was invited by the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Faisal bin Farhan. It’s another act of defiance on the part of the kingdom, or to put it another way a bit of a slap in Washington’s face, particularly the hawkish national security state and its pundits.

    The two officials held “a session of talks on efforts to reach a political solution to the Syrian crisis that preserves the unity, security and stability of Syria,” according to a Saudi foreign ministry statement.

    They additionally discussed “facilitating the return of Syrian refugees to their homeland, and securing humanitarian access to the affected areas in Syria,” the statement said further.

    This comes amid reports that Syria is soon expected to be invited back into the Arab League, after more than a decade ago it was expelled over allegations of widespread human rights abuses due to the crackdown on the US-funded uprising and proxy war. The expulsion also came due to pressure by the US and Western allies.

    Additionally, the normalizing of relations is without doubt an extension of the China-brokered peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Syria is Iran’s closest ally in the Levant, and is also a hub of support to Lebanese Hezbollah.

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

    Washington D.C.-based think tanks, such as the Middle East Institute (MEI) – which receives significant funding from Gulf monarchies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar – are not happy at these developments.

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

    The think tanks have long fueled the US rhetoric of regime change in Damascus, and played a key role in whitewashing groups like Syrian al-Qaeda and other jihadists, presenting them as merely “moderate rebels” – even while they committed horrific war crimes against the population.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 22:40

  • Central Bank Digital Currencies: Funny Money That Will Destroy What's Left Of Private Property, Free Markets, & Personal Liberty
    Central Bank Digital Currencies: Funny Money That Will Destroy What’s Left Of Private Property, Free Markets, & Personal Liberty

    Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute,

    During the Cold War, the East-West divide was commonly portrayed as pitting communism against capitalism. The Soviet Union, its satellites, and allies operated command economies in which centralized authorities directed the allocation of resources, agricultural production, and industrial manufacturing of the State. The United States and the Western Bloc championed liberal democratic norms and free markets. That division, of course, was always too simplistic. Not only did the US support third-world dictatorships when doing so would produce strategic advantages against the USSR, but also the demarcation between free and controlled markets was never so plainly cut-and-dried.

    When young students learn the basics of capitalism, they are taught about markets in which people may freely bargain for the exchange of goods and services according to their personal needs and interests. They are taught that privately-owned property is the hallmark of capitalism and the key distinction separating that system from various socialist and communist economic systems in which property is variously shared among the people or owned exclusively by the State.

    When young students mature, however, they realize that throughout the West, private ownership and free markets are neither quite so private nor free. Property may best be understood as a bundle of sticks tied up together with a bow. In an economic system in which what you own is yours and no-one else’s, all those sticks stay bundled together tightly. However, when others have an independent claim on what you “own,” then one by one, those sticks come undone.

    You might think you own your home after you have made every payment, but what happens if you fail to pay local property taxes or refuse to grant the municipal government permission to build a sewer system below your dwelling? You will soon learn that any number of city administrators, revenue agents, state regulators, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats, public utilities commissioners, and even a motley crew of private citizens objecting to how you choose to use your property all believe that they have an ownership stake in what you own, too.

    In most places throughout the West, they would be right. Statutes, regulations, and tax obligations all encumber what you think is yours, and even when you have followed every law to the letter and paid every fee to the cent, there is still no guarantee that government agents will not later invoke eminent domain laws to swipe what you own because they believe they can use your private property more fruitfully for the “public good” – and, since Kelo v. New London, even for someone else’s private good. So much for private ownership.

    Likewise, free markets are hardly free from government intervention. Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and rules constrain the activities of every industry. Before starting any new business venture, an entrepreneur must consider a multitude of State-imposed restrictions: What kinds of products may be bought and sold? What kinds of raw materials must go into those products? What types of government permits must first be obtained? What types of skilled employees are required to do the work? How long are those employees allowed to be on the job? What safety and industry standards must be followed? What means of transportation may be utilized to move finished products from one location to another? In what types of storage can those products be kept? What downstream customers may legally purchase goods? Can those goods cross national borders without violating international treaties or national security restrictions? Bargained-for exchange of goods and services is hardly simple when rules and regulations govern every part of the market transaction and the failure to abide by those rules results in fines, lost inventories, delays, or even criminal punishment.

    Young students of capitalism learn that markets operate according to the laws of supply and demand, through which Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” guides both the production and prices of finished goods. When demand for a particular product is high, its price will rise. When prices rise, new entrepreneurs will enter the market and produce new supplies. When those entrepreneurs compete against each other, their desire to attract customers creates a natural incentive for them to construct the best possible products in the most efficient ways at the lowest cost. Competition, in theory, forces markets to naturally discard bad and expensive products, while keeping the prices of the best products low.

    In practice, however, mature students of capitalism understand that entrepreneurs are never in search of markets for competition but rather conditions for maintaining monopoly. Wherever and whenever producers may make and sell goods free from competing sellers, they alone determine the quality and price of their product. When their product is something that consumers must have, monopolists control the market. That is how real fortunes are made. The end result is that capitalists are always in pursuit of ways in which they may take advantage of laws and regulations, specialized knowledge, government contracts, or other exclusionary mechanisms to restrict potential competitors from ever entering the market. There is nothing “invisible” about the ways in which large corporations and financial conglomerates use their leverage to prevent smaller firms from ever challenging their dominion. In this way, most markets could hardly be described as entirely “free.”

    If neither private property nor free markets exist outside of abstraction, the rise of fiat national currencies — whereby gold money has been replaced with government-imposed, innately-worthless paper notes — has only exacerbated the problem. The usefulness of money over traditional bartering for goods and services comes from its three chief functions providing (1) a unit of account, (2) a store of value, and (3) a medium of exchange. When sound money exists within society, market transactions are easy and trade flourishes. Rather than trying to determine how many rabbit pelts might be worth a slab of beef or bushel of wheat or lawyer’s expertise, consumers save time and energy by using standard monetary instruments that are easy to hold and transport and have consistent value. Although everything from pearls and shells to teeth and bones have been used as forms of money, gold has remained the, well, gold standard of money across cultures for thousands of years. Possessing a stable value over time due to its relative scarcity and human beings’ shared perception of its innate worth, gold has provided an ideal medium of exchange. That is why so many standard currencies throughout history and from nations and cultures around the globe have been minted coins made of precise measurements of this precious metal.

    By slowly replacing the use of gold coins with mandated paper currencies, however, nation states have engaged in a bit of hocus-pocus to conjure funny money out of thin air. Although the particular order of events has been different for different nations over the last century and a half, the important steps have all been the same: First, some form of paper money is introduced and backed by the government’s promise to pay the holder of each note a fixed sum in gold or silver. Next, the introduction of a private central bank comes into existence holding a de facto monopoly power to print paper money according to its best judgment for maintaining a healthy national economy. Finally, the gold or silver backing of those paper money currencies is revoked.

    Throughout the West, that slow but steady transition from money with innate value to currencies with no innate value has operated like a long con against the public. People were conditioned to use paper money over the course of decades; the supply of and demand for paper money was decoupled from Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”; and government mandates precluded citizens from returning to the universally stable mediums of exchange that gold and silver have long provided. Abracadabra, Western treasuries and central banks replaced free markets securely denominated in fixed quantities of gold with centrally controlled paper currency markets that distort the value of anything privately owned.

    This rather Machiavellian switcheroo has enabled governments to spend money like drunken sailors precisely because central banks right across the street will buy up their debt and facilitate the printing of more money. How could politicians object to an arrangement that allows them to spend recklessly without any normal free market consequences? On the contrary, decades of currency printing has only artificially inflated the prices of houses, stocks, and other assets denominated in those paper notes — giving ordinary citizens the false impression that some of what they own is gaining value. If a house today is now twenty times more expensive than in 1950, however, it just might have something to do with the fact that the U.S. dollar has lost over 97% of its value since the private Federal Reserve central bank came into existence in 1913 and the United States slowly but surely decoupled its currency from gold backing during the course of the next sixty years. Housing prices have certainly risen, but any savings in U.S. dollars have gone up in smoke. So much for the stored value of money.

    Now with the central banks printing money and reckless government spending pushing Western economic systems to the brink, a new kind of financial hocus-pocus has been proposed: central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). The idea is that consumers and producers will transact entirely in virtual currencies that do not physically exist outside of the stored memories of interconnected machines. If replacing sound gold monies with worthless paper was not bad enough, now worthless paper will be replaced with the ephemeral ones and zeroes of computer code. What could possibly go wrong?

    Put aside the financial system’s fragile house of cards destabilizing global markets today and central banks’ suicidal penchant for playing Russian roulette with eight billion lives linked through common dependence on money. Instead, consider what the transition to CBDCs would mean for the West. Succinctly put, any lingering Cold War distinctions between capitalism and communism would vanish.

    If governments and central banks control the creation, distribution, and exchange of virtual money, whatever remains of free markets will disappear. If governments and central banks monitor every transaction between consumers and producers, then all industries will be subjugated to the centralized command of the State. If governments and central banks assert the legal power to determine who may store value, how much value may be personally stored, and how long that value will be permitted to last, then whatever remains of private property will cease to exist. If governments and central banks maintain a digital monopoly over the only legalized forms of money, then they may redistribute wealth or penalize personal behavior without regard for individual rights or limits to their control.

    The same surveillance systems and social credit scores that are already pervasive in communist China will invariably become pervasive throughout the formerly free West, as well.

    No doubt propaganda campaigns will cloak this oppressive monitoring in the West’s own “politically correct” language of fighting “hate” or “racism” or “climate change” or the next COVID-like scare, but the West’s system of control over its citizens will be no different from the Chinese communist version: Individuals will have their digital wealth confiscated or replenished according to whether their behavior conforms to the strictures of the State. Free markets, free will, free speech, and even free thoughts will be regulated just as easily as central banks regulate each citizen’s digital wealth. In effect, the implementation of CBDCs will give Western governments the ultimate monopoly over every life within their dominion.

    For too long Westerners have remained quiet while market competition has given way to government-sanctioned monopoly, and private property has transformed into something much less personal or secure. The funny money of paper currencies has destroyed most ordinary Westerners’ savings, while artificially inflating the prices of stocks and other assets increasingly beyond the reach of many. Now an overhaul of the financial system and a transition to mandated CBDCs threaten what remains of Westerners’ personal liberties. Before the last vestiges of the Cold War’s ideological dichotomy evaporate and nothing remains to distinguish East from West, this is the time for friends of freedom to stand and be counted. For while Klaus Schwab may desire a future where Westerners find happiness in owning nothing, those who value liberty know that personal ownership and the unfettered exchange of goods, services, and ideas remain the bedrock of those free nations that refuse to be enslaved.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 22:20

  • Which States Allow The Permitless Carry Of Guns?
    Which States Allow The Permitless Carry Of Guns?

    In July, Florida will become the 26th state in the U.S. that isn’t requiring a permit to carry a concealed gun in public.

    As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation last week finalizing the change. In recent years, more and more states have enacted similar legislation, but the case of Florida is significant as it still outlaws the open carry of guns – typically only common in a few states that have very strict gun legislation.

    Infographic: Which States Allow the Permitless Carry of Guns? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    All other 25 states that allow permitless concealed carry also allow permitless open carry. Alabama was the latest to implement no carry permits at all on Jan. 1, 2023, preceded by Indiana, Georgia and Ohio in 2022 and Utah, Montana, Iowa, Tennessee, Arkansas and Texas in 2021. The change in Indiana made headlines as it occurred just two weeks before a deadly mass shooting at a mall in an Indianapolis suburb, where a gunman killed three and wounded two more before being shot dead by a bystander who also carried a gun.

    For many decades, Vermont was the only state with these types of laws, which is why the practice is sometimes also referred to as “Vermont carry”. In 2011, Wyoming was the first state to enact or re-introduce similar laws.

    Throughout the U.S., there are eight states requiring permits for open and concealed carry. Another three (plus Washington D.C.) require permits for concealed carry and prohibit the open carry of most guns. 13 states allow the open carry of guns without a permit while requiring one for concealed carry (no states do it the other way around).

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 22:00

  • Toxic Indiana Fire Will Spew Smoke, Soot, And Ash For Days; Officials Say
    Toxic Indiana Fire Will Spew Smoke, Soot, And Ash For Days; Officials Say

    Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times,

    A “serious, large-scale” industrial fire spewing toxic smoke that forced the evacuation of more than 2,000 residents of Richmond, Indiana, on Tuesday will burn for several days, authorities say.

    As of late Tuesday night, the blaze was under control and not expected to spread.

    However, the Wayne County Emergency Management Agency (EMA) said in an update that the fire will keep burning and producing smoke, soot, and ash for several more days. This is due to the nature of the fire and the fuel it was burning.

    The fire was located at the former Hoffco factory, located 70 miles east of Indianapolis and near the Ohio border. Plastics and other materials were being stored for recycling or resale at the factory, which ceased operations in 2009.

    Individuals within 0.5 miles of the fire were required to evacuate, while those outside the zone sheltering in place were urged to turn off their HVAC units, keep all windows and doors closed, and bring their pets inside.

    The Wayne County EMA urged residents to follow these instructions as soon as possible to ensure their safety, as it was unclear how long it would take to contain the blaze.

    Some residents from nearby areas have been sharing photos on social media of debris. Authorities have cautioned against disturbing or touching any debris, as it was unknown what chemicals may or may not be on the debris.

    Videos of a giant, black plume were also circulating on social media. The exact health impacts of the fire and smoke were unknown as of late Tuesday since officials were unsure of what had burned.

    The Wayne County EMA’s alert noted that the primary concerns were for respiratory issues, including shortness of breath, irritated skin, and burning or irritated eyes. Those with respiratory issues were advised to be especially cautious and seek medical advice or evaluation if breathing troubles arise.

    Smoke rises from an industrial fire at 358 NW F Street, in Richmond, Ind., on April 11, 2023. (Zach Piatt/The Palladium-Item via AP)

    Evacuation

    At the scene, the Indiana State Fire Marshall warned that the smoke was “definitely toxic.” However, no injuries have yet been reported.

    “This fire is going to burn for a few days,” the state’s fire marshall added, Fox 59 reported.

    Late Tuesday night, Richmond Mayor Dave Snow took to Twitter to say that operations would continue overnight, and a bus would remain on hand to assist with evacuation needs.

    He also said he is in constant communication with the Fire Department, Police Department, and Wayne County Emergency Management Agency, and will continue to provide updates as they become available.

    Earlier, the mayor cautioned residents to avoid the area if possible while first responders attempt to get the blaze under control, describing it as “dangerous.”

    Snow shared an evacuation map on Twitter.

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

    Snow said the facility was ordered to clean up and remediate the site due to the fire hazard posed by the way the materials were being stored.

    The fire started in a tractor-trailer parked on the site and quickly spread. The cause is not yet known. Numerous units are present at the scene to contain the fire.

    Wind from the west blew black smoke across the state border into Ohio. Bethesda Worship Center in Richmond offered temporary shelter for people forced out of their homes while other agencies were trying to arrange hotel rooms as needed.

    State and federal regulators were present at the scene to assess air quality and other environmental impacts.

    The mayor of Richmond, which has a population of 35,000, also said Tuesday that the fire had been contained on the city’s northwest side, with efforts being made to prevent it from spreading to the East side.

    The Wayne County EMA said the investigation surrounding the fire would take several weeks and span multiple agencies.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 21:40

  • Mayor Adams And NYPD Unveil Dystopian Robot Dog To Fight Crime
    Mayor Adams And NYPD Unveil Dystopian Robot Dog To Fight Crime

    Mayor Eric Adams and the New York City Police Department have reintroduced the controversial robotic dog for surveillance patrols, and there’s another surprise this time: an R2-D2-style robot. These robots are set to debut in Times Square, making this already bustling area of the city appear even more than dystopian ever. 

    According to local news ABC 7, Mayor Adams said Tuesday he is modernizing the NYPD with the latest technology to fight crime. 

    “We are scanning the globe to find technology that will assure this city is safe,” the mayor said. 

    The return of the $74,000 Boston Dynamics’ four-legged robotic dog called “Digidog” is set to assist the NYPD in investigating high-risk or hazardous incidents. Digidog first appeared on the streets in 2020 and was shelved months later after civil rights advocates called the technology ‘aggressive policing.’ 

    Besides the robotic canine, the NYPD will add a K5 Autonomous Security Robot to its force and the StarChase GPS system. 

    Think of the K5 robot as Robocop; Its R2-D2 style with real-time situational awareness and cameras will allow the NYPD to monitor streets. There’s yet to be a word if the police will be operating facial tracking software from the robot’s cameras… 

    “This K5 robot provides real-time situational awareness and actionable intelligence to first responders and also provides a physical crime deterrence,” Chief of Department Jeffrey Maddrey said. 

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

    And then there’s the StarChase GPS system, which allows police, in a hand-held or vehicle-mounted launcher, to track a tagged vehicle remotely. 

    “We want the public to know that the use of these technologies will be transparent, consistent, and always done in collaboration with the people that we serve.

    “And as with every NYPD initiative, we will continuously evaluate their use and impact on our city. Our job is to fight crime and keep people safe. And these tools are significant steps forward in that vital mission,” Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell.

    If you’re curious about how the StarChase GPS system works. Watch this:

    The introduction of these new technologies coincides with a rise in crime in New York City amid a worsening police shortage.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 21:20

  • California Reparations: A 'Blueprint For America'?
    California Reparations: A ‘Blueprint For America’?

    Authored by Chris Talgo via AmericanThinker.com,

    Like many deep-blue states, California has its share of deep-rooted problems. From a surge in violent crime, homelessness, and drug overdoses to a giant budget shortfall, a population exodus, and a power grid on the brink of collapse, the Golden State is suffering from multiple crises.

    Yet, instead of addressing these problems and actually making life better for the 39 million Americans who currently live in California, Golden State lawmakers are focused on identity politics in the form of a comprehensive reparations plan that one California lawmaker says, “will be a blueprint for America.”

    So, what does the California Reparations Task Force (CRTF) “blueprint for America” look like?

    For starters, the CRTF seeks to provide all eligible Black Californians with a lump sum payment of $5 million. On top of that, eligible residents would also receive “free” college, “free” housing, and total debt forgiveness, among several other government goodies.

    According to California Reparations Task Force Chair Kamilah Moore, “I hope that… this task force sets a precedent not only for what other states can do… but, of course, the federal government as well because it’s primarily the federal government’s responsibility. They are the entity that has the big enough purse, for instance, to close the wealth gap, and so I do think that the task force is headed in the right direction in terms of that precedent-setting.”

    If Moore gets her wish, and other states follow California down the reparations road, the economic and social repercussions would be terrible. If the federal government were to embark on a similar quest, it would spell the end of America as we know it.

    First, it must be stated that slavery never existed in California. In fact, California was a free state that fought alongside the Union against the Confederacy during the Civil War. That alone should make the reparations conversation in California moot.

    Second, California (and every other state for that matter) does not have billions of dollars at its disposal to redistribute to a sliver of its population. Currently, California’s population is 39 percent Hispanic, 35 percent White, 5 percent Asian, and 4 percent Black. Is it fair to force 95 percent of Californians, all of whom had absolutely nothing to do with a reprehensible institution that was outlawed more than 150 years ago, to pay enormous sums of money to 4 percent of the population simply based on their skin color? Of course not. Actually, that is the very essence of racism.

    Third, if California lawmakers really wanted to help its Black residents and close the wealth gap, one-time payments and other government handouts will not make the situation better, it arguably will make it worse.

    Consider. Since the start of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “war on poverty,” the federal government has spent $22 trillion on various wealth redistribution programs. Yet, over that span, the rate of poverty remains unchanged.

    Perhaps this is because giving some people other people’s money is an incentive for the former to remain indolent. In other words, government checks breed dependence on government.

    On the other hand, if California lawmakers were actually interested in addressing the plight of many of the Black residents who live in the Golden State, they ought to take a forward-looking approach that would include an increased police presence, a tough on crime approach, lower taxes, fewer regulations, and commonsense policies that would make energy affordable and abundant.

    And, if these same lawmakers were really audacious and genuinely wanted to throw a wrench into the cycle of poverty that has entrapped so many Black Californians, they would do everything in their power to ensure that universal school choice was the norm in the Golden State. It also would help if these so-called leaders addressed the elephant in the room: the breakdown of the Black family, which is arguably the biggest driver of poverty and so many other societal problems.

    However, these are difficult conversations for leftist lawmakers, who always view more government wealth redistribution as the answer to everything. It is much easier for politicians to propose a superficial solution, like reparation payments, even though time has shown that giving people money doesn’t solve deep-seated, complex problems.

    I hope the rest of the country does not follow California’s lead on this issue. Once upon a time, Americans flocked to California because it was the land of freedom and opportunity. Today, Americans are fleeing California because it has become the land of big government socialism and identity politics. Suffice to say, this is not the path that other states, or the federal government, want to tread.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 21:00

  • Ken Griffin Donates $300 Million To Harvard
    Ken Griffin Donates $300 Million To Harvard

    Citadel founder Ken Griffin is making a monster, $300 million donation to his alma mater, Harvard University. Griffin first started his hedge fund while at the university in his dormatory, Yahoo wrote this week, and the donation brings his total gifts to the school to over $500 million. 

    The school’s 150-year-old Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) will be on the receiving end of the donation. The FAS oversees undergraduate and PhD programs, as well as athethics, museums and libraries, the report said. The FAS will be renamed the Harvard Kenneth C. Griffin Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the report says.

    Harvard President Larry Bacow (pictured depositing the check below) said: “Ken’s exceptional generosity and steadfast devotion enable excellence and opportunity at Harvard.”

    The $300 million number pales in comparison to Griffin’s $35 billion net worth. He previously donated $150 million to Harvard in 2014 which was, at the time, the single largest gift to undergraduate financial aid, Yahoo wrote. They reported that his “total philanthropic giving” is now approaching $2 billion. 

    Harvard’s endowment now stands at a stunning $51 billion, as of the end of 2022. Other large gifts it has received include a $500 million gift from Mark Zuckerberg and $400 million from John Paulson. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 20:40

  • Who Is Running Stanford?
    Who Is Running Stanford?

    Authored by Greg Jacobs via The Stanford Daily,

    I was disappointed in 2021 to read that Stanford had been sued by a number of its athletes when the school, without warning, told them it had decided to drop 11 varsity sports teams. Those sports included men’s volleyball, wrestling and rowing. Women were to lose sports like synchronized swimming, rowing and fencing. President Marc Tessier-Lavigne, Provost Persis Drell and Athletic Director Bernard Muir said the cut was a budget necessity, and was needed to keep Stanford “competitive” with other schools. That turned out not to be true. In fact, the school rejected alumni financing of the sports. I was further angered when I read that Tessier-Lavigne may have co-authored a number of scientific papers with “manipulated images.” I was then saddened to read about Stanford soccer player Katie Meyer, who had committed suicide last March after a badly botched disciplinary action Stanford attempted to take against her. Her parents filed a lawsuit against Stanford in October. 

     

    These are some of the more serious scandals involving the school in the last three years. There have been less severe missteps taken by those who are supposedly in the business of running an elite, world renowned university, but even these smaller mistakes seem to indicate a larger problem. One of my classmates (I graduated in 1970) complains that the administration is of late “rudderless,” stumbling from one crisis to another. He may not make his annual donation to the school as a result. I think it is time to ask: exactly who manages Stanford? And how are they making decisions? Is it the President? The Board of Trustees? Or a small group of individuals known only to a few?

    By themselves, some recent actions taken by Stanford were somewhat humorous. The school has been the butt of jokes by The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and numerous other major and local papers. For example, the IT department came out with its “Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative” to be used on its websites. The national media had a field day with this action, especially when it recommended no longer using the word “American.”   

    Some folks may have found humor in the suspension of the Stanford Tree after the Washington State home football game, when the Tree displayed the now widely-viewed hand-made “Stanford Hates Fun” banner (oh, there goes the band again). I did not find humor in the suspension because the Tree was telling the truth (please see the article “Stanford’s War on Social Life” in the Palladium Magazine by a graduate student, Ginevra Davis, who makes a strong case for the fact that Stanford’s administration has arbitrarily and quietly clamped down on student social activities since 2012). The Tree was suspended by a “faceless student committee” assisted by the band’s musical director. Not only that, students coming to the next home football game were searched, and even had to lift their shirts to see if they had “objectionable banners.” 

    For more serious misconduct by Stanford, I encourage Daily readers to look at the contents of the lawsuit filed by the 240 students who were members of the 11 sports Stanford wanted to cut without any warning. Stanford changed its tune when a lawsuit was filed, alleging a lot of embarrassing conduct by Stanford, and reinstated all of the sports. The student lawsuit, “Guden, Bicknell, Lietzke, Stemmet et al v. the Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University (aka Stanford),” alleged that for years the school had planned to drop those sports, but did not tell any students.

    The more recent lawsuit, which is even more upsetting, has been filed by the parents of Katie Meyer, who state that Stanford acted improperly in its attempt to discipline Katie, a member of the women’s soccer team. Katie supposedly spilled coffee on a Stanford varsity football player who assaulted a friend of hers (he got to play out the season, and was never disciplined). Stanford knew that Katie was struggling after she was brought into Stanford’s byzantine and draconian student discipline process. On the last day, or actually the evening of the last day Katie could be disciplined, Stanford sent an email to her saying they were placing her diploma on hold three months short of graduation, and proceeding to a disciplinary hearing. Her parents claim she could have lost her student status, her membership on the soccer team, her captainship of the team and other benefits of a Stanford degree. She desperately tried to contact a Stanford representative, but it was after hours, and there was only a phone number to call. No one answered. Notify her at night when no one is around? This seems cowardly and unfair. She took her own life later that night. 

    For many years now, Stanford had decided that the student disciplinary process was too harsh. So what did Stanford do? It studied the issue. There had been many complaints from students, parents, mental health professionals and even Stanford faculty that the process needed an overhaul. Unfortunately for Katie, it was never done. Meyers v. Stanford alleges, if true, incredibly heartless conduct by Stanford.  

    Stanford has, in fact, changed. It has clamped down on all forms of student social activity on campus, starting with fraternities and the Stanford band. In doing so, the school has not even met minimal standards of good management in dealing with its most precious resource, the students. What is going on? Maybe the following can shed some light. Athletic Director Muir came in 2014, from a college where he cut a number of sports teams. He failed to make the same kind of cut here. Persis Drell, Dean of the School of Engineering from 2014-17, and Provost since 2017, tried to cut funding to the Stanford University Press in 2019, but withdrew in the face of widespread criticism. She said she had not “anticipated the reaction” to her decision. And along with Muir, she failed to cut the 11 Stanford teams. The University has even hired a former Harvard administrator to clamp down on student activities here, after he unsuccessfully tried to do so at Harvard, only when he was faced with a lawsuit (Sound familiar?).

    President Tessier-Lavigne was hired by Stanford, I assume by the trustees, in 2016, despite a cloud over him from allegations of improper research publications dating back some years. The Board was forced to investigate those claims recently, when The Daily raised the issue. The Board of Trustees started to do its own investigation, but The Daily found out that one of the trustees had invested 18 million dollars in Tessier-Lavigne’s business. 

    So, I ask, who is running Stanford?

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 20:20

  • "Burned Alive:" Explosion Kills 18,000 Cows In Texas
    “Burned Alive:” Explosion Kills 18,000 Cows In Texas

    A dairy farm in Texas was rocked by a massive explosion that resulted in the deaths of thousands of cattle, reported local media outlet KFDA. 

    Fire crews in Dimmitt, Texas, responded to an explosion and fire that engulfed multiple building structures at South Fork Dairy on Monday evening. Reports suggest over 18,000 cattle were killed in the blaze.

    Castro County Sheriff Sal Rivera said the fire resulted from an explosion that spread to the building where the cows are housed before bringing them into the milking area and holding pen. 

    KFDA quoted the Animal Welfare Institute, saying this is the deadliest barn fire in Texas since 2013. 

    “We hope the industry will remain focused on this issue and strongly encourage farms to adopt commonsense fire safety measures.

    “It is hard to imagine anything worse than being burned alive,” Margie Fishman, Public Relations Manager with AWF. 

    Videos of the explosion are absolutely shocking. 

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

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

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

    Add this explosion to the long list of unexplainable fires at food processing plants in the past 12 months. 

    Following the dozens of fires, some Americans are raising concerns about the durability of food supply chains. Some have gone as far as ask: Is America’s food industry being sabotaged?

    Think about it, no fake meat or soy plants are mysteriously catching on fire… 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 20:00

  • Trump Vows To 'Never Drop Out' Of 2024 Race, Even If Convicted
    Trump Vows To ‘Never Drop Out’ Of 2024 Race, Even If Convicted

    Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Former President Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla., on Jan. 31, 2022. (The Epoch Times)

    No matter how many accusations Democrats throw at him, former President Donald Trump vows to keep campaigning for the 2024 presidential election.

    “I would never drop out. It’s not my thing. I wouldn’t do it,” Trump declared on Tuesday during his first post-indictment interview. He spoke from his home at Mar-A-Lago, Florida, with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson for over an hour.

    Trump also revealed some behind-the-scenes details of his court appearance a week ago in New York.

    Trump said court employees grew emotional as they put a former president through the machinations of criminal booking procedures for the first time in U.S. history.

    “They signed me in, and I’ll tell you: People were crying, people that work there, professional workers that have no problems putting in murderers,” Trump said.

    Former President Donald Trump arrives at court in New York on April 4, 2023. (Mary Altaffer/AP Photo)

    He pleaded not guilty to 34 criminal charges in a Manhattan courtroom. Trump is accused of falsifying business records in violation of state law and in furtherance of an unspecified underlying crime.

    In his interview with Carlson, the Republican former president also said that the Democrat-led prosecution is a “weaponization of our justice system.”

    Trump said it’s the latest example in a seven-year string of bogus investigations targeting him, all intended to sabotage his political endeavors.

    Trump  described the Manhattan court’s criminal charges booking area as “a tough, tough place,” but said the court employees were apologetic for having to “do certain things.”

    He called the court workers “phenomenal” and said that, even though his arraignment represented a sad day for him and for America, “in one sense, it was beautiful,” because of how the employees treated him.

    But, Trump said, in another sense, it was “nasty.” Wryly, Trump remarked that nothing in his past experience prepared him for that procedure.

    “I went to the Wharton School of Finance … We didn’t have a class on an arraignment,” he said.

    Those court employees and the American people can see through the “hoaxes” that are still being perpetrated against him, Trump said.

    During the first two years of his presidency, 2017-2019, Trump was investigated on false allegations that he conspired with Russians to sway the 2016 election in his favor.

    That investigation crippled U.S.-Russia relations, Trump told Carlson.

    ‘Disinformation’

    Trump said Democrats are “the party of disinformation.” He was responding to some Democrats asserting that if Trump is again selected as the Republican presidential nominee, President Joe Biden or another Democrat could beat him in the 2024 election.

    “So what they say is, ‘We want to run against Trump,’” when they actually would prefer not to face him as a presidential contender, Trump said. People need to know that Democrats often say the “opposite” of what they really want, he said.

    Support for Trump has seemed to increase since the FBI conducted an unprecedented raid on his Mar-A-Lago residence in August and climbed further after his indictment, Carlson acknowledged.

    And, at his recent speeches and the March 25 rally in Waco, Texas, held under a cloud of the looming indictment, support for him hasn’t waned, he said.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 19:40

  • San Francisco City Hall Meeting On Crime Canceled After Vandalism Knocks Out Internet
    San Francisco City Hall Meeting On Crime Canceled After Vandalism Knocks Out Internet

    San Francisco is experiencing a surge in crime, despite leadership in the progressive-run town attempting to persuade everyone that the city is safe. The latest incident, and you can’t make this stuff up, involved vandalism of communication infrastructure near City Hall that caused a meeting to be canceled. 

    According to The San Francisco Standard, a Tuesday meeting of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors was postponed after a telecommunications box had been “completely destroyed” down the street from the San Francisco City Hall building. 

    “A fiber enclosure in an underground vault was completely destroyed, disrupting services to customers served by that portion of Comcast’s network.

    “Comcast is working quickly and diligently to restore services for customers impacted by the damage to our network,” a spokesperson for Comcast told the Standard. 

    Tech entrepreneur David Sachs tweeted about the incident, saying, “Can’t make this stuff up.” 

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

    Sacks has also called on the state of California to address the problem of random violent crime (read: here & here). 

    As crime rates continue to rise, progressives have chosen to ignore the issue. However, the situation has become so alarming that even members of the Democratic party are beginning to criticize their own party’s approach to the matter.

    State Sen. Scott Wiener tweeted this:

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

    The vandalism of telecommunications infrastructure comes amid a broader discussion of crime in the failing liberal city. On Tuesday, the Downtown Whole Foods Market announced it would soon be closing, citing concerns over out-of-control thefts. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 19:20

  • Illinois Trucking Company's Sudden Shutdown Leaves Team Drivers Stranded, Unpaid
    Illinois Trucking Company’s Sudden Shutdown Leaves Team Drivers Stranded, Unpaid

    By Clarissa Hawes of FreightWaves

    Team drivers for Cromex Inc. of Villa Park, Illinois, say things were looking bleak after they were stranded in a Chicago-area hotel for three days more than 1,000 miles from home without a paycheck or a truck until a truckers outreach organization offered to pay their rental car expenses to get them home to Jacksonville, Florida. 

    On Tuesday, the team drivers were headed home thanks to a nonprofit group, Truckers Emergency Assistance Responders (TEAR), after the drivers feared being homeless in Illinois when their funds ran out.

    The father-and-son team, with a combined 24 years of driving experience under their belts, said Danijel [or Daniel] Krizanac, owner of Cromex, “ghosted” them after returning their tractor-trailer to the carrier’s yard on Friday, as they waited for a different truck to drive, which never arrived. 

    Neither did their paychecks, which amounted to about $3,000 for two weeks’ pay and reimbursement for the hotel they booked to wait for their new truck to be out of the shop. 

    “It was all empty promises,” said the younger trucker, who asked to be identified by his Twitter handle @RunnTDC or by SuperHussle. “I thought we were friends but now he’s in the wind and he’s not going to respond to me anymore. He’s blocked all of our numbers.”

    His dad did not want to be named or interviewed for the article for fear of retaliation. 

    Co. drivers paid as 1099 contractors

    At one point, SuperHussle, who said the pair operated as company drivers but were paid as 1099 contractors, asked Krizanac if they could move personal items they cleared out of their other truck, check out of the hotel and stay in the new truck until it was finished amid dwindling funds. 

    Krizanac’s response back to the drivers was: “Company is bankrupt and closed, bro. Trucks went back to [the] bank,” according to one of the text messages shared with FreightWaves.

    As of publication on Wednesday, FreightWaves was unable to confirm that Cromex Inc. had filed for bankruptcy. 

    Cromex listed 15 power units and 16 drivers when it updated its MCS-150 form in October 2022, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s SAFER website. 

    However, one of the drivers said that number had dropped to around five trucks in the months leading up to the closure.

    Over the past 24 months, Cromex’s trucks had been inspected 20 times, and six had been placed out of service for a 30% out-of-service rate. That is higher than the industry’s national average of around 22%, according to FMCSA data.

    The company’s drivers had been inspected 43 times and three were placed out of service, resulting in a 7% out-of-service rate. The national average for drivers is about 6.6%.

    The firm’s trucks have been involved in three crashes, including one with injuries and two towaways over the past 24 months.  

    The father-and-son team has driven for Cromex twice — once for six months and the second time for almost a year. 

    “The first time we left after six months was because the truck was in the shop more than it was on the road and we barely made any money,” SuperHussle said. “We came back to Cromex when the company we moved to started to not make money or pay on time.”

    When asked when he and his dad would be paid and why he gave up the truck, Krizanac responded, “Because I lose money running your a** on a truck [with] payment.”

    He also texted the drivers, “You won’t get sh** now and find a new job.”

    Daniel Krizanac and his wife, Ervina Krizanac, failed to respond to FreightWaves’ messages seeking comment.

    As Cromex closes, new company opens

    According to Illinois secretary of state business filings, Cromex Inc. was incorporated by Danijel Krizanac in April 2017 but isn’t in good standing after failing to file an annual report.

    Illinois business filings state that Ervina Krizanac recently opened a trucking company called Boscro Cargo in Evanston, Illinois, with its operating authority being reinstated on March 31. According to FMCSA data, Boscro is using the same DOT and motor carrier numbers as another company she owns, Royal Queen Trans Inc., which had its operating authority revoked in March 2018. 

    Before his number was blocked, SuperHussle said he sent a final plea to the company owner to pay him and his dad because they didn’t have the funds to make it back home.

    Daniel Krizanac’s response was to “figure it out and start making calls for a new job,” SuperHussle said.

    “Since the market went into the tank, he can’t pay us on time, if at all, and now he just lured us up here under false pretenses to dump us in the street, literally,” SuperHussle said.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 19:00

  • All Eyes On Ukraine-Related Talk As Lula Arrives In China, But Trade To Dominate
    All Eyes On Ukraine-Related Talk As Lula Arrives In China, But Trade To Dominate

    Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has arrived in China Wednesday where he’s expected to meet with President Xi Jinping and join Beijing’s to push for peace in Ukraine, which Washington officials have dismissed as an insincere and empty ploy (that is, Xi’s 12-point peace plan), given Russia and China’s political closeness of late.

    Brazil is China’s biggest trading partner, thus it could prove Lula’s most consequential foreign trip of his presidency. The two leaders are expected to sign at least 20 bilateral agreements during Lula’s two-day stay – a trip that will also be watched closely in the West.

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

    “Lula wants Brazil, China and other nations to help mediate the war as part of his nation’s return to the world stage, but his proposals to end the conflict have irked Ukraine and some in the West,” AP observes. “Less controversial is the Brazilian and Chinese mutual interest in trade after a rocky period under Lula’s predecessor.”

    “I want the Chinese to understand that their investment here will be wonderfully welcome, but not to buy our companies. To build new things, which we need,” Lula told Brazilian journalists days ahead of the trip. Brazil each year ships tens of billions of dollars worth of soybeans, poultry, sugar cane, beef, iron ore, pulp, cotton and crude oil to China.

    But more closely watched on a global level will be any statement put out related to the war in Ukraine, given that both China and Brazil alongside Russia are BRICS members, aimed at pushing back against the U.S.-dominated system of how global affairs are managed.

    But there are signs that Ukraine won’t be center state during talks, as CNN quotes one regional analyst to say…

    While Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has dominated much diplomatic conversation in Europe and in Washington, Lula’s official schedule doesn’t mention it, despite previous vows to discuss peacemaking strategies with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

    “From what I heard, removing Ukraine from the list of things that they’re going to discuss was a demand from the Chinese government,” says Igor Patrick, a research scholar at the Kissinger Institute on China at the Wilson Centre.

    “There’s still some interest from the Brazilian part to raise the issue and to discuss ideas, and they hope to release a joint statement where they mention the Ukrainian conflict, calls for a peaceful solution and mediated diplomatically, but it’s not officially on the program and to a large extent that was expectable,” Patrick told CNN.

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

    Brazil is among BRICS countries that while friendly to the US has refused to bow to Washington pressure to provide arms or defensive aid to Ukraine.

    Lula’s plane touched down in Shanghai Wednesday night, with the state visit slated to run to April 15.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 18:40

  • Peter Schiff: The World Is Starting To Divest Itself Of The Dollar
    Peter Schiff: The World Is Starting To Divest Itself Of The Dollar

    Via SchiffGold.com,

    In a surprise move earlier this month, OPEC announced further oil production cuts of about 1.16 million barrels per day. Analysts projected the cuts could raise the price of oil by $10 per barrel. Peter Schiff recently appeared on NewsMax’s Wake Up America and explained why these production cuts will further complicate the Federal Reserve’s efforts to fight price inflation, and more broadly, how global moves like this and others undermine the dollar.

    Peter called the production cuts “a very big deal” and said it is clearly complicating efforts to bring down price inflation — especially given the fact that we’re in the midst of another financial crisis.

    Not only is the supply of oil going to come down, but the supply of money – US dollars – used to buy oil is going up. The Fed has already gone back to quantitative easing to bail out the banks. So, we’re printing more money, but we’re not producing as much oil.”

    Compounding the problem is the fact that the world is starting to divest itself from US dollars.

    That will put more downward pressure on the value of the dollar, which of course will put more upward pressure on the price of oil.”

    Wake Up America host Carl Higbie noted that President Trump made energy independence a priority. Peter said it’s not just energy independence that is necessary.

    We need to be able to produce everything. We’re dependent on the rest of the world for everything that we consume because we no longer have the industrial capacity that we once enjoyed because of the policies that have been pursued for decades. We have too much regulation. We have too high taxes and too much government spending, and so we’re not producing what Americans consume. We rely on the rest of the world.”

    Peter pointed out that the only way the US can rely on the world as it does is because the dollar is the reserve currency.

    We may lose that privilege over the next several years, maybe even over the next few months. Who knows?”

    The BRICS nations recently announced plans for a new currency. Higbie asked what impact that could have even if it only usurps a small percentage of global trade in dollars. Peter said he thinks it would hurt “substantially.”

    And once they start moving in that direction, the pendulum is going to continue to swing. There are all sorts of reasons why the world should want to divest of dollars and no longer depend on the US dollar as a reserve currency, but we gave them another one. The Biden administration in slapping those economic sanctions on Russia really highlighted how dangerous it is to allow the United States to enjoy this privilege. And so, we have scared the world into divesting of dollars, something they should have done anyway because it was in their economic interest to do so.”

    Peter emphasized that the dollar’s role as the world currency is a huge privilege for the US that the rest of the world pays for.

    It enables Americans to live beyond our means. We’re able to consume all kinds of stuff that we did not produce. And the only reason we could do that is because we could print money that costs us nothing and our trading partners will accept that instead of actual goods. If we lose that privilege, our standard of living is going to implode.”

    Higbie asked Peter what he would tell Joe Biden to do if he had 30 seconds with the president.

    Well, he needs to resign. But he also needs to take Kamala Harris with him. But what we need is free market capitalism. We don’t need more government solutions to government-created problems. Government has to get out of the way so free market capitalism can clean up the mess government created.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/12/2023 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest