Today’s News 14th December 2024

• Global South's Energy Rebellion At COP29 Signals A New Future
  Global South’s Energy Rebellion At COP29 Signals A New Future

  Authored by Vijay Jayaraj via RealClearWire,

  The climate movement’s annual showpiece, the United Nation’s Conference of Parties (COP), held this year in Baku, Azerbaijan, has been exposed to an unprecedented level of disinterest—even dissent—from developing nations.

  

  Leaders of some of the world’s most resource-rich, economically aspiring countries have opted to sit this one out, sending only low-level delegates, if any. This is the latest signal of a growing resistance to an anti-fossil fuel “gospel” advanced by the United Nations.

  Last year’s COP28 in the Middle East, where oil wealth underpins entire economies, forced the climate community to confront its contradictions. Today, COP29 in central Asia continues this reckoning and presages the demise of an unscientific and anti-developmental policy framework wrecking global economies.

  Host of COP29 Educates Climate Woke Delegates

  The tone of COP29 itself is a marked departure from prior gatherings. In Azerbaijan, where oil and gas production are integral to the national economy, the summit’s host, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, called fossil fuels “a gift from God,” lauding their contribution to global prosperity and stability.

  Fossil fuels have moved from being a taboo “elephant in the room” to a subject of open discussion at COPs. The leaders of countries in Africa and Latin America are freely questioning the premise of banning their use of fossil fuels while much of the developed world continues to consume record amounts of coal, oil and natural gas. The notion that high-income nations can dictate the energy agenda is seen as a remnant of a power structure that primarily serves the interests of the world’s most privileged.

  The International Energy Agency projects that developing countries will see substantial growth in energy demand over the next decade, an expansion that cannot be met by renewables. Leaders in these regions understand that hydrocarbons are critical to achieving their development goals.

  Unprecedented Pullout From COP Conference and Resistance From Global South

  In a surprising move, Argentina’s newly elected president, Javier Gerardo Milei, withdrew his country’s 80-person delegation from Baku less than a third of the way into this year’s 11-day COP. He cited the need for pragmatic energy policies that encourage development rather than stymie it.

  For Milei, whose presidential campaign was based on a pro-business, anti-bureaucracy platform, the message is clear: Policy must serve the economic needs of his country first. Argentina’s ongoing energy crisis, its untapped shale gas reserves and a crippling economic situation demand a level-headed approach that prioritizes national interests over global climate ideals that are both batty and corrupt.

  Milei’s political philosophy resonates with a growing number of leaders in the Global South who view economic growth as paramount and recognize that access to energy is fundamental to achieving it.

  Argentina’s departure from COP29 is a turning point that should serve as a wake-up call to the U.N. and its allies. The time for one-size-fits-all mandates is over. The rigid orthodoxy of fossil fuel divestment pushed by the U.N. and wealthy nations is losing ground, challenged by leaders who refuse to sacrifice their national interests to a destructive agenda.

  For much of the Global South, the idea of an immediate energy transition remains, at best, aspirational and, at worst, profoundly out of touch. The reality is that fossil fuels still power 80 percent of global energy consumption. This isn’t just an inconvenient truth; it’s an inescapable basis of modern civilization that developing nations understand viscerally.

  As the COP29 circus concludes in Baku, the world is seeing the crumbling of the long-held illusion that a global transition to green energyis feasible, much less fair and desirable. Developing nations are proclaiming that they will not be deprived of necessary energy sources by nations that continue to feast on the very fossil fuels they frown upon. The disconnect between rhetoric and reality is stark, and developing countries are calling attention to it.

  Fossil fuels are not a relic of the past; for many countries, they are the key to a prosperous future—truly “a gift from God.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 23:25

• Russian Forces Positioned To Take Key City Of Pokrovsk As Ukrainian Manpower Falters
  Russian Forces Positioned To Take Key City Of Pokrovsk As Ukrainian Manpower Falters

  The key logistical hub of Ukraine’s eastern front, Pokrovsk has been under steady contention for the past three months. Russian forces have spent the better part of that time pushing westward to flank just south of the city.  They have now taken Kurakhove and cut off supply routes coming from Pokrovsk to a large portion of the front line.  Some reports indicate that Ukrainian troops trying to leave Kurakhove may be cut off.  The slow motion flanking maneuver has set the stage for Pokrovsk to be enveloped from the south.  

  

  Since the beginning of the war the area has been the primary staging ground for resupply of Ukrainian troops across the east.  After Pokrovsk is cut off or taken, it is expected that Russia will then be able to gain significant ground across the entire front and move closer to controlling all of Donetsk.  

  Losses for Ukraine have been stacking up in 2024 and lack of manpower has been the overarching theme.  Though numerous western officials and think-tanks (including The Institute For The Study of War) claim that Russian gains have been paid for with “massive casualties”, they’ve provided no concrete proof so far to support their stats.  The “Russian meat grinder” narrative is beginning to sound like a coping mechanism or propaganda as it becomes clear that Russia is gaining troop strength instead of losing momentum.

  

  (There has been similar propaganda surrounding mass casualties of North Korean troops in Kursk – There are still no verified reports or video footage of actual DPRK troops in combat against Ukraine.  Rumors abound, like the “Ghost of Kyiv”)

  What we do know is that Ukraine is desperate for new soldiers to refresh their defensive lines.  NATO leaders and the Biden White House have been putting pressure on Vladimir Zelensky to draft men from the 18-25 age bracket; a move Zelensky has avoided to prevent the complete loss of a generation.  The average age of conscripts is now well over 40 years old.  

  This may be why Joe Biden recently gave the green light for Ukraine to use long range missiles (ATACMs and Storm Shadows) within Russian territory.  Every time Ukraine faces a strategic failure, NATO offers up new weaponry as a public distraction.  They said Abrams tanks would be a game changer for Ukraine, then they said the F-16s would be a game changer.  Now they claim the long range strikes using smart weapons will be a game changer.

  Most military analysts agree that these weapons have had little effect on the course of the war.   

  Russia’s typical methodology for dealing with urban centers has been to surround and then bombard with artillery and FABs until the majority of buildings and defenses are rubble.  A renowned Ukrainian military officer, Serhii Filimonov, commander of the Da Vinci Wolves battalion of the 59th Motorised Brigade, described Pokrovsk’s defense as a “disaster”.  Senior officers are placing “unrealistic” demands on units and are unfamiliar with circumstances on the front line, Filimonov wrote on his Telegram channel this week.   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 23:00

• Amazon To Donate $1 Million to Trump's Inauguration Fund, Live Stream On Prime Video
  Amazon To Donate $1 Million to Trump’s Inauguration Fund, Live Stream On Prime Video

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Amazon said Thursday it will donate $1 million to President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration fund and an additional $1 million in-kind donation by live-streaming the historical event on Prime Video.

  

  Amazon’s announcement, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, coincided with news that Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, also contributed $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund.

  The move marks a shift for tech leaders who appear to want to improve the previously rocky relations with Trump, who will take office next month.

  Trump has previously criticized the Amazon- and Jeff Bezos-owned The Washington Post over political coverage. Bezos has publicly condemned some of Trump’s rhetoric and accused him of bias in a 2019 lawsuit over a $10 billion Pentagon contract.

  Bezos has recently softened his stance, expressing optimism about Trump’s second term and endorsing proposed regulatory reforms while at a business summit last week.

  Bezos and Trump are set to meet next week, potentially marking a turning point in their relationship.

  Amazon’s donation and live-streaming offer, as well as Meta’s donation, signal a strategic effort to improve relations with Trump and his incoming administration after years of tension.

  Trump’s relationship with Meta was strained by the suspension of his Facebook and Instagram accounts in January 2021, following the breach of the Capitol. The company attributed the deplatforming to what they said was Trump’s “praise for people engaged in violence at the Capitol on January 6.”

  The company restored his accounts in early 2023 and announced stiffer penalties for public figures who repeatedly violate its policies “in ways that incite or celebrate ongoing violent events or civil unrest.”

  This heightened scrutiny was later revoked on July 12, one day before the attempted assassination of Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

  Zuckerberg expressed praise for Trump following his brush with death, and called him.

  “Seeing Donald Trump get up after getting shot in the face and pump his fist in the air with the American flag is one of the most bad-[expletive] things I’ve ever seen in my life,” Zuckerberg told Bloomberg days after the shooting.

  Trump’s stance on Zuckerberg has also softened since the call, he revealed on the “Bussin’ With the Boys” podcast. Trump said during the interview that he appreciated the tech leader’s call and praised him for “staying out of the election.”

  This was a reference to the $400 million Zuckerberg and his wife donated $400 million to election offices around the country during the 2020 elections, with 90 percent directed toward Democrat-leaning counties in key swing states.

  In recent months, Zuckerberg has publicly supported some of Trump’s economic plans.

  Stephen Miller, Trump’s incoming deputy chief of staff for policy, has said Zuckerberg wants to support and assist the president-elect in implementing national reforms. The donation marks a turning point in the billionaires’ previously rocky relationship.

  The Associated Press and Samantha Flom contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 22:35

• Court Denies TikTok Request To Delay US Ban Set For Jan 19
  Court Denies TikTok Request To Delay US Ban Set For Jan 19

  By Catherine Yang of The Epoch Times

  

  A federal appeals court on Dec. 13 denied TikTok’s request to delay the Jan. 19, 2025, deadline for it to cut ties with the Chinese communist regime, shortly after the app filed its final argument for a delay.

  In an unsigned, expedited order, the three-judge panel denied the request and found there was no precedent for granting this type of request.

  TikTok, its parent company ByteDance, and a group of TikTok users had challenged the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA) that went into effect in April, arguing the law was unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. PAFACA forbids apps that operate in the United States from being owned by a foreign adversary. ByteDance argues that it is effectively a ban because the Chinese regime will not allow the sale of TikTok and its proprietary algorithm.

  The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia last week denied the petitioners’ challenge, finding the law did not violate the First Amendment. The Justice Department, representing the government, argued that the law targeted ownership of an entity by a foreign adversary, not content on the app.

  When President Joe Biden signed the law in April, it started a 270-day countdown for ByteDance to either divest of TikTok by Jan. 19, 2025, or cease operations in the United States.

  TikTok then requested the court pause the countdown while it seeks appeal at the U.S. Supreme Court. The DOJ had opposed the delay, arguing three branches of government had already affirmed that TikTok presented a national security risk.

  “The petitioners have not identified any case in which a court, after rejecting a constitutional challenge to an Act of Congress, has enjoined the Act from going into effect while review is sought in the Supreme Court,” the order reads.

  The judges found that TikTok and the petitioners relied on First Amendment arguments that the court had already rejected in order to make their case for an extension.

  “As to those claims, this court has already unanimously concluded the Act satisfies the requirements of the First Amendment under heightened scrutiny,” the order reads.

  TikTok may ask the Supreme Court to issue an emergency injunction, effectively stopping the countdown, while the high court considers its petition. There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take any case.

  In its emergency request for relief, TikTok said delaying enforcement of the law would “simply create breathing room for the Supreme Court to conduct an orderly review and for the incoming Administration to evaluate this matter—before one of this country’s most important speech platforms is shuttered.”

  The platform said that a temporary shutdown would “have devastating effects on TikTok Inc.’s business” while halting the law would “impose no material harm on the Government.”

  A separate filing showed TikTok creators declaring that the law would cause them harm. For example, Brian Firebaugh, a cattle rancher who has the “cattleguy” account on TikTok, told the D.C. circuit court that he earns most of his income through selling ranch products promoted on the platform.

  “Not only would a TikTok ban quickly dismantle my business and my family’s way of life, it would also immediately eliminate the most effective tool for me to communicate with and support the agricultural community in Texas,” he said.

  DOJ’s response said that TikTok and others were downplaying national security concerns.

  “TikTok’s continued operation in the United States under its current ownership poses substantial harms to national security by virtue of TikTok’s data-collection practices and the covert intelligence and surveillance efforts of the Chinese government,” DOJ’s response read.

  Continue reading at Epoch Times

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 22:15

• Trump Slams Long-Range Missile Strikes On Russia
  Trump Slams Long-Range Missile Strikes On Russia

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  President-elect Donald Trump has said that he “vehemently” disagrees with the US supporting long-range missile strikes inside Russian territory, which President Biden authorized last month.

  “I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia. Why are we doing that?” Trump said in an interview with Time Magazine for an issue that named him Person of the Year.

  

  “We’re just escalating this war and making it worse. That should not have been allowed to be done,” Trump added.

  Biden took the step to support Ukrainian strikes on Russia using US ATACMS and British Storm Shadow missiles even after Moscow made clear it would risk a nuclear escalation.

  Russia responded to Ukraine’s initial ATACMS and Storm Shadow strikes by firing a new hypersonic intermediate-range missile known as the Oreshnik.

  Ukrainian forces fired more ATACMS into Russia this week, and the Russian Defense Ministry has vowed there will be another response:

  “This attack by Western long-range weapons won’t be left unanswered, and corresponding measures will be taken,” the ministry said.

  Trump campaigned on ending the proxy war in Ukraine but has not articulated how exactly he plans to do that. He was asked in the Time interview if he would “abandon” Ukraine and responded:

  “I want to reach an agreement, and the only way you’re going to reach an agreement is not to abandon. You understand what that means, right?”

  The president-elect stressed in the interview that he was concerned with the death toll in the conflict, saying it was much higher than what’s been reported. He said the “numbers of dead young soldiers lying on fields all over the place are staggering. It’s crazy what’s taking place.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 21:45

• Moody's Cuts France In Surprise Downgrade Amid Mounting Political Chaos
  Moody’s Cuts France In Surprise Downgrade Amid Mounting Political Chaos

  Two weeks ago, at the end of November, when many were expecting Moody’s to downgrade France’s Aa2 rating (after it was put on negative outlook in October), the rating agency chickened out as there was still hope that Macron might salvage some of the political chaos engulfing Europe’s second biggest economy, and well aware that telling the truth in Europe is very costly. Alas, after Marine Le Pen toppled Barnier’s government in a dispute over deficit reduction one week ago, Moody’s no longer could pretend that France is anything but a flaming dumpster fire of a political circus, and late after the Friday close, in a downgrade that came outside of Moody’s regular review schedule for France, Moody’s cut its rating of the euro area’s second biggest economy to Aa3 from Aa2, three levels below the maximum rating, and with a “stable outlook”, for now. Moody’s was the last holdout: France has already been cut to equivalent levels by Fitch and S&P.

  

  The downgrade comes hours after President Emmanuel Macron named on Friday veteran centrist politician and early ally Francois Bayrou as his fourth prime minister this year. His predecessor Michel Barnier failed to pass a 2025 budget and was toppled earlier this month by left and right-wing lawmakers opposed to his 60 billion euro belt-tightening push that he had hoped would rein in France’s spiraling fiscal deficit.

  The political crisis forced the outgoing government to propose emergency legislation this week to temporarily roll over 2024 spending limits and tax thresholds into next year until a more permanent 2025 budget can be passed.

  The decision “reflects our view that the country’s public finances will be substantially weakened over the coming years,” Moody’s said in a statement. “Looking ahead, there is now very low probability that the next government will sustainably reduce the size of fiscal deficits beyond next year.”

  “As a result, we forecast that France’s public finances will be materially weaker over the next three years compared to our October 2024 baseline scenario,” it added.

  Barnier had intended to cut the budget deficit next year to 5% of economic output from 6.1% this year with a 60 billion euro package of spending cuts and tax hikes. But a majority of lawmakers were opposed to much of the belt-tightening drive and voted a no confidence measure against Barnier’s government, bringing it down.

  Bayrou, who has long warned about France’s weak public finances, said on Friday shortly after taking office that he faced a “Himalaya” of a challenge reining in the deficit.

  Outgoing Finance Minister Antoine Armand said the downgrade reflects the recent parliamentary developments and uncertainty around the budget. “The nomination of Francois Bayrou as prime minister and the reaffirmed will to reduce the deficit will provide an explicit response,” Armand said in a social media post.

  The government’s collapse and the scrapping of France’s 2025 budget added to months of political upheaval that has already hammered business confidence, with the country’s economic outlook steadily deteriorating.

  Barnier’s budget foresaw significant belt tightening by historical standards to bring the deficit to 5% of economic output from 6.1% this year. The next government will likely have to pare back those ambitions in order to get support from some of the lawmakers who toppled Barnier, but economists say the final outcome may even be no improvement. Plans to repair public finances were already derailed this year by poor tax revenues as consumer spending and corporate profits disappointed.

  The political crisis put French stocks and debt under pressure, pushing the risk premium on French government bonds at one point to their highest level over 12 years, with the yield on French bonds surpassing that of Greece.

  *FRANCE 10-YEAR YIELD PREMIUM WIDENS 8BPS, THE MOST SINCE JUNE

  Congrats, Greece is now less risky than France! pic.twitter.com/xK2rdZ8b1h

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 2, 2024

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

  Ironically, back during the peak European sovereign debt crisis, it was France that was among the countries that came to Greece’s rescue. Alas, nobody in Europe is big enough to rescue France. Expect the EURUSD to tumble when trading reopens on Monday, on its way to parity with the dollar.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 21:39

• California Docs, Hospitals Sued For Rushing 12-Year-Old Into Gender Transition
  California Docs, Hospitals Sued For Rushing 12-Year-Old Into Gender Transition

  A 20-year-old woman has filed suit against California hospitals and doctors, saying they rushed to conclude she suffered from gender dysphoria and then “fast-tracked [her] onto the conveyor belt of irreversibly damaging” medical interventions that included puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and a double-mastectomy at age 14.  

  According to the complaint filed in Los Angeles, Kaya Clementine Breen says she was sexually abused as a young child and that, around age 11 or 12, “began struggling with the thought of developing into a woman and began to believe that life would be easier if she were a boy.” When she shared those feelings with a school counselor, the counselor told Breen that she must be transgender, and then called her parents to push the same assumption as a fact. 

  

  Breen’s parents sought out “experts” at the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital in Los Angeles, including Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, one of the world’s most vocal advocates for the gender-transitioning of children. “At her very first visit, after mere minutes, Dr. Olson-Kennedy diagnosed Clementine with gender dysphoria and recommended surgical implantation of puberty blockers,” according to the complaint, which also alleges that Olson-Kennedy neglected to perform a mental-health assessment or inquire about past trauma or abuse. 

  Echoing a grievance that commonly surfaces in the gender-transition realm, the complaint alleges Olson-Kennedy told Breen’s parents that their daughter would “commit suicide if she did not begin taking testosterone…At that time, Clementine had never had any thoughts of suicide, and she certainly had never expressed anything along those lines to Dr Olson-Kennedy.” According to The Economist, Olson-Kennedy’s own notes made no mention of suicidal ideation. Ironically, it was only after enduring transition procedures and “therapies” that Breen would later attempt suicide as her mental health declined and she contended with extreme depression and anger. 

  This is how it ends 🙏

  “I wish I could have told myself that there is no right way to be female, and if I hate myself for being female that doesn’t mean there is something physically wrong with me that I need to buy a cure for.”

  Clementine Breen is a beautiful, articulate,… pic.twitter.com/1GlnzONOlb

  — Beth Bourne (@bourne_beth2345) December 12, 2024

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

  The fateful Dec. 27, 2016 consultation with Olson-Kennedy led to years of drastic medical alterations of Breen’s body. These included puberty-blockers at age 12, cross-sex hormones starting from age 13 through 19 and a “gender-affirming” double-mastectomy at just 14 years old. She was also “urged” to have a hysterectomy at age 17, though it’s unclear from the complaint if she did so. The mastectomy surgeon is among the many defendants, and is accused of his own negligence in carrying out the drastic procedure, having only met Breen for about 30 minutes on the very morning of the life-altering surgery.  

  

  It was only via mental health care that she started receiving near the end of high school that Breen eventually concluded she was not “trans” after all. She stopped identifying as a male named “Finn,” and has begun de-transitioning — to the extent it’s possible. Summarizing Breen’s experience as “a despicable, failed medical experiment and a knowing, deliberate, and gross breach of the standard of care,” the complaint lays out a long and disturbing list of enduring harms:

  She has suffered physically, socially, neurologically, and psychologically. Her voice has permanently deepened. Her female body did not develop, and she has a very masculine body structure. Her fertility is almost certainly destroyed from the combination of years on puberty blockers and testosterone.

  And even if she could conceive and deliver a child, she would not be able to breastfeed because her healthy breasts were removed when she was only 14. And she has to seethe scars from that unnecessary surgery every day. She has experienced vaginal atrophy, and her sex life has been materially impacted. She is also at risk for bone-related problems later in life.

  Breen’s experience closely matches the picture Megyn Kelly painted in her searing indictment of “gender-affirming care” during her October appearance on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher”: 

  Must-watch clip of Megyn Kelly on Bill Mahar discussing transgenderism and children.

  How did we even get to this point? pic.twitter.com/gIXtG5fZqF

  — Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) October 26, 2024

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

  Olson-Kennedy came under fire earlier this year when she admitted to withholding the findings of her team’s research, which found puberty blockers did not result in mental health improvements for children, telling the New York Times, “I do not want our work to be weaponized. It has to be exactly on point, clear and concise. And that takes time.” Earlier this year, a British study concluded that a great many children who think they may be transgender have mental health issues that spring from abuse or difficult family situations.  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 21:20

• Yes, It Was A Landslide
  Yes, It Was A Landslide

  Authored by J.T.Young via American Greatness,

  Having lost the election, demoralized Democrats now argue their defeat wasn’t a landslide. Nice try. Their reaction is more than knee-jerk petulance; instead, it arises from fears of permanence. With Trump gaining momentum, even before his inauguration, Democrats rightfully fear that they could fare even worse in 2028 and beyond.

  

  Before the election, the Democrats’ presidential complaint was the Electoral College. Certain they would win the popular vote, Tim Walz, speaking in October, voiced what other Democrats thought: “I think all of us know the electoral college needs to go.” On the night of November 5, their concern changed. Now Democrat apologists (CNN, NYT, LAT, and more) are all arguing to diminish Trump’s victory—and thereby his momentum.

  While Democrats and their supporters’ need is understandable, Trump’s landslide gets bigger the more it is scrutinized.

  Even on the surface, its particulars are impressive. Trump was the Republicans’ first presidential candidate to beat a Democrat in the popular vote in 20 years. He won more popular votes than any Republican presidential candidate in history. He won each of the contest’s seven swing states—and he came close to flipping several (NJ, VA, NM, NH, and MN) seemingly solid blue states. And he won the electoral vote 312-226.

  Conversely, compared to Biden in 2020, Democrats’ popular vote percentage dropped in 50 of 51 states and the District of Columbia, going up only in Utah by a scant 0.2 percentage points.

  Big as Trump’s win was on the surface, closer examination shows it was bigger still.

  Trump’s victory came despite finishing behind Harris by over four million votes in California and New York combined and despite these states combining for 84 electoral votes. Dismissing the result in these two states, Trump won by five percentage points in the other 48 states and 312 to 142 in electoral votes. Take away the results of Massachusetts and Washington, and Trump won by almost seven percentage points in the popular vote and 312-121 in the electoral vote.

  Basically, apart from the coasts, Trump won overwhelmingly: where 80 percent of the presidential electoral votes are, Trump won three-quarters of them.

  Next, put these impressive numbers into the context of their occurrence.

  Trump amassed these numbers while being enormously outraised and outspent. Harris had hundreds of millions more to fuel her campaign than Trump did. And she had to only focus on the seven swing states that everyone knew were the fulcrum of the contest. Yet, Trump still swept all seven—something that neither he nor Biden had been able to do in 2016 and 2020.

  Trump also rang up his numbers despite eight years of unrelenting negativity from the establishment media. For almost a decade, there has been nothing approaching balanced coverage: regardless of his opponent—Hillary, Biden, and Harris—each received a strong establishment media tailwind. Yet despite this, Trump increased his general election popular vote percentage each time.

  And that establishment media bias was never stronger than in the aftermath of Biden’s withdrawal.

  For over 100 days, the establishment media gave Harris a pass: on press conferences, on interviews, on evading questions, on softball venues when she did appear, on often not answering questions in even these friendly confines, and on nonsensical responses when she did speak.

  And Trump won despite having almost the entirety of America’s self-styled elite opposing him.

  In academia, in Hollywood, in music, in sports, the coolest of the cool and the biggest of the big were overwhelmingly and vocally against him. Not surprisingly, in the face of all this opposition, Trump’s favorability rating was below Harris’s.

  Yet, Trump still racked up his impressive numbers.

  Despite every conceivable disadvantage, Trump beat not one, but two Democrat nominees to win the presidency. Outright – not only in electoral votes but by almost 2.5 million votes.

  That is the definition of a landslide.

  Of late, Americans have suffered a surfeit of Democrats and their apologists saying something isn’t true when it patently is—that Joe Biden was capable of being president, that the Democrat elite wasn’t deposing Joe Biden when they drove him from the ticket, that Kamala Harris was his qualified replacement, that Joe Biden wouldn’t pardon Hunter. The list is endless; it stretches back in time and extends uninterrupted into it. But nowhere is Democrat denial greater than in their attempt to deny Trump’s November presidential landslide.

  Their reason is as obvious as the truth they are seeking to deny. They fear its repetition.

  They worry that Republicans will continue Trump’s conservative populism, and they know that next time 2024’s overwhelming advantages will be gone. Bad as November’s landslide was, the ones Democrats potentially face going forward could be far worse.

  *  *  *

  J.T. Young is the author of the new book, Unprecedented Assault: How Big Government Unleashed America’s Socialist Left, from RealClear Publishing, and has over three decades of experience working in Congress, the Department of Treasury, and OMB, and representing a Fortune 20 company.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 20:55

• Israel Sees 'Opportunity' For Attacking Iran Nuke Sites With Syria Knocked Out
  Israel Sees ‘Opportunity’ For Attacking Iran Nuke Sites With Syria Knocked Out

  With Syria burning and no longer a threat, Israel’s military said it is currently conducting preparations for “potential strikes” on Iranian nuclear facilities.

  Its air force has already been carrying out literally hundreds of raids on Syrian Army bases in the wake of Bashar al-Assad’s overthrow. Israel has complete domination of Syria’s skies, and given that Assad’s anti-air defense missile systems are no longer an issue, this would make it much easier to strike the Islamic Republic of Iran.

  

  According to a Thursday report in The Times of Israel, the IDF “believes that following the weakening of Iranian proxy groups in the Middle East and the dramatic fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, there is an opportunity to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, military officials said Thursday.”

  “The Israeli Air Force has therefore continued to increase its readiness and preparations for such potential strikes in Iran,” the report states.

  “The IDF also believes that Iran — isolated after the fall of the Assad regime and the weakening of its main proxy group Hezbollah in Lebanon — may push ahead further with its nuclear program and develop a bomb as it scrambles to replace its deterrence,” it adds.

  Iran has long maintained it develops only peaceful nuclear energy, and there’s little doubt that after the dramatic events unfolding in Syria, and with Hezbollah top leadership largely decimated, Tehran finds itself on a back foot. 

  Some Israeli and Western officials believe that all of this will make Iranian leaders more desperate to ensure they have a final and ultimate defense against any threats (as in rapidly developing a nuke).

  The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have said in a new statement, “The Syrian air defense array is one of the strongest in the Middle East and the blow caused to it is a significant achievement for the Air Force’s superiority in the region.”

  Any potential preemptive Israeli attack directly on Iran would however unleash more immense anti-Netanyahu controversy in Israel, at a moment he’s already under fire by hostage victims’ families for his handling of Gaza.

  🚨🎙️Israeli air strikes on Hafir al-Tahta and al-Qalamoun in #Syria pic.twitter.com/NJioRXtcbh

  — Winnemuller (@RWinnemuller) December 9, 2024

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

  Israel and Hezbollah just achieved a long hoped-for ceasefire in Lebanon, and any attacks on Iran could also open up that front again, at a moment Israel is trying for the safe return of its citizens to northern towns and settlements, which the ceasefire is aimed to achieve. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 20:30

• Biden's Education Dept Spent Over $1 Billion On DEI Grants; Report
  Biden’s Education Dept Spent Over $1 Billion On DEI Grants; Report

  Authored by Eric Lendrum via American Greatness,

  A new report claims that the Biden Administration’s Department of Education has spent over $1 billion on grants that force the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) agenda in hiring practices, programming, and mental health training in public schools.

  

  According to Fox News, the report from the watchdog group Parents Defending Education (PDE) claims that this DEI spending has been ongoing since 2021. PDE researchers found a total of 229 such grants across 42 states, plus Washington D.C., during the roughly four-year time period.

  With the spending broken down along specific criteria, nearly $490 million was spent for grants that demanded more racial bias in hiring practices, while $343 million was spent on general DEI programs, and another $170 million was spent on mandating DEI-based mental health training. This amounts to just over $1 billion, at approximately $1,002,522,304.

  This spending “incorporates both awarded (committed) and disbursed dollars, as most of the grant money is distributed [a] period of several years,” the report reads.

  One of the researchers who worked on the report, Rhyen Staley, said it was likely that the report does not even account for every single grant that may be considered pro-DEI, as the report narrowed down their search to a handful of criteria. This led to the researchers ignoring many other grants that they determined to be simply using “buzzwords” rather than actively promoting DEI.

  “The only people or groups to benefit from the enormous amount of grant funding are the universities, administrators, and DEI consultants, at the expense of children’s education,” said Staley.

  “This needs to change by placing children’s learning at the forefront of education, instead of prioritizing race-based policies and DEI.”

  A statement was issued by PDE Senior Advisor Michele Exner, declaring that “over one billion dollars [have been] squandered on progressive pet projects all while American students’ academic performance continues to plummet. Under Secretary [Miguel] Cardona, this organization has been a complete farce that has failed families and students time and time again.”

  “This will be the legacy of the Biden administration’s Department of Education,” Exner added.

  “Families are fed up and are excited for January when we will have new leadership in the nation’s capital who will focus on getting this toxic and divisive waste out of our education system.”

  The Department of Education has long been a target of conservative scrutiny, with many advocating for the abolition of the department altogether, as it has failed to improve average test scores or education quality across the nation. President-elect Donald Trump vowed on the campaign trail that he would eliminate the department, a sentiment that was echoed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the leaders of Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 20:05

• "FSD, Robotaxi, & Optimus": Deutsche Bank Highlights Top Takeaways From Tesla Meeting
  “FSD, Robotaxi, & Optimus”: Deutsche Bank Highlights Top Takeaways From Tesla Meeting

  Tesla shares continue to trade at record highs to close the week, regaining popularity as investors focus on full self-driving, robotaxi, new lost-coast models, and Optimus robots.

  The stock has delivered a stunning performance year-to-date, surging 70% and commanding a $1.3 trillion market capitalization.

  

  Meanwhile, Elon Musk commented on X this week that Bill Gates’ Tesla short could potentially “bankrupt” the billionaire. 

  If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 10, 2024

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

  Heading into 2025, a team of analysts from Deutsche Bank hosted an investor meeting with Tesla’s head of investor relations, Travis Axelrod, to explore the key drivers behind the stock’s performance.

  “The majority of focus was naturally around FSD, robotaxi, and Optimus but we also covered the status of new models in 2025 and puts/takes regarding margin,” DB’s Edison Yu and Winnie Dong wrote in a note to clients. 

  They summarized the key takeaways in the conversation with Axelrod:

  New models and 2025 volume growth

  • The new Tesla model (we refer to as “Model Q”) should launch in 1H25 and will be priced <$30k including subsidies (i.e., $37,499 if US EV tax credit goes away).

  • Additionally in the 2H, there will be other new vehicles released that are intended to augment Tesla’s TAM. We suspect one model will be a 3-row longer wheelbase Model Y variant in China.

  • All these new models will be built on existing lines. Management once again highlighted volume growth of 20-30% in 2025; the rationale behind this growth range is based on ability to maximize existing capacity utilization.

  • Operationally, Tesla commented that hitting the high end of the range would be contingent on essentially flawless execution and is confident that the China supply chain can scale up fairly quickly while it may be harder in N. America.

  • Tesla’s plan for the Mexico plant will continue to hinge upon geo-political dynamics and the tariff situation under the new Trump Administration.

  Puts and takes for 2025 margins

  • Tesla explained that 2025 will be a year of product launches, and whenever that happens, there will be disruption to profitability as it will be in the early days of building a product and have more inefficient fixed cost absorption.

  • But this could be offset by a lower cost of goods sold from the more affordable products.

  • 2025 margins will also hinge upon where ASP lands based on the demand curve.

  • The main goal is to focus on growing volume and garnering incremental gross profit (as opposed to targeting a certain gross margin %), delivering

  Robotaxi operations

  • Still expects to launch robotaxi services in CA and TX next year using existing vehicles (3/Y), generating paid rides.

  • In terms of the UI, the company plans to use an internally developed ridehail app and control the “value chain.”

  • Tesla believes it would be reasonable to assume some type of teleoperator would be needed at least initially for safety/redundancy purposes.

  • Tesla views regulation as the biggest headwind to broad deployment of robotaxi, which the company hopes will be adjusted at the federal level through updating of rules at NHTSA.

  • Management intends to start off entirely with the company-owned fleet and eventually dynamically adjust supply based on customer demand/ traffic patterns.

  Cybercab development

  • Unboxed manufacturing should result in ~$20-30k COGS per vehicle, at run rate, a number which isn’t possible under current, traditional manufacturing processes.

  • CyberCab, when production starts in 2026, will be the first product to use unboxed manufacturing with the expectation that any products released subsequently will also use unboxed processes.

  • At full run rate production, the company expects to build a CyberCab for less than $30k.

  • As the CyberCab rollout occurs in 2026, the company will need to make investments across its service/cleaning and charging apparatus (e.g., install wireless charging) with TX and CA likely the first states to see a rollout given proximity to manufacturing facilities and headquarters.

  FSD progress

  • V13 has just been rolled out to early access users, and typically takes about 2-3 weeks to roll out to the broader audience if no issues are found.

  • This version should demonstrate 3-5x performance improvement vs. v12.5 from a miles between critical intervention perspective (1 every ~10k miles).

  • Management continues to target launch of an unsupervised version of FSD between Q2 and Q3 of next year, coinciding with start of robotaxi operations. This could be some iteration of v13.x depending on level of progress. Important to note that FSD can be unsupervised even if it doesn’t surpass human level safety threshold early on as long as Tesla feels comfortable taking on the risk/liability.

  • In general, the large improvement seen over the past year can be attributed to the increase in training compute, from 20k to ~90k GPUs in the span of 10 months. Tesla can now train dozens of end-to-end models in a few weeks vs. only one, enabling much faster iteration/improvement.

  • In terms of FSD attach rate, Tesla commented that it has seen an increase after the V12 release to N. America (>20%) vs. in April this year, and another jump during the 10/10 event. Adoption rate should continue to increase as Tesla increasingly fine-tunes its marketing strategy to offer more free trials.

  Competition in autonomous driving

  • Management doesn’t see any true competition in the US/Europe from a cost/scale perspective.

  • For pure play robotaxi efforts like Waymo and Cruise, Tesla believes they’re essentially using more sensors (e.g., lidar) to compensate for deficiencies in the rules-based software (almost as a buffer).

  • Unlike Tesla with a massive fleet of customers to generate a large amount of data, Waymo is reliant on a very small fleet that cannot generate enough data to effectively train large E2E models.

  • Separately, Waymo also does not have proper scale/vertical integration in making cars and associated parts, forcing them to partner with an OEM. As such, even if Waymo switches to E2E approach, it would likely still be at a cost/scale advantage considering the largest cost in Tesla’s view is the D&A.

  • In respect to China, Tesla does observe more entities taking a similar approach (E2E vision-only architecture). Its own commercial efforts are still in motion, working on getting approval from the local government to take data out of the country to improve performance of its E2E models, still aiming for 1Q25 roll-out. Chinese competitors appear to be quickly pivoting toward using E2E model for perception but path planning is still mainly using rules-based.

  • For Europe, the regulations around autonomous driving makes it a challenging backdrop, given the driver has to approve the automatic response of the vehicle, which would defeat the purpose of self-driving functionality.

  • Looking farther out, the 3rd gen Dojo chip which is expected to launch in 2028 will be another big enabler because the 1st gen cannot compete on cost/performance vs. Nvidia and 2nd gen (in 2026) still can’t compete on performance (should be at cost parity though). At that point, the economics around training compute become much more favorable.

  Evolution of Optimus

  • The objective remains to have >1k humanoid robots deployed internally in factories and then selling to external customers in 2026. Performance will be limited to fairly basic material handling tasks for industrial environments as opposed to home lifestyle which would happen much later on.

  • From a development perspective, the “intelligence” of Optimus will continue to improve and should at some point mirror the rapid improvement seen in FSD over the past year. Currently, Optimus is being trained by data sets generated through teleoperation and videos of itself performing tasks paired with motor/actuator data to essentially map out framework that can align with human movement. Ultimately, after the compatibility is fully mapped out, Optimus should be able to train/learn by watching videos of humans performing tasks in a “DIY” type of manner, similar to how FSD learns from humans driving.

  • In terms of manufacturing, the aspirational target is getting the BoM down to ~$30k. The engineering team is still iterating and there will likely be changes depending on what parts need to be re-engineered to reduce cost as opposed to scale volume components.

  • When selling to customers, the strategy could either be to sell the HW+SW together or lease out the robot. Tesla is confident that the economics could be very favorable in replacing human labor especially in the US.

  Other considerations

  • Megapack demand remains very strong with the company standing by its expectations for more than 100% growth this year, implying ~27 GWh of production. Next year, the new Shanghai factory will come online and the US could potentially provide up to ~40 GWh.

  • The company believes that the recent court ruling rejecting Musk’s pay package was wrong and will be appealing the decision, though there is no timeline on its response.

  Based on their conversation, the analysts raised their price target on Tesla from $295 to $370. Here is their explanation: 

  We raise our price target from $295 to $370, mainly assigning greater value to Tesla’s autonomy efforts. Specifically, we refine our valuation framework to include FSD sales (both one-time and subscription), robotaxi operations, and OEM licensing fees into the “Robotaxi” bucket whereas previously we included FSD in the “Auto” line. Moreover, given our belief the new US administration can streamline federal regulations around deployment of robotaxi, we increase our robotaxi forecasts and use a higher 20x EV/Revenue multiple on 2035E sales of > $40bn (vs. prior 15x) akin to leading E2E AI peers. We also assume some type of service to be deployed overseas in that time frame. Other elements of our valuation are essentially unchanged except we lower our Energy multiple from 25x EV/ EBITDA to 20x given de-rating seen recently by comparable companies.

  

  The summarized key takeaways from DB analysts offer valuable insights into the company as 2024 winds down and the new year approaches. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 19:40

• Trump's Treasury Pick Sees A "Global Economic Reordering"
  Trump’s Treasury Pick Sees A “Global Economic Reordering”

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  President Trump’s pick for Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, has stated that he believes the world is on the cusp of a “global economic reordering”. And he would “like to be a part of it”.

  

  He has hinted at the need for a new international agreement on the level of the famous Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944. Bretton Woods, of course, established the world monetary order over 8 decades ago.

  It sounds like Bessent is thinking big. He will certainly need to, given the challenges the Trump administration will face over the next four years. Trump will come into office at a key moment in American history, and his administration’s decisions will echo over the coming decades.

  The world order is indeed shifting, and if America is to thrive going forward, major changes will be required. “Economic surgery”, as Bessent refers to it.

  Bessent has a deep understanding of international trade and finance. Along with George Soros, he famously profited from “breaking” the Bank of England while betting against the pound in 1992.

  He also worked closely with Stanley Druckenmiller, one of the greatest investors of all time. Bessent eventually ran his own hedge fund and is a self-made multi-billionaire. He represents a substantial upgrade from the more academic Janet Yellen.

  This man has a deep Rolodex and a wealth of knowledge when it comes to trade and finance.

  Interestingly, Bessent is a major gold bull:

  “I think we’re in a long-term bull market in Gold. We’re seeing reserve accumulation by central banks. I follow it closely. It’s my biggest position.”

  A gold enthusiast as U.S. Treasury Secretary? Interesting. Ironically, gold fell more than 3% when Trump announced his appointment, apparently due to Bessent’s hawkish budgetary credentials.

  Trump’s pick for Treasury is an advocate of cutting government spending and deficits. During the Biden administration he offered fierce denunciation of economic policies. And he was a strong critic of the Green New Scam, stating that the Biden administration has “repeatedly stretched its legal authorities to direct resources towards favored areas of the economy, often in direct contravention of statute.”

  3-3-3 and China

  Bessent has proposed the 3-3-3 economic plan for America, consisting of:

  • 3% annual real growth

  • 3% deficit-to-GDP max

  • 3 million additional barrels of oil per day

  These goals offer a nice start. If Trump can pull off all three, we’ll be well on our way to long-term sustainability.

  Internationally, Bessent sees China as America’s prime competition. He believes the yuan is undervalued and that this is distorting the world economy by favoring Chinese exports. He says Chinese citizens save too much, and don’t consume enough, which is true.

  A cornerstone of Bessent’s approach will be aggressive trade policies. Tariffs, and perhaps more importantly, the threat of tariffs. Threats can go a long way, as long as they’re prepared to back them up.

  Tough trade policy will be key to dealing with growing worldwide economic imbalances.

  Trump’s economic team believes strongly that higher tax rates are not the way forward. Bessent has stated that lower tax rates can actually create higher tax revenue through increased growth. Overall, his views on growth are encouraging:

  “I decided to come out from behind my desk because I do believe in this election, there’s a big choice and we are going to decide whether we are going to grow our way out of this debt burden.

  I think we can through deregulation, energy, independence and dominance in the US and a growth mindset. We can get back to growth. I feel very strongly that this is the last chance to grow our way out of this.”

  This is correct. It is our last chance to change course on the economic Titanic. We’re headed for an iceberg and strong international trade policy and faster growth are the only ways to avoid it.

  Of course, as Treasury Secretary there’s only so much Bessent can do. But he should act as a positive influence on Trump in terms of policy. It’s a prestigious position, and even with limited policy tools, he should be able to make his influence felt.

  So far Trump’s economic team is shaping up to be a disruptive and powerful force. We’ll be monitoring this situation closely. Stay tuned.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 19:15

• Russia Launches Massive Attack On Ukrainian "Critical Fuel & Energy Infrastructure"
  Russia Launches Massive Attack On Ukrainian “Critical Fuel & Energy Infrastructure”

  Russia launched a massive drone and missile strike against Ukraine on Friday in retaliation for Kyiv’s recent use of the US-supplied Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) against a Russian military base.

  ABC News quoted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who said Russia launched 93 missiles and nearly 200 drones targeting the country’s energy infrastructure. This was one of the largest bombardments against Ukraine’s energy sector since the invasion began almost three years ago.

  

  Zelenskyy said Ukrainian defense forces intercepted 81 missiles, including 11 cruise missiles shot down by Western-supplied General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter jets.

  He accused Russia of continuing to “terrorize millions of people” with these reckless assaults, renewing his request to the international community for intervention and more support for Ukraine.

  “A strong reaction from the world is needed: a massive strike – a massive reaction. This is the only way to stop terror,” Zelenskyy said.

  Meanwhile, the Russian Defense Ministry published a statement on its official Telegram channel, claiming that the retaliatory strike hit all intended targets:

  “In response to the use of American long-range weapons, Russia’s Armed Forces launched a massive strike with high-precision long-range air- and sea-based weapons and UAVs on critical fuel and energy infrastructure facilities in Ukraine that support the operation of the military-industrial complex.”

  On Wednesday, Ukraine fired six ATACMS at a Russian airfield inside the country’s sovereign territory. Russia claimed after the attack that all missiles were intercepted.

  Reports on X indicate that Ukraine’s state-run energy company, Ukrenergo, warned that up to 50% of residential customers could be without power after today’s attack.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 18:55

• Why The Popularity Of BNPL?
  Why The Popularity Of BNPL?

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  I’ve become a fan of TubiTV. It’s obvious why it is growing in popularity as a streaming service. There is no login and everything is instantly available. The movies and shows stream one after another so that you can have it on for hours, just like television in the old days. And it costs nothing at all. It pays for itself with advertising, and the ads are oddly welcome because they are not the usual ones you see on network television.

  

  Many great old movies are there and plenty of shows too. Tired of woke? This is a service for you. Most movies before 2000 are actually reliably free of that nonsense. I always check this site before paying for content on other venues. It also allows me to observe what kinds of things are being advertised to those who are either unwilling to pay for streaming or lack the financial means. That alone is instructive.

  Major advertisers for this service are the financial apps classified as BNPL, or “buy now, pay later” services. There are so many of them now that it is hard to keep up. The ads feature someone at the store with a large tab. The person notes that there is not enough money in the bank account to cover the costs. The idea is that you download an app, link it to your bank account, and then get an instant cash advance.

  Maybe such services would be popular anytime, but I suspect more so now that real income has fallen in these inflationary times. There are signs of hope on the horizon that the economy will improve in the future. Wall Street certainly thinks so, and retail spending seems to be recovering, but these ads tell a different story. They reveal just how much suffering there is out there right now, how many people truly do not have enough in the bank to pay basic costs.

  On the one hand, this is very sad. On the other hand, these services are valuable and somewhat brilliant.

  I’m not joining the chorus of commentators who are calling for them to be regulated or abolished. They exploit no one. They serve plenty of people. To be sure, they do cost money. What is the interest they charge? That’s a complicated question because mostly they are fee-based, like an ATM. The fees can be quite high in accord with the going rate, so anywhere from 7 percent to 20 percent.

  One way or another, these companies are going to be paid back and then some. There is no such thing as a free lunch or free groceries. The bill is going to be paid by someone.

  Thinking of how these services work helps us understand something about the loan contract of medieval origins. They represent an exchange of people with capital in the form of money and people without capital in the form of money who need to consume something. When the first loan contract came along and families like the Medicis got rich, there was something of a moral panic in Europe. How can people make so much money merely by moving money around? It seemed strange.

  Every religious tradition has something different to say. The Christians (both Protestants and Catholics) mostly condemned the charging of interest as “usury,” while Islam carved out a number of exceptions. The Second Lateran Council (1139) and Third Lateran Council (1179) both denied Christian burials for usurers. Indeed, the Catholic church did not fully liberalize on the topic until the 19th century.

  Judaism did not condemn interest, reasoning that it was a perfectly justifiable exchange between people with excess and those without. It is for this reason that Jews developed a reputation as the money lenders: Other religions could not come up with morally sophisticated justifications for the practice. Islam still retains its strictness, although with exceptions.

  What is the basis of the charging of interest? It is relatively simple: Goods obtained now are more expensive than the same goods purchased later. It is called “time preference” in the economics literature, but you see it every day in regular pricing habits. It’s conventional that a flight purchased for two weeks from now is going to be cheaper than a flight leaving tomorrow.

  It always pays to plan ahead. This is why people who forgo consumption today in favor of saving earn interest while people who live on revolving credit cards are paying more than 20 percent for the privilege. They are simply involved in an exchange: high time preference trading with low time preferences. Interest also covers other factors, such as the risk of not being paid back or the risk, in the case of business loans, that the enterprise will not be profitable.

  Regardless, the free market has proven to be brilliantly adept at managing the exchange between the present and the future and pricing it in a rational way. You want those groceries now but don’t have the money to buy them? You can get a cash advance—at a price that you agree to pay. There is nothing sketchy about this: It is a deal struck by parties based on voluntary decision-making.

  The interest rate itself merely reflects the pricing of time relative to available resources. Like any other price, it can fluctuate based on underlying realities. When society is full of savers, more resources become available for lending, and the interest rate is going to be pushed down. When society is full of high time preferences with more borrowers than savers, the interest rate is going to rise.

  There is no role in any of this for the Federal Reserve to intervene to drive interest rates up or down. The belief that the Fed can and should do this is based on nothing but mythology. If the Fed acts to drive rates lower than what the market would be, it is creating a distortion, what F.A. Hayek cleverly called “forced savings” because it signals the existence of resources that are not really there. That leads to a distortion in product structures such as we saw for the decades after 2000 and especially after 2008.

  Such distortions achieve nothing for overall economic growth. They only end up fueling the boom/bust cycle. This is just another application of the general principle that government has no resources of its own that it does not take from the people. An artificially low rate of interest ends up creating new money and credit that funds unsustainable investments that result in inflation, as our present experience proves.

  Thus do these BNPL programs end up creating loan markets of a different form. They are especially valuable among a class of borrowers who cannot gain access to credit cards. These days, getting a credit card is no easy task for some people, which is why debit cards have become more common than ever. Still, people need credit from time to time, and the markets have been brilliant in figuring out ways to make this possible.

  I’m generally favorable to many of the Trump administration’s proposed economic policies, but this idea of capping interest rates on credit cards is not a good one. It will result in higher user fees elsewhere or end up denying credit to people who otherwise would have it, thus giving the BNPL industry a boost.

  One thing it simply will not do is lower borrowing costs.

  Interest rate caps are no different from any other price control: They end up creating market distortions with unsustainable surpluses and shortages.

  What credit markets need is to be left alone. This goes for the Fed’s interventions, attempts to regulate credit card rates, or proposed regulations of the BNPL industry. They are operating just fine on their own. Hey, it’s not my cup of tea, but it’s good that they are there for people who need them. It so happens that people like me who are too cheap to buy movies without ads also happen to be the same demographic cohort to come up short for grocery money from time to time. It makes perfect sense.

  *  *  *

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 18:25

• Trump Team Weighing Options For Preemptive Airstrikes On Iran's Nuclear Program
  Trump Team Weighing Options For Preemptive Airstrikes On Iran’s Nuclear Program

  Just days after the rapid collapse of the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, and now with Israeli warplanes having complete domination over Syria’s skies for the first time in modern history, the priorities of US and Israeli officials in the region have drastically changed.

  Both US and Israeli leaders are now mulling the possibility of striking Iran’s nuclear program, amid several reports in recent weeks saying the Islamic Republic is expanding its program and enriching more nuclear-grade material. Tehran is now much more on the defensive, and could be more desperate to achieve nuclear weapons.

  A significant Friday report in The Wall Street Journal says that “President-elect Donald Trump is weighing options for stopping Iran from being able to build a nuclear weapon, including the possibility of preventive airstrikes, a move that would break with the longstanding policy of containing Tehran with diplomacy and sanctions.”

  

  “Trump has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in recent calls that he is concerned about an Iranian nuclear breakout on his watch, two people familiar with their conversations said, signaling he is looking for proposals to prevent that outcome,” the report continues.

  “The president-elect wants plans that stop short of igniting a new war, particularly one that could pull in the U.S. military, as strikes on Tehran’s nuclear facilities have the potential put the U.S. and Iran on a collision course.”

  Currently the United States still has some 1,000 troops occupying northeast Syria, and they have come under internecine attacks by Iran-backed militias over the recent years. In any broader US-Iran war, these troops would be sitting ducks for attack via Tehran’s proxies in the region.

  Trump in his first administration tried but failed to bring the troops home, but deeper entanglement in striking Iran could surely draw these troops into a broader conflict. The Pentagon would in that case likely expand its deployed forces in the region as well.

  “Iran has enough highly enriched uranium alone to build four nuclear bombs, making it the only nonnuclear-weapon country to be producing 60% near-weapons-grade fissile material,” WSJ has noted further. “It would take just a few days to convert that stockpile into weapons-grade nuclear fuel.”

  Iran has long maintained it develops only peaceful nuclear energy, and there’s little doubt that after the dramatic events unfolding in Syria, and with Hezbollah top leadership largely decimated, Tehran finds itself on a back foot. 

  Some Israeli and Western officials believe that all of this will make Iranian leaders more desperate to ensure they have a final and ultimate defense against any threats (as in rapidly developing a nuke).

  But if Trump were to authorize strikes on Iranian facilities, this would also obviously violate his frequent vows to his voters to not start new wars in the Middle East. The reality is that even ‘limited’ strikes still constitute an act of war. The potential for runaway escalation involving the US, Iran, and Israel would be a much bigger likelihood. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 18:00

• The Historic Failure Of The Biden Administration
  The Historic Failure Of The Biden Administration

  Authored by James Fanell and Bradley Thayer via American Greatness,

  Whether American presidents are successes or failures is measured by their major foreign and domestic actions. That has been the historical standard by which they are weighed and which defines their legacy. Some presidents are outstanding in every respect. Washington defined the American presidency. Lincoln saved the Union and kept foreign powers, most importantly Great Britain, from intervening to aid the South. Most presidents are heavily mixed; Buchanan employed the Army to suppress the Mormon Rebellion, but his monumental failure was that he did not act to stop the Civil War. Lyndon Johnson’s failure in Vietnam defined his presidency. Richard Nixon had many successes in foreign policy, but Watergate was his demise. Jimmy Carter failed abroad and at home.

  

  With just over 40 days left, Americans are nearing the end of the Biden administration, and so it is fitting to provide an assessment of it and to place it in historical context.

  By any metric from American history and by any objective standard used to measure his predecessors in the White House, the Biden administration has been a catastrophic failure for the American people. Were that it was otherwise. An old man suffering from the horrors of dementia is a tragedy. Biden is not only a dementia patient but also President of the United States. It is clear that now he is more dementia victim than he is president. He cannot stay awake at international meetings and other fora, and he seems to willingly accept the deliberate snubs. Accordingly, as hard as it is to acknowledge, given that he is the President of the United States, world leaders, and Americans know that he has no business being in the nation’s highest office. This impacts all Americans and U.S. national security, and it is important to recognize facts that impact national security as they are, rather than as we would desire them to be.

  In the years to come, the fiasco of the Biden administration will be explained by multiple factors. We may certainly anticipate that presidential historians will argue that his dementia was debilitating and precluded him from effective leadership, or that his presidency was just a Potemkin Village. Others may assess that Barack Hussein Obama was actually in control through his direct intervention and via surrogates like Susan Rice—who overreached in pushing a radical Marxist agenda. At this point, no matter the causes, it is essential to document the Biden administration’s failures and to learn from them as a cautionary tale about the disastrous impacts of the worst president in American history. Of course, we note that his greatest catastrophes may be yet to come.

  In domestic policy, Biden destroyed the economy, inflation returned with a vengeance, and America’s borders were opened intentionally. This caused a flood of illegal immigration. Immigration took an unprecedented turn, even an unimaginable one; the U.S. government entered the business of importing people, some 12 to 15 million, and thereby funded the cartels and other criminals and criminal organizations. The true numbers will not be known until Trump comes into office and reveals how this happened and the true impact and parameters of the problem. Another domestic failure has been the massive increase in the federal deficit—one that impacts every American, as well as our national security posture. Likewise, energy security was compromised, and America’s energy independence was lost. These domestic disasters reveal the spirit of the American people was targeted deliberately—in order to usher in a new world order based on the tenets of collectivism and top-down control rather than the principles of individualism, freedom, and liberty.

  In the realm of foreign policy, the Biden Administration will be remembered for their disastrous and deadly retreat from Afghanistan to the benign neglect of checking the People’s Republic of China (PRC) across the Indo-Pacific. By failing to deter the Russian invasion of Ukraine and by laboring to simultaneously sustain and escalate the war, rather than pressuring both sides to end the conflict, Biden will be held responsible for the deaths and displacement of many millions. Even the recent collapse of governments in Germany and France can be laid at Biden’s doorstep due to his waffling approach to great power politics and NATO’s ineptitude. The Middle East went from stability to war as Israel fights against multiple threats in the wake of the horrific terror attacks on October 7, 2023. In the Indo-Pacific, Xi Jinping, the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), treated Biden as a supplicant. In no small part because Xi knew that Joe Biden’s administration was compromised via millions from the PRC that flowed in and enriched the Biden family’s coffers. Xi instructed Biden on how to behave, and the Biden administration went along with it when it mattered, such as not laboring to overthrow the CCP at a time of great peril for it.

  The opportunity cost of the Biden administration was massive. Their actions precluded other strategic choices, priorities, and paths that the U.S. might have taken. For example, the strategic airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan would not have been lost to Chinese influence and occupation. The war in Ukraine might have been deterred, and millions alive and billions of dollars saved for American citizens being hit by deadly hurricanes in North Carolina or fires in Maui. Moreover, America’s arsenal of stockpiled weapons would not have been depleted.

  Likewise, the CCP would be on the run through a concerted and consistent whole-of-government agenda to roll back the PRC’s advances in their declared “People’s War” against the U.S. Fundamentally, Biden was the return to and the last of the post-Cold War presidents—Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama—those who could do anything they wanted in the domestic and international realms because they were living off the capital their predecessors had accumulated—a strong and prosperous America. In his first term, Trump was different and labored mightily to change course. Now America faces genuine peril at home and abroad.

  The warnings from the Biden administration are myriad. However, at root, the lesson is how could it have been otherwise when a vile and loathsome individual intent on enriching himself be permitted to be used as a puppet by Obama and the CCP? Biden neither has the merit nor the mettle to be president. He is a vessel filled with personal ambition but does not possess the acumen or virtue to realize his ambition. It had to be given to him by Obama. His legacy is a grotesque one: he proved the “Peter Principle” wrong—that you actually can rise far beyond your level of incompetence. He did his best to destroy the country. He leaves for his successor a dangerous world and an economy in an equally precarious position. Thankfully, Trump and his administration will be up for such a massive task.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 17:40

• Sen. Rand Paul Urges Immediate US Withdrawal From Syria Amid Failed State & 'ISIS 2.0' Fears
  Sen. Rand Paul Urges Immediate US Withdrawal From Syria Amid Failed State & ‘ISIS 2.0’ Fears

  US Senator Rand Paul has called for the immediate withdrawal of American forces from Syria in a statement on X earlier this week, with just over a month ago before the Trump administration enters the White House.

  President-elect Trump and his team will have a lot of major and key decisions to make on conflict zones in various parts of the globe. Syria will be a crucial focus, given it is now essentially a failed state and is poised to further become a terrorist hotbed, and given US-designated terror group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham now controls Damascus and much of the country.

  Bring our troops home! The war pits Islamists against socialist Kurds against Iranian proxies. Not our fight. 900 US troops scattered about Syria are a target not a deterrent. https://t.co/PuQqLLlCzX

  — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) December 9, 2024

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

  “Bring our troops home! The war pits Islamists against socialist Kurds against Iranian proxies. Not our fight. 900 US troops scattered about Syria are a target, not a deterrent,” Sen. Paul posted on X in reference to the ongoing ‘mini-civil war’ still raging in Deir Ezzor area and the north.

  While the Pentagon recently claimed there are no plans to expand the US military presence in northeast Syria, there’s no hint of bringing any troops home either.

  US forces are there propping up the Syrian Kurds (SDF/YPG), who also control Syria’s oil and gas fields, but the US proxies are now locked in a battle for survival with the larger and better armed Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA). The SDF has just been kicked out of Manbij, and fighting is still happening.

  These US proxies are now bogged down enough to have to give up any pretense at a ‘counter-ISIS’ mission, which is the “official” reason the Pentagon is supposed to be there in the first place.

  All of this is a huge flaming mess to say the least, and Trump will inherit it from day one, including the likelihood of a greatly resurgent ISIS, which can now have free reign in many parts of Syria…

  The CIA just respawned ISIS 2.0 https://t.co/QiPkROoPUx

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 12, 2024

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

  Pentagon chief spokesman Air Force Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder has meanwhile confirmed US forces have come under sporadic attack amid the chaos, and that there have been a few troop injureis: “As you know, those numbers can fluctuate. I’m not aware of any other injuries at this time,” the said.

  “Again, we’ll not hesitate to take appropriate action and protect our forces if they are threatened,” he added. Days ago, as the shock of the HTS advance against Assad forces was happening elsewhere in Syria, the US launched major airstrikes against alleged ISIS locations across the east of Syria.

  Meanwhile… Rand Paul is RIGHT:

  1. US said Assad needs to go because he fired on protesters.

  2. US backs “syrian democratic forces” east of the Euphrates.

  3. Syrian democratic forces fire on protesters. pic.twitter.com/jLPseUEhNs

  — Syrian Girl 🇸🇾 (@Partisangirl) December 12, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 17:20

• FBI, DHS Say "No Evidence" New Jersey Drones Pose National Security Threat
  FBI, DHS Say “No Evidence” New Jersey Drones Pose National Security Threat

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  The FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responded to reports about drone sightings over the New Jersey area in the past several weeks, a phenomena that has raised alarm among local elected officials.

  

  In a statement to The Epoch Times on Thursday evening, the FBI and DHS said the agencies “have no evidence at this time that the reported drone sightings pose a national security or public safety threat or have a foreign nexus.”

  “The FBI, DHS and our federal partners, in close coordination with the New Jersey State Police, continue to deploy personnel and technology to investigate this situation and confirm whether the reported drone flights are actually drones or are instead manned aircraft or otherwise inaccurate sightings,” the statement reads.

  Their statement did not go into more detail about the sightings in recent days. Several state and U.S. lawmakers in both New Jersey and New York have called on the federal government to release more information or take action regarding the drone sightings.

  In several interviews this week, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) warned that the drones may be Iranian in origin, which was denied by a Pentagon spokeswoman. White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Thursday that the drones do not pose a national security risk to the United States.

  On Thursday, Van Drew disputed the Pentagon’s statement about Iran being unconnected to the drone sightings, doubling down on his previous claim. He said “high-level” anonymous U.S. officials provided him with that information, which is why he is going public with it.

  That same day, Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) sent a joint letter to DHS, the FBI, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to brief them on drone activity over New Jersey and New York.

  “The potential safety and security risks posed by these drones in civilian areas is especially pertinent considering recent drone incursions at sensitive military sites in and outside of the continental United States over the past year,” they warned.

  Separately, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told reporters that the drones should be “shot down, if necessary” and that the United States “should be doing some very urgent intelligence analysis and take them out of the skies, especially if they’re flying over airports or military bases.”

  “The lack of information is absolutely unacceptable,” the senator said Thursday.

  In their statement Thursday, FBI and DHS also cautioned that there have been “cases of mistaken identity” and that the drones might be “manned aircraft or facilities.”

  In the meantime, DHS and the FBI are supporting New Jersey state and local law enforcement with detection capabilities “but have not corroborated any of the reported visual sightings with electronic detection.”

  “To the contrary, upon review of available imagery, it appears that many of the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft, operating lawfully,” they said.

  “There are no reported or confirmed drone sightings in any restricted air space.”

  The FBI and DHS asserted that the two agencies “take seriously” any threats that could be posed by drones but stressed that officials “have uncovered no such malicious activity or intent at this stage” so far.

  “While there is no known malicious activity occurring in New Jersey,” the agencies said, “the reported sightings there do, however, highlight the insufficiency of current authorities.”

  Reports of drone sightings over the Garden State began in November, Van Drew and other New Jersey officials have said.

  In early 2023, a high-altitude balloon that originated from China flew hundreds of miles across North America, passing near sensitive military sites, U.S. officials said at the time.

  The U.S. Air Force ultimately shot down the balloon off the coast of South Carolina in early February of that year.

  Multiple other balloon sightings were reported since then, with the U.S. military shooting down a balloon over Lake Huron near Michigan in February 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 17:00

• New Study Links Ozempic To Vision Loss, Confirms Harvard Research
  New Study Links Ozempic To Vision Loss, Confirms Harvard Research

  Another study has been published suggesting that patients taking semaglutide—the active ingredient in Novo Nordisk’s blockbuster drug Ozempic—may face a higher risk of developing a rare eye condition that can lead to blindness. 

  “The glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) semaglutide has quickly become a key treatment for managing type 2 diabetes and obesity. Recent findings have raised concern about a potential association between semaglutide use and non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION),” according to a new Danish–Norwegian study, backing up similar results from a Harvard University study published in July. 

  Non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, or NAION, occurs when blood flow to the optic nerve is blocked, causing sudden vision loss. 

  Bloomberg first reported the results on Friday afternoon. The findings were initially published on Wednesday on medRxiv, an online platform for sharing research.

  The results indicate that a type 2 diabetes patient taking Ozempic for two decades would have a .3% to .5% chance of developing NAION. 

  “The vision loss is usually irreversible and there is no treatment. Given the serious nature of this potential adverse effect of semaglutide, we leveraged the nationwide Danish and Norwegian health registries to further investigate this association,” according to authors from the University of Southern Denmark, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, and the University of Copenhagen.

  The authors emphasized: “Given the well-established effects of semaglutide in managing both diabetes and obesity, it is crucial to weigh the potential risk of NAION against the substantial therapeutic benefits of semaglutide. While the association observed for the use of semaglutide in type 2 diabetes represents a two-fold or higher relative risk increase…” 

  The Nordic study comes months after Harvard-affiliated Massachusetts Eye and Ear found the rising risk of Ozempic patients developing NAION. 

  In Copenhagen, Novo shares slid as much as 5.4%. Since peaking in June at 1,000 Krone, shares have entered a bear market (-26%). 

  

  Using Goldman’s index of companies with high exposure to GLP-1s, the Trump dump pressured the index lower from nearly 40% gains on the year in late summer to hovering around 14% on Friday, while companies at risk from GLP-1s have steadily gained on the year, 13%.

  

  In addition to the risk of vision loss, Ozempic and Wegovy users can also develop “Ozempic Face” after rapid body fat loss. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/13/2024 – 16:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest