Today’s News 16th May 2021

• The End Of Western Globalia?
  The End Of Western Globalia?

  Via TheSwarmBlog.com,

  Since the 1970’s, international trade has continuously been promoted by leaders of developed countries and economic agents.

  Several theoretical frameworks have been put forward to explain the benefits of a free trade environment, from Adam Smith’s concept of absolute advantages to more recent firm-based theories. However, the reality is much more nuanced, especially after China’s entry into the WTO in 2001, and questions arise as to the sustainability of the current model.

  

  While the development of free trade activity could be regarded as a sound intellectual victory for Western capitalism, such trend has paradoxically weakened several countries in Europe and America.

  • The first side effect of economic globalism in the West has been the retreat of manufacturing in several economies like the United States, with durable unemployment issues as a result. Beyond social impacts, Canadian author Vaclav Smil argued that a manufacturing decline is structurally problematic as it affects the ability of a country to innovate on the long run.

  • The second reason to be skeptical about international trade is the multiplication of structural imbalances in the global economy, with unstainable surpluses and deficits everywhere. An economy displaying a growing trade deficit is getting poorer with respect to foreign economies, leading to a financial and/or social crisis in the end. To understand that, it is necessary to imagine a country whose currency is backed by something tangible (e.g. gold). In that case, a deficit means that the country owes metals to the rest of the world. Of course, current account deficits can be offset by financial inflows, but as there’s no free lunch in economics, that should not be seen as a long-term solution.

  • Last but not least, the rise of global trade and countries specialization has led to a system full of frictions and highly vulnerable to shocks (whatever their size). This has been well documented and explained by research in complex systems including econophysics (see It’s the Complexity Stupid). One could imagine a local natural disaster disrupting the global car industry supply chain (e.g. Japan earthquake and tsunami 2011), a small shipping incident blocking a large part of maritime trade (e.g. Suez Canal obstruction 2021), or even a tiny pathogen freezing the global economy for several months (e.g. COVID-19 pandemic).

  In other words, a problem affecting local factories in some regions of Asia or mining facilities in Chile is likely to impact most economies in the world. In other words, the more specialized countries are in terms of economic production, the more dependent on foreign production they become, and the more vulnerable to distant events they will be.

  The Trade War Black Swan

  All that being said, imagine what happens if US-China tensions keep on rising and if the global economy gradually splits into two different markets. While America has turned more protectionist since Trump’s election in 2016, China has made it clear that they will implement a “Made in China for China” economic policy for the coming years (and even decades) as economic independence has become one of the main goals of Xi Jinping.

  I do not know how well Western economic agents are prepared for such a scenario, as most people display Gaussian-like behavior and always bet on a return to normal. But the consequences of a structural change in the global trade activity could be significant for the rest of the world, especially for net importers depending too much on foreign producers for materials or key technological components.

  People may argue that the world is getting more and more interconnected and that a large-scale economic network is likely to continue to expand on the long run. That is correct on a long timeline, but it could be proven wrong during our lifetimes.

  From that perspective, interesting lessons can be learned from the decline of the Western Roman Empire.

  The Fall of Rome

  Studying the transitional period from the Roman Empire to Middles Ages (also known as Late Antiquity), British archeologist Bryan Ward-Perkins explained that “the fall of Rome” was a brutal decline during the 5th and the 6th century.

  More interestingly, Ward-Perkins argued that before the 5th century, a large and complex trade network had emerged in the Western Empire, leading to strong economic activity in most provinces and a high level of technology with respect to Middles Ages. For instance, regions specialized in the production of weapons for the legions, others on certain types of pottery, etc.

  Ward-Perkins noted that after decades of so-called “Barbarians invasions,” economic activity showed serious signs of decline in the Empire, as evidenced by the collapse of manufactured goods such as pottery or “high-end” building materials. Besides, archaeological excavations also lead to the conclusion that the use of coins significantly diminished during that period.

  Since every region became dependent on the others, the economic foundations of the Western Empire became vulnerable to any disruptive event. And this is what happened for two centuries. It is interesting to note that in the same time the Byzantine Empire was experiencing relative peace and economic boom, as evidenced by archaeological findings.

  As the economy of the West was hit by several shocks, the Roman Empire got caught in a vicious circle, meaning that wars and defeats led to weaker supply activity in some regions, resulting in economic problems everywhere, budget issues, less transfers to the legions, social unrest, and thus further military defeats, and so on.

  The example of the Western Roman Empire is striking, as its collapse also led to a serious decline in terms of technology. Thus, the question is whether it is a relevant proxy for the current Western capitalist empire.

  No one knows for sure, but as Ward-Perkins wrote in 2005: “Romans before the fall were as certain as we are today that their world would continue forever substantially unchanged. They were wrong. We would be wise not to repeat their complacency.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 23:30

• Visualizing Key Generation-Defining Events In US History
  Visualizing Key Generation-Defining Events In US History

  Looking back at history is a necessity when trying to understand what the future may hold.

  Using insights from our Generational Power Index 2021 report, along with survey data from Pew Research in 2016, Visual Capitalist’s Iman Ghosh identified some key milestones for each cohort, to understand how these events helped shape each generation’s unique perspectives.

  

  Quick Context on Generational Definitions

  Before diving in, it’s important to clarify which generations we’ve included in our research, along with their age and birth year ranges.

  

  These generational categories aren’t universal, but we went with the most widely cited definitions from reputable U.S. sources including the Pew Research and the U.S. Federal Reserve. It’s also worth noting that these generational definitions are somewhat specific to North America. For this reason, the focus is on U.S. historic events.

  Defining Events: Silent Generation

  The oldest members of the Silent Generation were 11 years old at the start of World War II, and were teenagers by the time it ended. In other words, their formative years fell smack dab in the middle of one of the biggest international conflicts in modern history.

  Because of this, it makes sense that World War II ranks as the second most impactful event in their lifetimes, trailing only the far more recent Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (2001).

  Most Impactful Historic Events, Silent Gen (Survey Results)

  

  In fact, the Silent Generation cited four different wars on their list, more than any other cohort. For context, Boomers identified three conflicts (including the Cold War), while Millennials only referenced one (Iraq/Afghanistan).

  Of course, other not-so-violent events made the list as well. And interestingly, some of these impressionable moments occurred later on in life.

  For example, the youngest members of The Silent Generation were already in their mid-t0-late forties when cellphones became common in the ‘90s—yet, 27% identified the tech revolution as one of the top 10 most impactful events that happened in their lifetime.

  Clearly, life never stops throwing you curve balls—no matter how far along you might be.

  Most Notable Historical Events: Baby Boomers

  Many of the historical experiences cited by Baby Boomers were related to war and violent acts. For instance, Boomers identified two assassinations on their list—John F. Kennedy’s in 1963, and Martin Luther King’s in 1968.

  Most Impactful Historic Events, Boomers (Survey Results)

  

  For this generation, the moon landing in 1969 made the cut, as did Barack Obama’s election win in 2008.

  Baby Boomers only identified one event that was unique to their cohort (Martin Luther King’s death). It’s worth noting that responses varied between Americans of different racial backgrounds. Not surprisingly, Black Americans were far more likely to name MLK’s death as a top defining moment.

  Most Notable Historical Events: Gen X

  For Gen Xers, two unique events made their list: the Challenger disaster (1986) and the Gulf War (1991). Interestingly, neither of of these events stood out for other generations.

  The Challenger disaster impact was widely felt because it involved civilians alongside astronauts, making the space shuttle’s explosion all the more notorious.

  Most Impactful Historic Events, Gen Xers (Survey Results)

  

  Hurricane Katrina (which occurred in 2005) is the only natural disaster to make it on any of these lists. The hurricane—which caused a significant share of New Orleans’ population to resettle—left a lasting impression on the nation.

  Most Notable Historical Events: Millennials

  Millennials remember the September 11 attacks the most of all generations, with 86% citing it as their most influential event. They also paid close attention to the aftermath of this occurrence, as marked by the inclusion of both the Iraq/Afghanistan wars and the death of Osama Bin Laden among their most notable events.

  Most Impactful Historic Events, Millennials (Survey Results)

  

  Sadly, a lot of Millennials recollect instances of gun violence more than any other generation, from Orlando and Columbine to Sandy Hook.

  Last but not least, Millennials are the only generation to note the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, and the subsequent Great Recession, as a momentous event. This makes sense considering many of them began their careers in its aftermath.

  Gen Z and Younger

  The Pew Research survey data was collected in 2016, so opinions on more recent events have not been collected.

  That said, it could be premature to say in the short term which events will leave a lasting impression on generations, young and old.

  According to the above data, the election of Barack Obama was a lasting milestone in recent history. Will the election of Donald Trump leave a similar impact? How will COVID-19 be regarded in the future? Time will tell which events will define future generations.

  Moments, Movements, and Everything in Between

  One key takeaway worth emphasizing is just how varied these formative events can be. Some were experienced as a single moment, while others were a culmination of shifts over several years.

  It’s also clear that timing and duration are not the only determining factors behind an event’s influence on American society. For example, the moon landing was a tangible moment with a date stamp, whereas the tech revolution has a much fuzzier start (before exploding in significance alongside the Dotcom boom and bust).

  Also interesting is what is absent from the top results. For example, the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 is barely referenced.

  In short, a variety of impactful events and more gradual revolutions have made their mark on American society. Some have influenced specific generations, while others have transcended generational boundaries and unified the American public.

  Download the Generational Power Report (.pdf)

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 23:00

• Denying Reality Leads To Tyranny And Societal Failure
  Denying Reality Leads To Tyranny And Societal Failure

  Authored by Patrick Barron via The Mises Institute,

  The common thread that connects failed societies, from Weimar Germany to the Soviet Union, is an almost pathological insistence on denying reality. Weimar Germany denied that masses of printed money would destroy civilized society. The Soviet Union insisted that Soviet Man would emerge spontaneously from the ashes of capitalist society. Weimar Germany spawned Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany was completely destroyed, both physically and politically, by the World War II Allies. Mercifully, the Soviet Union simply collapsed after seventy years of consuming capital to achieve the phantom of the classless society. Today both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are synonymous with tyranny and failure. Both nations murdered millions. Both nations no longer exist. True, Germany exists as does Russia, but I contend that both are new nations. Neither is perfect, but neither claims a political heritage to the nation that preceded it.

  Pathological policy errors flowed inexorably from a skewed view of reality in both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Once this view of reality was deemed to be above criticism, its champions adopted increasingly tyrannical policies. Nazi Germany’s Aryan Supremacy racial theories seemingly justified the murder of the handicapped, Gypsies, those of alternative sexual orientation, Jews, and Slavs. In the name of birthing a new Soviet Man, the Soviet Union murdered anyone who stood in the way of its program to confiscate all businesses, including small farms. When businesses and farms failed, there was no soul searching as to root causes that might lie in Marxism itself. No, the problem had to be saboteurs within society. Reality, you see, was what the Soviet Union’s Politburo said it was. As the vanguard of the proletariat, the Politburo stood outside society and saw its flaws. Those who disagreed were blind to this insight and had to be eliminated.

  Chasing the Phantoms of Alternative Reality

  Today the West especially is adopting policies that flow from alternative realities that, frankly, do not exist.

  Here I list just a few:

  1. Catastrophic global warming/climate change is caused by man and must be stopped. I prefer to qualify the term “global warming/climate change” by the adjective “catastrophic”. Is the world warming? Who knows? Is the climate changing? Probably. But neither global warming nor climate change is “catastrophic”. Yet it has become almost an article of faith that the earth is on the precipice of an environmental catastrophe, requiring ever more radical handicaps on our freedoms and the economy.

  2. White privilege in the US is responsible for crimes against minorities and disparities in wealth. This critical race theory has spawned witch hunts for secret and shadowy white supremacist groups especially in the military, which has empowered investigators to find evidence of these groups and root them out. It will be imperative that these investigators actually uncover such groups, whether they exist or not. Critical race theory is the old Marxist class struggle theory in new clothes. The Marxist class struggle theory postulated that we all are born into a class and cannot escape its prejudices. But notice that the Marxist and now the Race theorists consider that they themselves are not susceptible to the prejudices in which all the rest of us are trapped. Very convenient, eh?

  3. Covid-19 is an existential threat to human life on earth. Constitutionally guaranteed human rights may be violated with impunity. Who gets to decide all this? Why, elected officials and government bureaucrats, of course.

  4. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) explains that government need not moderate its spending. Government can always manufacture more money in order to fund new programs and pay its debts . More government spending can always prevent a drop in aggregate demand. Government debt is irrelevant, because “we owe it to ourselves”. MMT gave government elected officials exactly what they always wanted–carte blanche to spend, spend, and spend some more and not worry about justifying or prioritizing spending. As Keynes actually said, pay people to dig holes in the ground and pay others to fill them back up. What could possibly go wrong?

  Champions of the above denials of reality refuse to discuss whether their view of reality is accurate. All are articles of faith and cannot be questioned. In fact, to question them is considered to be an admission of ignorance, guilt, or perfidy. One wants to destroy Mother Earth, enslave minorities, kill innocent people, and prevent all in society from enjoying unlimited prosperity. It’s the old straw man fallacy on steroids. Furthermore, resources will be expended to pursue these phantoms, and more resources will be expended to protect oneself from being caught in a witch hunt. Society will live in fear–fear of global warming, fear of being branded a racist, fear of contracting a dread disease. Unfortunately, what society does not fear is that our lifetime’s savings will be wiped out by inflation made possible by MMT.

  

  The Basics of Reality

  Contrast these phantoms with the pragmatic basics of sound economics: namely, that in order to prosper man must face the reality of human existence—primarily scarcity and uncertainty. People’s preferences must be accepted at face value. Man acts. This is an irrefutable axiom in that to deny it is to confirm its validity. His action is rational in the sense that he believes that his action will improve his condition. He understands cause and effect. He performs one act at a time. He performs the most important act first; in other words, he ranks his actions in order of importance. Performing an act means that he must sacrifice the execution of others until later; in other words, acting means giving up some other preference, at least until some later time. Man’s ordinal ranking of preferences means that the cost of an action is determined by what he eschews until later. No two men have the identical ordinal ranking of preferences; plus, the preferences cannot be assigned a cardinal value in order to compare one man’s preferences with another. Man discovers the concept of comparative advantage and adopts the division of labor in order to accomplish more. Through the market process, man adopts a universal medium of exchange (money) in order to break the tyranny of direct barter. Now man can indirectly exchange his specialized production for a universal medium of exchange in order to obtain his real wants. Man invents government as a specialized service in order to protect his person and his property at a lower cost. He invents law in order to adjudicate inevitable disputes.

  All this is reality. Peaceful exchange requires social cooperation, which brings about peace and prosperity among men everywhere. As advice columnist Ann Landers used to say, Wake up and smell the coffee!

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 22:30

• IRS Launches Crackdown To Ensure Crypto Investors Pay Their Taxes
  IRS Launches Crackdown To Ensure Crypto Investors Pay Their Taxes

  Yesterday’s news that the DoJ and IRS are digging into Binance amid whispers about allegations of tax fraud, manipulation and AML violations was just the latest indication from the government that it is taking enforcement of securities taxes tied to crypto wealth very seriously. In case that wasn’t already clear, WSJ published a story in its “Tax Report” section (with the federal tax deadline just days away at May 17) reminding readers that the IRS under President Joe Biden is coming for your crypto wealth – and those that don’t cough it up might be subject to harsh penalties, both financial and criminal.

  

  It starts by reminding readers that two new IRS investigations to catch crypto tax cheats targeting various exchanges have been launched in recent months. In April, a judge in Boston approved an IRS summons to the payments company Circle and its affiliates, including the crypto exchange Poloniex. In May, a judge in San Francisco approved a similar summons for records from Kraken, another exchange based in California. Both summonses apply to customers who have traded more than $20K in crypto in any single year between 2016 and 2020.

  “With these summonses and other actions, the IRS is mounting a full-court press to show taxpayers how seriously it takes cryptocurrency compliance,” says Don Fort, a former chief of IRS criminal investigation now with Kostelanetz & Fink. “Taxpayers should take it seriously too.”

  Crypto exchanges don’t report client information to the IRS like discount digital brokerages do, so there’s temptation for traders to try and skate by. But if this approach worked in the past, be warned: that could change this year now that the Dems are back in power.

  Binance doesn’t even allow American customers to trade on its platform (though it has been accused of illegally doing so by turning a blind eye to users trying to skirt this rule), but other investigations and summonses of note go back even further. In 2016, the IRS received approval for a similar summons for Coinbase and obtained information for about 13K customers. The agency sent letters urging many of them to make sure their crypto taxes were paid, as the IRS might soon be taking a hard look.

  Admissions from the IRS in court filings suggest this tactic has been working for the agency. In one filing to justify its summonses, the the agency said it had received more than 1,000 amended tax returns and collected $13 million from crypto holders with more than $20,000 of transactions, plus another $12 million from other crypto notices, and audits are ongoing.

  Remember, those who are caught skirting taxes often are forced to enter the IRS’s Voluntary Disclosure program for taxpayers with criminal liability, a program that usually lets participants out of prosecution but imposes large penalties.

  Another filing hinted at a different strategy being employed by the agency: the agency plans to compare data it receives from Kraken to data on offshore crypto transactions. It didn’t identify the source of this offshore data to look for discrepancies. Kraken may also soon need to turn over phone numbers, email addresses, DoBs, tax ID numbers and other sensitive details as part of the subpoena.

  With all this in mind, here’s a few quick reminders from WSJ:

  When it comes to crypto tax laws, here are the basics: In 2014, the IRS declared that cryptocurrencies are property, not currencies like the dollar, and therefore are treated like an investment property akin to stocks. If an investor sells crypto after holding it for longer than a year, the profit is a typically considered a long-term capital gain, and taxed at lower rates than ordinary income under current law (although Congress may soon change this for the highest earners).

  If the holding period is a year or less, the profit is a taxed as a short-term capital gain as the same rate as ordinary income like wages. Capital losses on crypto investments can offset taxable capital gains on other assets as well as crypto, plus up to $3,000 of ordinary income such as wages a year—a valuable benefit. Unused losses can be carried forward to future years.

  Tax triggers: Any time a cryptocurrency is bought or sold or spent is a taxable transaction. If you trade bitcoin for dogecoin, that transaction has tax exposure.

  If you buy a tesla, you will owe an additional tax on the transfer on top of any sales taxes you pay. These rules make bitcoin difficult to use for payments, something that regulators no doubt intended.

  Lot identification: Investors who bought the same coin at different prices can often minimize taxes by selling the lot that would give them the smallest tax exposure. For example, say that someone sold bitcoins at $22,000 each in December 2020 and had coins bought in 2016 for $600 and 2017 for $16,000. Selling the 2016 coins would mean a taxable gain of $21,400 each, while selling the 2017 coins would mean a gain of $6,000 each—a big difference.

  Offshore holdings: In late 2020, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a Treasury Department unit known as FinCEN, announced that it may soon require US taxpayers holding more than $10,000 of cryptocurrencies offshore to file FinCEN Form 114, known as the FBAR, to report these holdings. But this rule has yet to be adopted, and wasn’t in effect for 2020.

  * * *
  Source: WSJ

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 22:00

• Portland Police Union President Says City Is "On The Precipice Of A Gang War"
  Portland Police Union President Says City Is “On The Precipice Of A Gang War”

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  The president of Portland, Oregon’s police union said in a blistering new statement that the city is on the brink of war.

  “We need to talk about the elephant in the room: gun violence. We are on the precipice of a gang war,” said Daryl Turner, head of the Portland Police Association.

  

  Police in the state’s largest city had responded to 357 shootings as of May 9, an increase of over 100 percent from the same time period the year prior.

  Portland dealt with a jump in violence in 2020, with both shootings and murders skyrocketing, along with near-nightly riots that regularly diverted attention from 911 calls.

  Officials in the city have tried addressing both matters, escalating the response to rioting and approving $6 million to combat shootings.

  But the city has not brought back the Gun Violence Reduction Team (GVRT) and none of the new funding went to the police. That’s on top of the City Council cutting money for the police force in 2020.

  Turner said that commissioners “only use data when it serves their political agendas” and called what he sees as a continued ignorance of statistics and shifting of blame unacceptable.

  “The GVRT proactively policed with a holistic approach, building partnerships and relationships to get illegal guns off the street. It’s obvious to everyone except for City Council that more guns and increased gang activity mean more violence,” he said in the new statement.

  City Council members are now focused on making additional cuts to the Portland Police Bureau’s budget, which will not address the gun violence epidemic, according to Turner.

  “The answer is that our community deserves a fully staffed police force with a minimum of 1,000 officers and a full budget commitment to addressing gun violence, AND our community deserves adequate social service resources. Forcing us to choose one over the other is short-sighted. Social services and alternatives resources are not a replacement for police officers and common-sense public safety infrastructure,” he said.

  A spokesman for Mayor Ted Wheeler, a Democrat who also serves as police commissioner and sits on the council, declined to comment, referring The Epoch Times to Portland’s Office of Violence Prevention. The office did not respond to an inquiry.

  Nike Green, the office’s director, last month called the jump in shootings “a public health crisis.” Green said the office was using “data, research, and evidence-based practices to prioritize partnerships designed to interrupt cycles of gun violence,” such as programs with violence interrupters, who seek to stop shootings before they happen.

  The other city commissioners did not respond to requests for comment.

  The council on Thursday approved a 2021 budget that includes a $3 million cut to the police bureau, local media reported.

  Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty, a Democrat, said in a statement that she appreciated the budget not adding “ongoing funds back into the Portland Police Bureau after council reallocated money from the bureau into the Portland Street Response and other community investments last year.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 21:30

• PFAS Crisis: Toxic "Forever Chemicals" Found In US Mothers' Breast Milk
  PFAS Crisis: Toxic “Forever Chemicals” Found In US Mothers’ Breast Milk

  New research conducted by Toxic-Free Future, a Seattle-based non-profit fighting for safer products free of deadly chemicals, found that women’s breast milk, especially in the US, contains dangerous levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). 

  Erika Schreder, a co-author and science director with Toxic-Free Future, said the findings “are cause for concern” and highlight a possible threat to newborns.

  Schreder collected 50 breast milk samples and discovered that the PFAS contamination was nearly 2,000 times higher than the level of regular drinking water.

  “The study shows that PFAS contamination of breast milk is likely universal in the US and that these harmful chemicals are contaminating what should be nature’s perfect food,” Schreder said.

  

  PFAS consists of approximately 9,000 compounds and is used in manufacturing clothing, food packaging, cooking products with Teflon, and cleaning products. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down and build-up in humans. 

  

  The study, titled “Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Breast Milk: Concerning Trends for Current-Use PFAS,” was peer-reviewed and published in the Environmental Science and Technology journal on Thursday. It said PFAS chemicals are linked to various diseases such as cancer, thyroid, lower sperm counts, and liver disease. 

  “The study provides more evidence that the PFAS that companies are currently using and putting into products are behaving like the ones they phased out, and they’re also getting into breast milk and exposing children at a very vulnerable phase of development,” she said.

  “Moms work hard to protect their babies, but big corporations are putting these, and other toxic chemicals that can contaminate breast milk, in products when safer options are available,” Schreder continued. 

  Besides breast milk, a separate study by the non-profit Environmental Working Group (EWG) reported 19 million Americans had been exposed to PFAS in their drinking water. EWG researchers found 610 locations, including public water systems, military bases, military and civilian airports, industrial plants, dumps, and firefighter training sites, across the country with dangerous levels of PFAS chemicals in the ground. 

  America appears to have a PFAS problem. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 21:00

• A Timeline Of "The Great Reset" Agenda
  A Timeline Of “The Great Reset” Agenda

  Authored by Tim Hinchliffe via GlobalResearch.ca,

  Say it’s 2014 and you’ve had this idea for a technocratic Great Reset of the world economy for some time now, but it only works if the entire planet is rocked by a pandemic. How do you go about selling your idea?

  “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future” — Klaus Schwab, WEF

  

  If you are World Economic Forum (WEF) Founder Klaus Schwab, you attempt to sell your vision of a global Utopia via a Great Reset of the world order in three simple steps:

  1. Announce your intention to revamp every aspect of society with global governance, and keep repeating that message

  2. When your message isn’t getting through, simulate fake pandemic scenarios that show why the world needs a great reset

  3. If the fake pandemic scenarios aren’t persuasive enough, wait a couple months for a real global crisis to occur, and repeat step one

  It took Schwab and the Davos elite about six years to watch their great reset ideology grow from a tiny Swiss seed in 2014 to a European super-flower pollinating the entire globe in 2020.

  

  The so-called “Great Reset” promises to build “a more secure, more equal, and more stable world” if everyone on the planet agrees to “act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.”

  But it wouldn’t have been possible to contemplate materializing such an all-encompassing plan for a new world order without a global crisis, be it manufactured or of unfortunate happenstance, that shocked society to its core.

  “In the end, the outcome was tragic: the most catastrophic pandemic in history with hundreds of millions of deaths, economic collapse and societal upheaval” — Clade X pandemic simulation (May, 2018)

  So, in May, 2018, the WEF partnered with Johns Hopkins to simulate a fictitious pandemic — dubbed “Clade X” —  to see how prepared the world be if ever faced with such a crisis.

  A little over a year later, the WEF once again teamed-up with Johns Hopkins, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to stage another pandemic exercise called Event 201 in October, 2019.

  Both simulations concluded that the world wasn’t prepared for a global pandemic.

  And a few short months following the conclusion of Event 201, which specifically simulated a coronavirus outbreak, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared that the coronavirus had reached pandemic status on March 11, 2020.

  “The next severe pandemic will not only cause great illness and loss of life but could also trigger major cascading economic and societal consequences that could contribute greatly to global impact and suffering” — Event 201 pandemic simulation (October, 2019)

  Since then, just about every scenario covered in the Clade X and Event 201 simulations has come into play, including:

  • Governments implementing lockdowns worldwide

  • The collapse of many industries

  • Growing mistrust between governments and citizens

  • A greater adoption of biometric surveillance technologies

  • Social media censorship in the name of combating misinformation

  • The desire to flood communication channels with “authoritative” sources

  • A global lack of personal protective equipment

  • The breakdown of international supply chains

  • Mass unemployment

  • Rioting in the streets

  • And a whole lot more!

  After the nightmare scenarios had fully materialized by mid-2020, the WEF founder declared “now is the time for a “Great Reset” in June of this year.

  Was it excellent forecasting, planning, and modeling on the part of the WEF and partners that Clade X and Event 201 turned out to be so prophetic, or was there something more to it?

  Timeline

  Below is a condensed timeline of events that tracks the Great Reset agenda that went from just a “hope” in 2014 to a globalist ideology touted by royalty, the media, and heads of state the world-over in 2020.

  2014-2017: Klaus Schwab calls for Great Reset and WEF repeats message

  Ahead of the 2014 WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland, Schwab announced that he hoped the WEF would push the reset button on the global economy.

  The ‘Great Reset’: A Technocratic Agenda that Waited Years for a Global Crisis to Exploit

  The WEF would go on to repeat that message for years.

  Between 2014 and 2017, the WEF called to reshape, restart, reboot, and reset the global order every single year, each aimed at solving various “crises.”

  • 2014: WEF publishes meeting agenda entitled “The Reshaping of the World: Consequences for Society, Politics and Business.”

  • 2015: WEF publishes article in collaboration with VOX EU called “We need to press restart on the global economy.”

  • 2016: WEF holds panel called “How to reboot the global economy.”

  • 2017: WEF publishes article saying “Our world needs a reset in how we operate.”

  Then in 2018, the Davos elites turned their heads towards simulating fake pandemic scenarios to see how prepared the world would be in the face of a different crisis.

  2018-2019: WEF, Johns Hopkins & Gates Foundation simulate fake pandemics

  On May 15, 2018, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted the “Clade X” pandemic exercise in partnership with the WEF.

  The Clade X exercise included mock video footage of actors giving scripted news reports about a fake pandemic scenario (video below).

  The Clade X event also included discussion panels with real policymakers who assessed that governments and industry were not adequately prepared for the fictitious global pandemic.

  “In the end, the outcome was tragic: the most catastrophic pandemic in history with hundreds of millions of deaths, economic collapse and societal upheaval,” according to a WEF report on Clade X.

  “There are major unmet global vulnerabilities and international system challenges posed by pandemics that will require new robust forms of public-private cooperation to address” — Event 201 pandemic simulation (October, 2019)

  Then on October 18, 2019, in partnership with Johns Hopkins and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the WEF ran Event 201.

  During the scenario, the entire global economy was shaken, there were riots on the streets, and high-tech surveillance measures were needed to “stop the spread.”

  Two fake pandemics were simulated in the two years leading up to the real coronavirus crisis.

  “Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation” — Event 201 pandemic simulation (October, 2019)

  The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security issued a public statement on January 24, 2020, explicitly addressing that Event 201 wasn’t meant to predict the future.

  “To be clear, the Center for Health Security and partners did not make a prediction during our tabletop exercise. For the scenario, we modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic, but we explicitly stated that it was not a prediction. Instead, the exercise served to highlight preparedness and response challenges that would likely arise in a very severe pandemic.”

  Intentional or not, Event 201 “highlighted” the “fictional” challenges of a pandemic, along with recommendations that go hand-in-hand with the great reset agenda that has set up camp in the nefarious “new normal.”

  “The next severe pandemic will not only cause great illness and loss of life but could also trigger major cascading economic and societal consequences that could contribute greatly to global impact and suffering” — Event 201 pandemic simulation (October, 2019)

  Together, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation submitted seven recommendations for governments, international organizations, and global business to follow in the event of a pandemic.

  The Event 201 recommendations call for greater collaboration between the public and private sectors while emphasizing the importance of establishing partnerships with un-elected, global institutions such as the WHO, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the International Air Transport Organization, to carry out a centralized response.

  One of the recommendations calls for governments to partner with social media companies and news organization to censor content and control the flow of information.

  “Media companies should commit to ensuring that authoritative messages are prioritized and that false messages are suppressed including though [sic] the use of technology” — Event 201 pandemic simulation (October, 2019)

  According to the report, “Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation.

  “National public health agencies should work in close collaboration with WHO to create the capability to rapidly develop and release consistent health messages.

  “For their part, media companies should commit to ensuring that authoritative messages are prioritized and that false messages are suppressed including though [sic] the use of technology.”

  Sound familiar?

  Throughout 2020, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube have been censoring, suppressing, and flagging any coronavirus-related information that goes against WHO recommendations as a matter of policy, just as Event 201 had recommended.

  Big tech companies have also deployed the same content suppression tactics during the 2020 US presidential election — slapping “disputed” claims on content that question election integrity.

  2020: WEF declares ‘Now is the time for a Great Reset’

  After calling for a great reset in 2014, the Davos crowd repeated the same ideology for a few more years before pivoting towards simulating faux pandemic scenarios.

  A few months after the WEF established that nobody was prepared to deal with a coronavirus pandemic, the WHO declared there was a coronavirus pandemic.

  All of a sudden! the great reset narrative that the WEF had been nurturing for six years, found a place to pitch its tent in the “new normal” camp.

  “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future,” Schwab declared on June 3, 2020.

  And that’s where we’re at today.

  • The Davos elites said they wanted a global reset of the economy many years ago

  • They role-played what would happen if a pandemic were to occur

  • And now they’re saying that the great reset ideology is the solution to the pandemic, and it must be enacted quickly

  The great reset is a means to an end.

  Next on the agenda is a complete makeover of society under a technocratic regime of un-elected bureaucrats who want to dictate how the world is run from the top down, leveraging invasive technologies to track and trace your every move while censoring and silencing anyone who dares not comply.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 20:30

• These Are The World's Top 50 Social Media 'Influencers'
  These Are The World’s Top 50 Social Media ‘Influencers’

  In the modern digital world, social media reach is power.

  The people with the most followers on Twitter, for example, have a massive platform to spread their messages, while those with large, engaged followings on Instagram are an advertiser’s dream sponsor partner.

  Social media can also be an equalizer of power. As Visual Capitalist’s Omri Wallach notes, while it’s true that many celebrities boast large followings across platforms, social media has also enabled previously unknown personalities to turn YouTube or TikTok fame into veritable star power and influence.

  Who has the biggest reach across the entire social media universe? Instead of looking at who has the most followers on Instagram, Twitter, or other networks, we ranked the most-followed personalities across all major platforms combined.

  

  Who Has the Most Overall Followers on Social Media?

  We parsed through hundreds of the most-followed accounts on multiple platforms to narrow down the top influencers across social media as of April 2021.

  Sources include trackers of the most followers on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok, verified directly on site and with social media tracker Socialblade.

  The results? A top 50 list of social media influencers consisting of athletes, musicians, politicians, and other personalities.

  

  Unsurprisingly, celebrities reign supreme on social media. As of April 2021, soccer superstar Cristiano Ronaldo was the most-followed person on social media with almost 500 million total followers.

  But there are other illuminating highlights, such as the global reach of music. With large and diverse fanbases, artists account for half of the top 50 largest social media followings.

  Also notable is the power of Instagram, which was the biggest platform for 67% of the top 50 social media influencers. This includes hard-to-categorize celebrities like the Kardashians and Jenners, which turned reality TV and social media fame into business and media empires.

  Download the Generational Power Report (.pdf)

  The Most Followers on Twitter, TikTok, and YouTube

  However, it’s not only celebrities that dominate social media.

  Personalities that started on one social media platform and developed massive followings include TikTok’s most-followed star Charli D’Amelio and YouTubers Whindersson Nunes Batista, Germán Garmendia, and Felix “PewDiePie” Kjellberg.

  Politicians were also prominent influencers. Former U.S. President Barack Obama has the most followers on Twitter, and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi has more than 175 million followers across social media.

  Former U.S. President Donald Trump would have also made the list with more than 140 million followers across social media before being banned from multiple platforms on January 8, 2021.

  A Generational Look at Social Media Influence

  While older generations have had to adapt to social media platforms, younger generations have grown up alongside them. As a measure of cultural importance, this gives Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z a rare leg-up on older generations.

  Millennials, in particular, hold the lion’s share of spots in this top 50 list:

  

  The average age of the top 50 influencers was just over 37.

  In our Generational Power Index (GPI), which measures the share of power generations hold in various categories, digital platforms were a key area where Millennials derived their power and influence. Overall, Baby Boomers—and to a lesser extent, Gen X—still run the show in most areas of society today.

  Social Media Influence, Going Forward

  As most fans and advertisers know, not all social media accounts and followings are homogenous.

  Many influencers with relatively small followings have more consistent engagement, and are often able to demand high advertising fees as a result.

  Conversely, most social media platforms are reckoning with a severe glut of fake accounts or bots that inflate follower counts, impacting everything from celebrities and politicians to personalities and businesses.

  Regardless, social media has become a mainstay platform (or soapbox) for today’s cultural influencers. Billions of people turn to social media for news, engagement, recommendations, and entertainment, and new platforms are always on the rise.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 20:00

• What Is Proof-Of-Stake? How It Differs From Proof-Of-Work
  What Is Proof-Of-Stake? How It Differs From Proof-Of-Work

  Authored by Jeff Benson and Matt Hussey via Decrypto.co,

  In brief

  • Proof of stake is a consensus mechanism, which makes sure that only legitimate transactions get added to blocks.

  • It works by having validators lock up their cryptocurrency to secure the network.

  Mining cryptocurrency is an energy-intensive business. But it doesn’t have to be.

  The Ethereum community has been working to change how the currency is created in order to radically reduce the blockchain’s carbon footprint. The method it’s working toward is called proof of stake (PoS).

  Proof of stake is an alternative to proof of work (PoW), which Bitcoin and Ethereum currently use.

  

  Both PoS and PoW are examples of consensus mechanisms.

  Consensus Mechanisms

  Public blockchains, at their most basic level, are just databases.

  Most databases set permissions for who can access and edit them. This centralized control is convenient but makes them vulnerable to hacks. By contrast, blockchains make everyone running the software—from exchanges to traders in their basement—responsible for updating them.

  That sounds like it would be messy, which is why blockchains use “consensus mechanisms” or “consensus algorithms.” Consensus mechanisms keep the network humming, making sure that only legitimate transactions get added to blocks. It’s all the nodes—or computers running the blockchain software—checking together to say, “Yes, this is true.”

  In doing so, they guard against 51% attacks, which is when someone gets more than half of the computing power in a distributed network and can then control it.

  Proof of Work

  To prevent attacks, which make it possible to spend funds twice, Bitcoin uses the proof-of-work consensus algorithm. That system asks people to use hardware and electricity to help the network process transactions. In proof of work, miners (or, their computers, to be precise) try to solve fiendishly difficult puzzles in order to be the first to complete a block of transactions. Their work helps to verify the transactions are legitimate. As compensation, they’re rewarded with cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin.

  Proof of work was built into the design of Bitcoin, and replicated by other cryptocurrencies, including Ethereum. However, one of the by-products of this system is it requires a lot of electricity and machines working on a problem in order to solve it.

  Proof of Stake

  Ethereum developers are building a separate set of upgrades, Ethereum 2.0 that will run on proof of stake and will eventually merge with the Ethereum mainnet.

  Proof of stake on Ethereum 2.0 aims to achieve the same outcome as proof of work: to securely verify transactions on the blockchain.

  But whereas PoW miners dedicate hardware resources (large, expensive computers) to secure the network, PoS “validators” dedicate their cryptocurrency. With PoS, to get a chance to verify transactions in a block—and get the associated fees—validators must lock up, or stake, at least 32 ETH that they can’t spend. The blockchain uses that locked-up crypto to secure the network.

  According to the Ethereum Foundation, proof of stake has several advantages over proof of work.

  • 🖥️ Since earning rewards isn’t based on having the most computing power, you don’t need super-fancy hardware.

  • 👨‍💻 That opens up the possibility for more people to participate in running an Ethereum node, which will allow for further decentralization and more resistance to 51% attacks.

  • 🔌 Because of the lower hardware requirements, proof of stake uses far less energy than proof of work.

  How Does the Network Choose?

  Validators are chosen at random by the network to propose new blocks.

  They are also randomly grouped into committees of 128 nodes, which change daily. Every time a new block of transactions is created and added to the blockchain database, the PoS consensus mechanism selects multiple committees to “attest” that the block that’s been proposed is correct.

  Validators receive rewards for both making blocks and attesting to seeing other blocks being made. If validators are offline or not making correct attestations, they receive a penalty. If they try to attack the network, they can lose up to their entire stake.

  The algorithm is designed to make an attack on the network statistically improbable. According to ConsenSys (which funds an editorially independent Decrypt), “There is less than a 1 in a trillion chance that an attacker controlling 1/3 of the validators on the network would control ⅔ of the validators in a committee to successfully execute an attack.”

  The Future

  Ethereum isn’t the first cryptocurrency to use proof of stake.

  Algorand, Cardano, Cosmos, EOS, Polkadot, and Tezos have all implemented a version of proof of stake.

  The Ethereum network is currently in Phase 0 of its upgrade to Ethereum 2.0. While people have staked ETH to the network, it’s not yet ready to be built upon.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 19:30

• NASA Rocket Launch Could Dazzle Saturday Night Sky In Eastern US
  NASA Rocket Launch Could Dazzle Saturday Night Sky In Eastern US

  Tens of millions of Americans could be in for a dazzling optical treat Saturday evening as NASA gears up to launch its Black Brant XII sounding rocket carrying the KiNET-X payload from its Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. 

  A four-stage Black Brant XII rocket carrying the KiNET-X payload will be launched around 2010 ET Saturday. There is a 40-minute launch window. 

  LAUNCH UPDATE 🚀 The Black Brant XII launch is now scheduled for no earlier than Saturday, May 15, with the window opening at 8:10 p.m. ET. The team continues to inspect the rocket and launcher after the vehicle came in contact with a launcher support during launch preparations. pic.twitter.com/2IMEkZ8wMn

  — NASA Wallops (@NASA_Wallops) May 13, 2021

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

  The rocket “will be used for the mission that includes the release of barium vapor that will form two green-violet clouds that may be visible for about 30 seconds,” NASA said. 

  The mission is called KiNETic-scale energy and momentum transport eXperiment, or KiNet-X. Researchers want to study a fundamental problem in space plasmas: how are energy and momentum transported between different regions of space magnetically connected? 

  What makes this launch so different from Central Florida ones is that barium vapor tracers will be visible for much of the eastern US from the Atlantic coast to the Mississippi River.

  

  Here’s an example of what millions of Americans might see on Saturday night, weather permitting, of course…

  

  Live coverage of the launch will be made available on the Wallops IBM video site around 1940 ET on launch day. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 19:00

• Fed Goal: Destroy 26% Of Dollar's Buying Power In 15 Years
  Fed Goal: Destroy 26% Of Dollar’s Buying Power In 15 Years

  Authored by Brian McGlinchey via Stark Realities,

  As Americans warily eye new data showing both consumer and producer price inflation heating up beyond expectations, few of them realize the Federal Reserve has an explicit goal to relentlessly degrade the purchasing power of their savings.

  The Fed weakens the dollar—and pushes prices higher—by creating new money and pushing it out into the economy. If the Fed hits its stated target, the U.S. dollar will lose 10% of its buying power over the next 5 years, 26% over the next 15, and 40% over the next 25. As bad as that sounds, history suggests the dollar will fare even worse than the Fed intends it to.

  

  The Fed’s Evolving Mandate: So Long, “Stable Prices”

  For much of its 108-year history, the Federal Reserve had either an implied or explicit mandate to preserve the value of the U.S. dollar—and it failed spectacularly. Between the Fed’s founding in 1913 and 2012, the dollar lost approximately 96% of its buying power.

  In 2012, the Fed formally dropped the value-preservation pretense, brazenly declaring that, henceforth, it will deliberately cultivate price inflation at 2% a year.

  In the context of a single year, that may not sound like much. However, just as small plumbing leaks quietly cause devastating damage over time, a steady loss of a modest amount of purchasing power accumulates to a major blow to the dollar. Naturally, the Fed didn’t say it wants to cut the value of a dollar by 26% in 15 years, but that’s how the math plays out.

  When announcing its new philosophy, the Fed claimed a 2% inflation rate is “most consistent over the long run with the Fed’s statutory mandate.” Is it? The Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977 directs the Fed to “promote the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.”

  The Fed is clearly applying a creative interpretation of the word “stable.” Would a doctor use that term to describe a patient’s pulse that keeps losing two beats per minute at hourly intervals?

  It wasn’t long until the Fed was straining at the longer monetary leash it had given itself. Next, the central bank declared that, rather than viewing 2% as an upper limit on annual price increases, it will feel free to let inflation run hotter in a given year, pursuant to hitting a 2% average over time.

  Given history’s many examples of runaway inflation, that sounds a lot like the Fed is playing with fire.

  An August 2020 elaboration on the central bank’s philosophy offered little reassurance: Fed chair Jerome Powell said, “We are not tying ourselves to a particular mathematical formula that defines the average. Thus, our approach could be viewed as a flexible form of average inflation targeting.”

  An “average” without “a particular mathematical formula” sounds all too flexible indeed.

  Has the Inflation Virus Already Escaped the Fed’s Lab?

  This spring, Fed officials have been assuring Americans that recent price increases are merely “transitory“—that they don’t mark the start of a major upward trend.

  In the wake of April inflation data, those assurances are looking increasingly empty. First came a market-jarring report that consumer prices were 4.2% higher than the previous year. Next, we learned the Producer Price Index soared 6.2% from April 2020—the largest jump since the index started in 2010.

  Remember that 2% inflation target? Consumer prices have already risen 2% in the first four months of 2021 alone, with month-to-month increases growing steadily larger. So far this year, the Consumer Price Index has risen:

  • +0.2% in January
  • +0.4% in February
  • +0.6% in March
  • +0.8% in April

  The Fed’s Unspoken Mandate

  Since consumer price increases are driven in large part by the Fed’s creation of new money, there’s ample reason to think inflationary pressures will continue to grow, thanks to the Fed’s unspoken mandate: aiding and abetting federal government deficit spending.

  For the first seven months of the 2021 fiscal year, the federal government spent 90% more money than it took in—since October, $4.075 trillion in outlays against $2.14 trillion in receipts.

  When the government spends more money than it takes in, it covers the difference by issuing debt in the form of Treasury bonds, bills and notes. To create artificial demand for that debt and force interest rates lower than what a rational market would demand from an entity that’s $28 trillion in debt, the Fed has been buying much of the new debt with money it creates out of thin air.

  This eyebrow-raising practice is called “monetizing the debt,” and in recent times, the Fed has been taking it extreme levels. For example, in March and April of 2020 alone, the Fed monetized over $1.5 trillion of federal debt—everything the Treasury borrowed during that span.

  

  The Fed is barred from buying debt directly from the government. In what is essentially a sham transaction, the Fed defeats the spirit of that law by simply waiting until the debt is issued to the public and then buying it from a select group of large financial firms who are in on the arrangement.

  It bears repeating that it does so by creating new money, with the consequence of reducing the value of the other money already in circulation. As a means of financing government, then, inflation is a tax everyone pays, but nobody votes for—unless you count the unelected appointees to the Federal Reserve.

  A Cornered Fed Won’t Stop Printing Money Now

  The U.S. government-Federal Reserve cartel has painted itself into a corner.

  Absent the Fed’s purchase of Treasury debt, the federal government’s cost of borrowing would soar, as investors demand full compensation for the growing risk of loaning money to the increasingly debt-laden U.S. government. Since Treasury rates serve as a benchmark, consumer and corporate borrowing costs would soar too, tanking the economy.

  At the same time, the prospect of higher inflation puts upward pressure on rates, prompting the Fed to create more money to buy Treasury debt and push rates lower—yet that new money is itself an additional source of inflationary pressure.

  Meanwhile, blissfully oblivious to the growing peril, Congress and President Biden are eager to keep stacking trillion-dollar spending plans that hand out money to mismanaged municipalities, give cash payments to people who lost no income during the pandemic, finance a sprawling global empire, award cronies and incentivize unemployed people to stay unemployed.

  There’s no telling how or when this will end, but it won’t end well.

  Read more and subscribe at https://starkrealities.substack.com/

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 18:30

• Meet The Bank Of America Exec Accused Of Ruling Through COVID With An "Iron Fist"
  Meet The Bank Of America Exec Accused Of Ruling Through COVID With An “Iron Fist”

  Thomas K. Montag, Bank of America’s second in command, oversees about 17,000 people and still gets thing done in an “old school” kind of way.

  Such was the topic of a new profile on Montag, that highlighted his business practices as inclusive of favoritism and “ruling with an iron fist”, according to the New York Times.

  Montage was born in Portland, Oregon and started his career in 1985 at Goldman Sachs. He was a former offensive tackle for his high school football team before going on to work in swaps at a Goldman trading desk. In 2008, he joined Merrill Lynch to run its markets division, and was soon put in charge of the merger between B of A and Merrill. Anne Finucane, Bank of America’s vice chairman said: “The early days were certainly rocky, but he made it work.”

  But divisions that Montag was in charge of “blossomed” and spoke to his ability to cultivate large clients. Some of his employees, however, found his expectations unreasonable: 

  On Friday afternoons over the years, after the markets had closed, Mr. Montag sometimes sought out floor managers at their desks, current and former employees said, leaving Post-it notes scrawled with the words, “Where are you?” if they weren’t around.

  Montag would also routinely clip or add to bonuses for reasons that weren’t clear, at the last minute, employees said. Those who got additional bonuses were known as “FOT” or friends of Tom.

  

  One FOT was Gene Reilly, a hedge-fund manager who worked for him as Bank of America’s global head of quantitative trading in the early 2010s. He told the NYT:  “Tom really cares about people in an old school way that’s not typical in today’s corporate world. Whether a colleague needs heart surgery or someone’s parent is dying in the hospital, Tom makes the phone call and helps anyway he can.”

  His old school style has led to sexual harassment within his divisions, however. “Montag’s divisions confidentially settled about 15 complaints annually” from employees who made “credible allegations of misconduct or a toxic work environment”. Bank of America spokeswoman Jessica Oppenheim called the number “grossly inaccurate”. 

  And the profile specifically takes exception with Montag’s handling of the pandemic – he was insistent in his employees still showing up to the office during the beginnings of Covid. These employees called themselves “warriors” who referred to those who stayed home as “tapped out”. At the time, “some of Mr. Montag’s workers grew fearful that if they didn’t go into the office, they would lose their jobs or their bonuses,” the report says. Those who didn’t show up were put on something called the “can’t be bothered” list – an idea he first developed in 2014 as “an annual roster of employees whose bonuses would be docked because they did not carry out administrative tasks such as participating in colleague performance reviews.”

  All the while, Montag monitored the efficiency and profitability of employees who stayed home, versus those who came to the office, via spreadsheet. In essence, the piece notes, he “[kept] score”.

  During the pandemic, the productivity spreadsheet, titled “Tom/Dashboard,” according to an image of it, allowed Mr. Montag to track individual profits and losses of employees working at home versus those still in the office, according to that and other images and two people with knowledge of the spreadsheets. In the office, said one of those employees, Mr. Montag would sometimes pop by individual desks and say, “I knew you’d be here.”

  Montag himself went into the office in the early days of the pandemic, telling the NYT: “I was the battlefront for us in a way.” He would cycle into the office in jeans and sneakers every day instead of showing up in his usual coat and tie, the report notes. 

  

  As the second best paid executive at Bank of America, it’s a stark contrast from many other corporate COOs who are happy to collect their compensation and who are busy focusing on things like not offending their employees. Or, as the New York Times put it, the 64 year old’s “hard-driving approach has been increasingly out of step with the contemporary world of finance”.

  While some describe him as shrewd and charismatic, other employees say his management style is “demanding and erratic”. 

  Robert Grillo, who was a managing director in the bond division of Bank of America from 2009 to 2016, said: “Tom demanded excellence. He was very motivational in speaking. He had an incredible work ethic. But his favoring of certain groups, and people, I think, was detrimental to the total culture.”

  Compared to other banks, Montag was slower to embrace working from home during the pandemic. This resulted in attrition and slumping morale. “At least 11 senior markets employees, including several traders and some department heads, have left Mr. Montag’s divisions, along with the chair of global corporate and investment banking,” the profile notes.

  More than 100 other people took layoff packages to exit while keeping their stock. The Times talked to more than 2 dozen current and former employees and found that the mood amongst them was one of “resignation”. 

  “They’re going to kick me out of here,” Montag said in February. Last July, he wrote to some of his employees: “I came to New York to make a few dollars, go back to Oregon, and buy a house. Everything else has been gravy.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 18:00

• COVID Deaths Plummet As Excess Mortality Falls To Pre-Pandemic Levels
  COVID Deaths Plummet As Excess Mortality Falls To Pre-Pandemic Levels

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  In any given year during the past decade in the United States, more than 2.5 million Americans have died – from all causes.

  The number has grown in recent years, climbing from 2.59 million in 2013 to 2.85 million in 2019. This has been due partially to the US’s aging population, and also due to rising obesity levels and drug overdoses. In fact, since 2010, growth rates in total deaths has exceeded population growth in every year.

  

  In 2020, preliminary numbers suggest a jump of more than 17 percent in all-cause total deaths, rising from 2.85 million in 2019 to 3.35 million in 2020.

  The increase was not all due to covid. At least one-quarter to one-third appear to be from other causes. In some cases, more than half of “excess deaths” were attributed to “underlying causes” other than covid. But whether due to untreated medical conditions (thanks to covid lockdowns), or drug overdoses, or homicides, total death increased in 2020. In other words, total excess mortality is a partial proxy for covid deaths. Whatever proportion of total deaths covid cases may comprise, it stands to reason that if total deaths decline, then covid deaths are declining also. Moreover, looking at total deaths helps cut through any controversies over whether or not deaths are properly attributed to covid. 

  What has been the trend with these “excess deaths” in recent months?

  Well, according to data through mid-March reported by Our World in Data and by the Human Mortality Database, excess mortality began to plummet in early January and is now back to levels below the 2015-2019 average:

  

  Excess mortality peaked the week of January 3 and then it began to collapse, dropping back to summer 2020 levels by mid February. By March 14, excess mortality was at 1 percent above the 2015-2019 average. All this occurred even as very few Americans were vaccinated. When excess deaths began to drop, less than one percent of Americans had been fully vaccinated. At the end of January, less than two percent of Americans had been fully vaccinated. By the end of March, when excess mortality returned to 2019 levels, 15 percent of the population had been fully vaccinated. 

  As of May 11, only one-third of Americans had been fully vaccinated, although “experts” insist 60 to 70 percent of the population must be vaccinated before we can expect to see a drop-off in deaths like that which occurred earlier this year.

  Yet, as of the week of March 22—excess mortality was below both the 2015-2019 average and below the total for the last year before the official beginning of the covid pandemic (2019).

  

  It’s likely these facts won’t stop “public health” bureaucrats from continuing to insist that another “wave” of covid deaths and cases is right around the corner. These activists have many strategies for pushing vaccine passports, mask mandates, and even continual precautionary business closures. They’ll tell us that new covid variants are sweeping the globe. This is what they were saying in January, for instance, when Vox was telling us it was too dangerous to even visit the grocery store. At least one expert in late January warned us that the coming weeks would be “the darkest weeks of the pandemic.”

  It’s now clear such predictions were spectacularly wrong. By late January, totals deaths were already in precipitous decline. 

  But what about the lag in data? We’re only looking at data up to mid-March because it tends to take several weeks for estimates of total deaths to become reasonably reliable. Yes, that data shows a big drop off. But what about the numbers for April and May? Should we expect those death totals to surge again with a promised “fourth wave” of new covid death?

  If we consider the more recent case and death totals attributed to covid, we see few signs of a new surge.

  Although Anthony Fauci and other government employed technocrats have been unable to provide any explanation at all for it, the fact remains that months after Texas and Florida and Georgia have either abolished or greatly scaled back all social-distancing and mask mandates, cases and deaths are generally declining, and total deaths per million (attributed to covid) remain below what we’ve seen in states with severe lockdowns. 

  

  The trend in the United States overall is similar.  Indeed, it appears that nearly all states have seen sizable drops in both cases and deaths, regardless of the mask or social-distancing policies in place. 

  Notably, it’s only in recent weeks that “CDC guidelines” are beginning to admit the reality. It wasn’t until April 26 that the CDC declared that fully vaccinated Americans are allowed to venture outside without masks on. The CDC states these “recommendations” unironically as if it weren’t the case that most Americans—outside of true-believer hotspots like San Francisco and Chicago—stopped wearing masks outside a long time ago. The hermetically sealed world of government employees and corporate journalists appears unaware that at least half the country pretty much went back to normal last fall. 

  So now what?

  The technocrats know that they need to keep pressing hard for more de facto vaccine mandates—pushed mostly by corporate America for low-risk younger populations.  Most Americans can already see that covid numbers are already in decline in spite of months of Americans flouting mask mandates and social distancing guidelines. People can see that children—an increasing number of whom are returning to schools—aren’t a significant factor in the spread of disease. So it will be important for the regime to push vaccines for children more aggressively before people stop listening to the “experts” completely. 

  Don’t expect the regime to admit it has been wrong about anything. If anything, it will double down on the usual narrative. It’s worked pretty well so far. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 17:30

• 3 Reasons Why Goldman Now Sees Almost No Upside For Stocks In 2021
  3 Reasons Why Goldman Now Sees Almost No Upside For Stocks In 2021

  Just over a month ago, in our preview of earnings season, we said that “Q1 earnings will be stellar, but are fully priced in and only guidance will matter“, and sure enough the broader market is now below where it was a month ago despite the strongest earnings season in modern history: with 90% of S&P500 companies having reported, the results show EPS rose by 46% year/year… 

  

  … the fastest pace since 1Q 2010, while a whopping 68% of S&P 500 firms have beat consensus by more than one standard deviation, a record high. Even crazier, equity analysts expected EPS growth of 20% at the start of the season, but realized growth was more than double that 46% with Consumer Discretionary (+187%) and Financials (+135%) posting the strongest results. Behind these shockingly good results? Better-than-expected net profit margins… although with inflation soaring, fears are spreading that profit margins are about to get clobbered.

  It’s this growing realization that “goldilocks” is behind us and profit-crushing inflation – or worse, stagflation – lies ahead that explains why the market was not impressed and punished both companies that missed as well as those that beat expectations:

  

  It’s also why as Goldman notes, even though 1Q EPS came in 20% above expectations, analyst estimates for 2Q-4Q 2021 and 2022 have been revised up by less than 5%.

  

  Here Goldman disagrees with the near-term consensus and as chief strategist David Kostin writes on Friday, “we raise our 2021 EPS forecast to $193 (from $181), driven by a roughly equal contribution from 1Q beats and our expectation of stronger EPS in the remainder of 2021. We also raise our 2022 EPS estimate to $202 (from $197). The combination of global reopening, elevated consumer savings, and strong corporate operating leverage will drive sharp recoveries in both economic and earnings growth. GDP growth is generally the primary driver of earnings growth. Our economists expect real US GDP growth will average +7% in  2021 and +5% in  2022. Following EPS growth of 35% in 2021 and 5% in 2022, we forecast growth of 5% in 2023 and 5% in 2024 as GDP growth decelerates to trend (see Exhibits 3 and 4)”

  

  The key reason, however, why Goldman is feeling especially optimistic on the near-term is another blockbuster quarter for tech names as well as bank which stand to benefit from sharply higher rates (unless of course we get a huge flattener next):

  At the sector level, our $12 upward revision to 2021 EPS is driven primarily by Financials (+$7) and Info Tech (+$3). The two sectors accounted for half of the beat vs. consensus 1Q estimates. Financials benefited in large part from the release of $10 billion in reserves. While future reserve releases are difficult to forecast, our Banksanalysts estimate only 36% of the reserves built since the peak of the COVID crisis have been released. Info Tech earnings, particularly among the largest stocks, continued to  impress; the sector posted sales growth of 19% and record high margins of 24.2% in 1Q 2021. Tech’s growing share of S&P 500 revenues have helped lift S&P 500 profit margins back to the 3Q 2018 record high of 11.6%

  A strong 2021 notwithstanding, Goldman is far less optimistic about 2022 where its EPS estimate of 202 for the S&P is $7 below consensus largely due to expectations of higher corporate tax rates next year:

  We assume a smaller version of President Biden’s tax proposal will be passed later this year. Our EPS estimate assumes a hike in the federal statutory corporate tax rate from 21% to 25% as well as a higher tax rate on foreign income. The 5% earnings impact of tax reform that we model reduces our 2022 EPS estimate from $212 (10% growth) to $202 (5% growth) – see Exhibit 5 above. Both our investor conversations and the performance of our tax baskets suggest portfolio managers have not incorporated higher taxes into their forecasts, meaning negative revisions to 2022 EPS are likely later in the year.

  This, together with other factors is why Goldman is turning increasingly cautious on the market and unlike many of its Wall Street peers, has refused to chase price action higher by lifting its S&P price target. Instead, as Kostin admits, Goldman’s year-end price target remain 4300 for 2021 (+3% from today) and just 7% higher – or 4,600 – for 2022, reflecting Goldman’s expectation that US equities will continue to appreciate, “albeit at a slower pace than has characterized the past 12 months.” As Kostin also notes, this dynamic is consistent with the typical pattern as economic growth peaks and starts to decelerate – i.e., the best is now behind us – which the bank’s economists believe is currently the case in the US and will be true on a global basis later this year. This phase of the cycle is also consistent with the view that earnings growth will drive returns while valuations cease to expand.

  Combining these observations, Kostin concludes that what little upside is left for the S&P, it will come entirely from earnings growth as valuation will only shrink going forward, or as Kostin puts it: three factors will prevent further valuation expansion during the remainder of 2021:

  1. Decelerating US growth,
  2. a real rate-driven rise in interest rates
  3. the likely passage of tax reform.

  While we previously expanded on point 1 here last week, regarding point two Goldman writes that its rates strategists expect the 10-year Treasury yield to rise to 1.9% in 2021 and 2.1% in 2022. And with breakeven inflation now a blistering 2.5%, the highest since 2006…

  

  … they expect higher yields will be primarily driven by real rates, a mix that has historically been less favorable for equities. In addition, echoing what he wrote above, Kostin says that the passage of Biden tax reform – even if watered down substantially – later this year should weigh on equity multiples. Along with higher corporate rates, Goldman’s political economists expect the capital gains tax rate for those making more than $1 million in annual income will rise to roughly 28% (below the 43% proposed). And although past capital gains hikes have been associated with lower equity prices and allocations ahead of the hike, these effects were ultimately short-lived.

  Finally, since Goldman still expects the S&P to rise modestly (instead of dropping), and since all of this upside will come from profit increases, the bank expects the S&P 500 P/E multiple to remain flat at roughly 21-22x through 2022.

  

  And addressing his preferred valuation measure (since it is the only one that says markets are not a crazy bubble right now), Kostin says he models the S&P 500 equity risk premium as a function of growth expectations, policy uncertainty, the size of the Fed balance sheet, and consumer confidence. Here, Kostin’s model suggests that the ERP will continue to decline and more than offset higher interest rates in 2021 as the global economy reopens.

  So despite predicting no valuation (multiple) expansion in 2021, Goldman’s forecasts imply a nosebleed inducing NTM P/E of 21.3x at year-end 2021, which would rank in the 93rd percentile since 1976 (i.e., crazy asset bubble), but a yield gap vs. Treasuries of 280 bp that would rank in just the 42nd percentile. Should yields jump materially higher than Goldman’s 2.1% 2022 year-end target (and according to many they will), then naturally all bets are off.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 17:00

• "This Is All About Stagflation… The U.S. Is Walking Into The Early Stages Of The Fourth Turning"
  “This Is All About Stagflation… The U.S. Is Walking Into The Early Stages Of The Fourth Turning”

  By Larry McDonald of The Bear Traps Report

  We believe the U.S. is walking into the early stages of the Fourth Turning, a subject entertained below. In this note we break down the ideal 2020-2030 portfolio and why it is so different from the 2010-2020 vintage. Above all, by now it should be clear to a five year old; Global Central Banks are working together in a dollar containment regime. With conviction, we laid out this thesis a year ago (April 2020) in our “Lessons from Omaha” and it became the foundation under our overweight positioning in commodities, global large cap value, and emerging markets.

  The good news is, the commodity cycle is still in the early innings.

  

  There are trillions of U.S. dollars married to deflation bets (fixed income bonds and tech stocks) and the lawyers are writing up the divorce papers as we speak. Unintended consequences are popping up weekly, the latest variety points to a significant labor shortage developing in the U.S. with colossal side effects moving our way.

  It’s going to be hilarious. Just when the last economist threw in the Phillips Curve towel, wrote the long winded obituary it will come roaring back to life. Wage inflation is about to explode, and this sword is swinging in the direction of profit margins.

  Above all, the Fed is staring down the barrel of  runaway inequality, inequality that the Fed itself has created. The American Dream just isn’t the 1950s-2000s bright blue, a touch of grey has moved in forging left wing populism. If you listen carefully to U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Fed Chair Jay Powell, they are focused on U 6 unemployment near 11% and the 9 million Americans who have left the Non Farm Payrolls since January 2020.

  Now listen to the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, planet earth has new alpha male central banks positioning themselves FAR more hawkish than the FOMC – dollar bearish. Strategically so, it’s all part of the plan. These brain trusts have FINALLY figured out a runaway dollar will obliterate emerging market balance sheets loaded with fresh and deep, Covid 19 wounds.

  

  The $64T of global GDP outside the U.S. is stabilizing relative to the $20T inside the 50 U.S. states. This is a colossal dollar bearish driver just what Powell placed on the menu. Today, inflation expectations are finally moving faster than bond yields, placing a strong bid under the emerging market equities, and delivering a gold silver tailwind that is picking up speed. The dollar is the near term problem solver, but once they lose control of the beast they will move face to face with the inflation shock around the corner.

  An interesting market development this week was Treasuries rallying despite commodities continuing to surge. Bonds likely rallied with growth stocks in major pain again (investors looking for safety) however; wheat, platinum, corn, soybeans, crude oil, etc. were ALL green, so this was not a ‘deflationary scare’.

  “This is all about stagflation. I think the yield curve is going to flatten, front end less anchored. The Fed is handcuffed. Not good. Inflation is going to choke growth in 3q/4q into 2022… This is a big problem for high yield and small caps in the longer term.“ – Senior Credit Portfolio Manager

  But first inflation gets really hot.

  “Larry I spoke to a number of our Food Brokers today (they represent man y manufacturers). Of the 30 Consumer Products Manufacturers, they represent 12 who have already taken a price increase this year. Three took Price Increases YESTERDAY. Increases range from 7% to 10%. (Everything from Frozen Potatoes to Baby Food going up). The companies that are not raising prices are reducing product sizes ( Hidden Cost Increase ) or reducing promotions. Net, Net a Hidden Price Increase. The majority of manufacturers give a 60 90 Day notice on price increases. The increase to consumers in stores will hit in Q3/Q4 2021, and Q1 2022″

  Even billionaire Sam Zell is now pitching gold as an antidote to 1970s style inflation: “Obviously one of the natural reactions is to buy gold, it feels very funny because I’ve spent my career talking about why would you want to own gold? It has no income; it costs to store. And yet, when you see the debasement of the currency, you say, what am I going to hold on to? Oh boy, we’re seeing it all over the place,” Zell said of inflation.

  “You read about lumber prices, but we’re seeing it in all of our businesses. The obvious bottlenecks in the supply chain arena are pushing up prices. It’s very reminiscent of the ‘70s.”

  

  Bloomberg’s Commodity Spot Index hit its highest level in 9 years this week. This is directly correlated to the continued rotation from growth to value equities. Higher inflation and higher yields means a higher discount rate for the net present value of future cash flows. Growth equity valuations discounted DECADES of future cash flows in 2020 when credit risk was ‘taken off the table’. These cash flows are now being eroded by inflation expectations. Meanwhile, the cash flows coming fro m commodity producers will likely surge higher with inflation.

  

  The Long View – The reversal in the Russell 1000 value to growth ratio looks eerily like the early 2000s reversal. This points to a looooong way to go in the value vs. growth trade (value outperformance to continue )… A decade of austerity, tea parties, taper tantrums, brexits trade wars, covid has pushed trillions into overcrowded deflation assets. Exit visas are in many hands today.

  

  Stay overweight global value, EM, and commodities. The tremors have joined us nearly every month this year, but the quake will soon have assets pouring out of tech in search of inflation protection.

  Millennials and the Fourth Turning

  The commodity bull case and the Fourth Turning go hand in hand. Also known as the Strauss Howe generational theory, our awareness is crucial here. Discovered by William Straus and Neil Howe, historical events are related to repeated, cyclical generation types. Each  generation starts a fresh era (a turning) lasting about 20-25 years, after having grown up in the prior era. Every four generations equals a “saeculum” or a long human life of 80-100 years. The Fourth and last phase of a saeculum is a crisis. There follows a First Turning, a recovery. During the recovery generation, community values dominate. The next generations after that attack the communal institutions in the name of autonomy , freedom, and individualism. This eventually leads to another crisis .

  On the balance sheet the good news is over the next 15 years $65T to $70T will pass from Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to Millennials. The bad news is the $30T of U.S. national debt and $160T of unfunded liabilities that will be hoisted upon these blossoming youngsters. After a colossal feast at the dinner table, Millennials are NOT happy with being left the check! Can you blame them?

  The Fourth Turning gets rid of the old order and replaces it with a new one. The First Turning is “the High,” followed by “the Awakening,” followed by “the Unraveling,” followed by “the Crisis,” which is the Fourth Turning. After that, there is another First Turning, another “High.” The last 1st Turning, the last “High,” was the generation of the post World War II era, starting in 1946. It ended with JFK’s assassination. During “the Awakening,” the Second Turning, formerly beloved institutions are criticized and the focus shifts to spiritual independence. Social progress leads to exhaustion with the discipline that created it. Self awareness becomes more important. The most recent Second Turning lasted from the campus and racial unrest of the 1960’s to the rejection of high taxes in the 1980s. The Third Turning, “the Unraveling,” is quite different than the First. At this point social institutions are weak, and people have lost faith in them. Individualism is now at its height. People of this generation just want to enjoy themselves. Society is not cohesive. The last Third Turning began in the 1980s through the 1990s economic boom and our culture wars.

  Then comes the Fourth Turning. The crisis can be extreme and take the form of a war or revolution or civil war. The nation’s survival is at stake. In response, old institutions are replaced with new ones. The slate is wiped clean in a period of creative destruction. A new consensus is formed from selective synthesis of certain ideas generated by both sides of the opposing camps from the prior period.

  The last Fourth Turning began with the crash of 1929 and ended with the conclusion of WWII. As traumatic as this period was, it was also foundational for the world we live in today, but that world is going away as new foundations are being prepared. The G.I. generation was the generation of heroes. Born between 1901 and 1924, they had guts, self confidence, and a collective view. In many ways, so does the Millennial Generation, with its confidence in collective action and sensitivity to others (politeness). During the generation of crisis, the nation itself appears to society to be at risk. As a result, profound secular change occurs. The external orders reconfigure, and private behavior goes through profound change. These Fourth Turning crises are not purely bad, provided one survives them.

  We are in the Fourth Turning now. It began with the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the crash it engendered. The rise of left wing populism (think AOC) is classic Fourth Turning.

  This helps contextualize who the Millennials (also known as Gen Y) really are. And they clearly aren’t Boomers. They hold very different ideals on the government’s role in society, on community, on the goals of the nation, on markets. Millennials were raised by helicopter moms who convinced each one that they are special, but also on the ideal of cooperation. They were protected, coddled, and schooled in the value of teamwork. They are highly attached to their families. They build through consensus and are personally most confident once team consensus has been established. And they care about the world at large. This is just the type of generation that will create the new world order out of the crisis and conflict of the Fourth Turning.

  When polled about what is more important, individualism or community, Boomers split close to 50% 50%, but Millennials favor community overwhelmingly, 71% 29%. The favoriting of the community over individualism is irrespective of political party affiliation.  These forces are large scale MMT (modern monetary theory) debt forgiveness drivers and are NOT deflationary. Bullish commodities, ten year view.

  Generation X, the generation after the Baby Boomers, born 1961-1981, was raised in the opposite way of the Millennials: they were left alone by parents focused on their own self awareness and voyages of self discovery. They were taught to survive on their own, to exercise personal agency. Generation X are often the parents of Millennials. Generation X is also referred to as the “latchkey generation” since they enjoyed (or suffered) much less parental oversight vs prior generations as a result of much higher divorce rates and more mothers in the workforce. This is the disaffected and cynical generation of punk and heavy metal. However, in mid life they often achieve a work life balance precisely because of their rejection of their Baby Boomer parents’ self absorption. Thus, they spent and spend much more time actively and directly engaged in raising the next Greatest Generation: the Millennials. So, it is the Millennials’ collectivism that will create a new cultural norm out of the crisis of the Fourth Turning.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 16:35

• Biden Phones Netanyahu After Israel Flattens AP Offices In Gaza – Doesn't Condemn Attack
  Biden Phones Netanyahu After Israel Flattens AP Offices In Gaza – Doesn’t Condemn Attack

  update(4:10pm): According to the White House readout of Biden’s Saturday call to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the US president “reaffirmed his strong support for Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket attacks from Hamas and other terrorist groups in Gaza,” while condemning the “indiscriminate attacks” coming from the Gaza Strip.

  NEW: Biden spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and raised concerns about civilian casualties in Gaza and the bombing of the building that housed AP and other media offices.https://t.co/Siva3uENZa

  — Axios (@axios) May 15, 2021

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

  He merely “raised concerns” about the “safety and security of journalists” – and glaringly absent was any specific mention in the call readout of the intentional targeting of the media building which was hit by a reported six airstrikes earlier in the day, causing it to be flattened.

  According to Axios in the call with Netanyahu Biden stopped short of an outright condemnation of the attack, but merely “raised concerns about civilian casualties in Gaza and the bombing of the building that housed AP and other media offices, according to Israeli officials.”

  The opening section from the White House statement on the call is as follows:

  The President spoke today with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. The President reaffirmed his strong support for Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket attacks from Hamas and other terrorist groups in Gaza. He condemned these indiscriminate attacks against towns and cities across Israel. The President updated the Prime Minister on high-level U.S. engagement with regional partners on this issue and discussed ongoing diplomatic efforts. The President noted that this current period of conflict has tragically claimed the lives of Israeli and Palestinian civilians, including children. He raised concerns about the safety and security of journalists and reinforced the need to ensure their protection.

  Statement from @AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt on the Israeli attack against our bureau in Gaza:

  “The world will know less about what is happening in Gaza because of what happened today.”https://t.co/CqoDxogAJ3

  — Samya Kullab | سامية كُلاّب (@samya_kullab) May 15, 2021

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

  Biden also phoned Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian officials confirmed, which marks a first during his administration. Axios details the call as follows:

  • “President Biden updated President Abbas on U.S. diplomatic engagement on the ongoing conflict and stressed the need for Hamas to cease firing rockets into Israel,” a White House readout of the called said.
  • The Palestinian Authority on Friday criticized the U.S. position on the Gaza crisis and called the Biden administration to intervene.

  And further, Abbas’s spokesperson, Nabil Abu Rudeineh, was quoted in a statement: “The silence by the Biden administration about what Israel is doing and the claim it is self defense led to massacres in Gaza and the West Bank. We ask the U.S. to take action because it is the only party in the world who can stop Israeli aggression.”

  Meanwhile, more and more protests are popping up across Europe – and some in the United States – expressing solidarity with Palestinians. “Protesters gathered in London, Berlin, Madrid and Paris as the worst violence in years raged between Israel and militants in Gaza,” AFP and others observed.

  Thousands of protesters in London and Madrid marched in support of Palestinians on Saturday as the worst violence in years raged between Israel and militants in Gazahttps://t.co/syzUFfODAc

  — AFP News Agency (@AFP) May 15, 2021

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

  The death toll continues to climb into the night Saturday, with regional media counting at least 145 deaths in Gaza from the airstrikes. 

  In Israel, at least eleven have been killed by the continuing onslaught of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket fire. Amid increased international condemnation for the appalling civilian death toll and especially high number of children killed and wounded, Netanyahu’s office released a statement placing blame squarely on Hamas for the casualties…

  After the reported death of a family of 10 in an Israeli strike in Gaza this morning, eight of them children, the prime minister’s Arab-language spokesman blames Hamas, Channel 12 reports.

  “Hamas bears full blame for the deaths of civilians in Gaza,” he says in a statement. “It sought this escalation and started it when it attacked Jerusalem. It intentionally buried its rocket launchers and weapons caches and posts in the center of residential areas and this is a war crime. It attacks our citizens to kill as many of them as possible and that is another war crime.”

  Death toll from ongoing Israeli bombardment on besieged Gaza climbs to 145, including 41 children and 23 women, while US repeats support for Tel Aviv https://t.co/FETPmVuIQY

  — TRT World (@trtworld) May 15, 2021

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

  In the US, many are taking increasing notice of the apparent complete lack of any US plan or diplomatic intervention toward a ceasefire.

  Once again, Netanyahu’s govt is slaughtering Palestinian Arabs in Gaza for political reasons to avoid a 5th election, and to impede his pending prosecution. Once again, Biden/Pelosi show no compassion to the mounting Palestinian civilian fatalities, using U.S. weapons and aid.-R

  — Ralph Nader (@RalphNader) May 14, 2021

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

  For now it seems the Biden White House is merely content to express “concerns” as the region burns.

  * * *

  update(12:49pm): So far the Biden administration has stopped short of condemning the Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza offices of US-based Associated Press and other international media outlets, which flattened the 12-story Al-Jalaa tower, resulting in widespread outrage from journalists and media rights organizations across the globe. 

  Hours after the attack Joe Biden as reportedly phoned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to express Washington’s “concerns” and to convey the “paramount responsibility” to protect journalists.

  #BREAKING Israel’s Netanyahu, US president Biden speak after Israel flattens AP news office in Gaza: statement pic.twitter.com/ItqTbUH1Sh

  — AFP News Agency (@AFP) May 15, 2021

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

  This also as the death toll continues to soar amid unrelenting airstrikes – also as Hamas rockets continue to fly toward Israel – at over 140 Gazans killed since Monday.

  Al Jazeera’s office in Gaza destroyed by an Israeli airstrike. The building also housed residential apartments and the AP bureau. This is the 6th consecutive day Israel has been bombing Gaza. The Gaza death toll is at 140, including 39 children. pic.twitter.com/2rNm9eMIaG

  — IMEU (@theIMEU) May 15, 2021

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

  * * *

  update(12:30pm): The White House has said it communicated its “concerns” to Israel over the safety of journalists after IDF airstrikes obliterated the 12-story office building that housed international media headquarters in Gaza, most notably the AP and Al Jazeera…

  “We have communicated directly to the Israelis that ensuring the safety and security of journalists and independent media is a paramount responsibility,” White House press secretary Psaki wrote.

  We have communicated directly to the Israelis that ensuring the safety and security of journalists and independent media is a paramount responsibility.

  — Jen Psaki (@PressSec) May 15, 2021

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

  AP CEO Gary Pruitt previously said in a statement: “We are shocked and horrified that the Israeli military would target and destroy the building housing AP’s bureau and other news organizations in Gaza. They have long known the location of our bureau and knew journalists were there. We received a warning that the building would be hit.”

  * * *

  Israel has targeted yet another large office and residential tower in the Gaza Strip, but this time its warplanes have destroyed the 12-story building housing the media offices of the U.S.-based Associated Press and Qatar-based broadcaster Al Jazeera, the AP itself as well as Reuters eyewitnesses confirm.

  The outlets have said that Israel issued advanced warning of the airstrikes of up to one hour before the attack on Al-Jalaa tower. Representatives with the AP and the building owner had reportedly pleaded with IDF officials to give more time to enable a safe evacuation and also to take out crucial media equipment. 

  Oh my god. The building where al Jazeera’s office is housed has just been taken down by Israeli airstrikes. There was a warning and evacuated. It houses offices and private homes. I can’t believe it. pic.twitter.com/Q4luRYk9H9

  — Stefanie Dekker (@StefanieDekker) May 15, 2021

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

  However, eyewitnesses say they were not given extra time, but merely made it out with whatever they had in hand and with their own lives.

  The building can be seen essentially collapsing in its own footprint, the same way that three prior residential apartment buildings did during days past. “The building was hit approximately six times before collapsing in plumes of black smoke, which engulfed the entire neighborhood,” international press reports noted.

  ⭕ LIVE footage of the moment an Israeli air raid bombed the offices of Al Jazeera and The Associated Press in Gaza City ⬇️

  🔴 LIVE updates: https://t.co/RvtP1lEX1x pic.twitter.com/RBO1ZiDAl0

  — Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) May 15, 2021

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

  The moment Israel bombed Al-Jalaa tower in Gaza housing international media outlets including Al Jazeera and AP. Reports and media personnel were not even allowed time to grab their equipment before evacuating the building #GazaUnderAttack #Palestine pic.twitter.com/jR2oMDyr68

  — Marwa Fatafta #SaveSheikhJarrah (@marwasf) May 15, 2021

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

  “The strike on the high-rise came nearly an hour after the military ordered people to evacuate the 12-story building, which also housed Al-Jazeera, other offices and residential apartments. The strike brought down the entire structure, which collapsed in a gigantic cloud of dust,” AP writes. 

  “There was no immediate explanation for why it was attacked,” AP adds.

  The IDF in a later follow-up statement alleged the media offices contained Hamas military intelligence units…

  After providing advance warning to civilians & time to evacuate, IDF fighter jets struck a multi-story building containing Hamas military intelligence assets.

  The building contained civilian media offices, which Hamas hides behind and deliberately uses as human shields. pic.twitter.com/zeDjEquePD

  — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) May 15, 2021

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

  The devastating attack brought swift condemnation by various international media organizations and advocates, with a number of prominent journalists expressing their shock, saying they “can’t believe” the media building was so blatantly targeted by Israel’s military.

  AP president Gary Pruitt issued a statement saying “we are shocked and horrified” at the “incredibly disturbing” attack wherein “we narrowly avoided a terrible loss of life.” 

  

  WATCH: The owner of al-Jalaa tower pleads with an Israeli officer on live TV to let journalists collect their gear before he bombs it.

  Moments later, Israeli air strikes demolish the #Gaza building that housed several international media offices used by AlJazeera and MEE pic.twitter.com/a5PRzQNOkC

  — Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) May 15, 2021

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

  “Journalists who worked there had been reporting on the Israeli attacks on Gaza,” Al Jazeera said in a social media statement. “Targeting journalists is a war crime.”

  An Israeli airstrike destroyed the Al Jazeera office in Gaza. The Israeli military warned they would hit the building that houses media organizations including the AP.

  Journalists who worked there had been reporting on the Israeli attacks on Gaza. pic.twitter.com/fZVo3TFEoO

  — AJ+ (@ajplus) May 15, 2021

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

  

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 16:15

• "I Upended My Life For Apple": Newly-Hired Engineer Livid After Woke Witch-Hunt Gets Him Fired
  “I Upended My Life For Apple”: Newly-Hired Engineer Livid After Woke Witch-Hunt Gets Him Fired

  A former Facebook project manager, author, and journalist who uprooted his life in Washington to take a job with Apple is livid, after a woke mob of employees circulated a petition demanding his ouster over controversial statements from a book he wrote five years ago.

  

  The petition took aim at Cuban-American Antonio García Martínez over his book, Chaos Monkeys  (dedicated to “all my enemies”) – an autobiography which traces his journey from Wall Street to Silicon Valley. Martínez has described the book as “total Hunter S. Thompson/Gonzo mode.”

  According to woke Apple employees, it’s both racist and sexist. And of course, when it comes to Silicon Valley, divergent opinions need not apply. Except, he did apply, and was hired – despite Apple being “well aware” of his writing, according to a pissed-off Martinez.

  In Chaos Monkeys, Martínez describes a broad-shouldered British woman he met in his travels who “made Bob Vila of This Old House look like a fucking pussy.” Bay Area women in tech, by comparison, are “soft and weak, cosseted and naive despite their claims of worldliness, and generally full of shit. They have their self-regarding entitlement feminism, and ceaselessly vaunt their independence, but the reality is, come the epidemic plague or foreign invasion, they’d become precisely the sort of useless baggage you’d trade for a box of shotgun shells or a jerry can of diesel.” Unlike, we assume, broad-shouldered, self-sufficient women.

  Obviously, the jerry can brigade didn’t take too kindly to that, and organized a woke cancel mob.

  

  According to a Friday Twitter thread by Martínez, Apple knew about his writing going in, and is now defaming him.

  1. Apple actively recruited me for my role on the ads team, reaching out via a former colleague to convince me to join. Apple found my experience in the ads space, specifically around data and privacy, highly relevant to their efforts and persuaded me to leave my then role.

  — Antonio García Martínez (@antoniogm) May 14, 2021

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

  3. Apple was well aware of my writing before hiring me. My references were questioned extensively about my bestselling book and my real professional persona (rather than literary one).

  This set of prominent Valley VCs and execs are all willing to assert as much under oath.

  — Antonio García Martínez (@antoniogm) May 14, 2021

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

  5. Apple has issued a statement that clearly implies there was some negative behavior by me during my time at Apple. That is defamatory and categorically false.

  — Antonio García Martínez (@antoniogm) May 14, 2021

  He also notes that his book was extremely well received before the witch-hunt.

  Just to do a sanity check on my awful book and just how boiled our political frog has been over the past five years, this is just a small sample of the globally positive reviews from elite mainstream institutions at the time.

  “Who controls the past controls the future.” pic.twitter.com/LnWNOrdDnF

  — Antonio García Martínez (@antoniogm) May 15, 2021

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

  Antonio has received overwhelming support from friends and ideological allies alike. 

  The tiny screenshots from your book were funny and written well enough that I put it on my list of books to read.
  Besides, why does it matter what you write in a book when all that matters should be how you perform at work?

  — Rising serpent 🇺🇸 (@rising_serpent) May 14, 2021

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

  It’s getting to the point where I can’t really take someone seriously as a public intellectual unless they’ve been cancelled at least once.

  — Mike Saint-Antoine (@mike20731) May 14, 2021

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

  As a woman who has worked in Tech/Bay Area for over 12 years I support @antoniogm
  . Cancel culture is out of control. To be an expert in your career is no longer enough. You now have to be defined by others’ expectations of what a “good person should say/do. This is terrifying.

  — mdsjql80 (@mdsjql80) May 15, 2021

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

  Just read about the case, fucking idiots, the whole thing has just gone too far. The whole thing sucks but you’re gonna find a better place. Talent always has a space. All the best.

  — Martín del Palacio Langer (@martindelp) May 15, 2021

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

  Stay strong, Antonio!

  — Cristian Nyari (@Cnyari) May 14, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 16:10

• Karl Marx's Road To Hell Is Paved With Fake Money
  Karl Marx’s Road To Hell Is Paved With Fake Money

  Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

  “The way to Hell is paved with good intentions,” remarked Karl Marx in Das Kapital.

  The devious fellow was bemoaning evil capitalists for having the gall to use their own money for the express purpose of making more money.

  

  Marx, a rambling busybody, was habitually wrong.  The road to hell is paved with something much more than good intentions.  Grift, graft, larceny, corruption and fake money are what primarily composes the pavement.  Good intentions are merely dusted in to better the aesthetic.

  If you want to understand what’s going on with exploding price inflation then you must understand this…

  Right now in the United States we have a scam currency that’s controlled by central planners.  Specifically, we have what Marx envisioned in Plank No. 5 of his Communist Manifesto:

  “No. 5.  Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.”

  The Federal Reserve System, created by the Federal Reserve Act of Congress in 1913, is indeed a ‘national bank’ and it politically manipulates interest rates and holds a monopoly on legal counterfeiting in the United States.

  Without the Fed’s policies of mass credit creation the U.S. government could have never run up a national debt over $28 trillion.  Without the Fed’s policies of extreme credit market intervention the U.S. trade deficit for March of $74.4 billion – a new record – would have never been possible.  Without the Fed’s printing press money the U.S. government could have never run annual budget deficits over $3 trillion.

  The fact is centralized credit in the hands of a central bank always leads to money supply inflation.  Asset price inflation and consumer price inflation then follow in strange and unpredictable ways.

  These price distortions are not defects of capitalism.  They’re symptoms of a scam currency managed by central planners.

  Here’s why…

  The Nobel Planner

  The economy is a complex living organism.  It continuously evolves and is always subject to change.  One relationship at one moment can be completely different at another moment.  Supply and demand are incessantly adjusting and readjusting to meet the conditions of the market.

  These continuous interactions provide a natural and efficient response to supply shortages and gluts.  Even in a moderately free market economy, bakeries do not run out of bread when there’s a wheat crop shortage.  The shelves never go empty.  Rather, the price of bread rises and consumers adjust their spending accordingly.

  Centrally planned economies, on the other hand, are inclined to frequent, intensive and chronic shortages.  Bureaucrats, armed with spiral bound planning reports and pie graphs, are incapable of fixing the proper prices for gumballs and gasoline by diktat.  There’s simply too much going on and too many moving parts for them to consider.

  With the best of intentions, the noble planner makes their best guess of the appropriate price control.  So, too, graft and corruption takes over to ensure the fake money flows to preferred industries and providers.  Then things invariably go haywire.

  The supply of certain goods or commodities may be more than adequate.  But when a price administrator enforces an artificially low price, consumers are prone to wasteful behavior.  They’re compelled to demand a greater amount than is supplied.  Hence, the store shelves remain perpetually empty.

  Certainly, uniform standards work well for units and measurements.  They’re critical to building consistency and standardization of hardware and parts.  They’re even necessary to effective communication and computer programming.  For certain things, however, uniform standards come up short…

  When it comes to the pricing of goods, commodities and services, commanding fixed prices by a central authority is an utter failure.  This was effectively proven by the experiences of the centrally planned economies of the old communist Eastern Bloc countries during the second half of the 20th century.

  Without market determined prices for goods and services via free exchange it is impossible to establish prices that reflect actual conditions.  Without prices that are grounded in reality the production and consumption relationship becomes distorted.  In the absence of the natural corrective mechanism of market determined prices, oversupply or scarcity conditions extend out to absurdity.

  Karl Marx’s Road to Hell is Paved with Fake Money

  The planners are never able to get things quite right.  In time, these absurdities become ubiquitous.  For example, in a socialist economy you’ll find supermarkets with long lines of people and empty shelves.  Another definitive gift of socialist economies is toilets without toilet seats.  How is this even possible?

  Regrettably, price controls don’t stop with just goods, commodities, and services.  The United States – like Europe and Japan – has been doing its darnedest during the early years of the 21st century to illustrate how the experiences of the old Eastern Bloc also apply to credit.

  Remember, credit, like a commodity or good, has a price attached to it.  The price of credit is the rate of interest a lender charges to a borrower.  Like fixing the price of a commodity or good by a central planning authority, fixing the price of credit by a central bank – such as the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, or Bank of Japan – is also an utter failure.

  Someone with even a dim perception of the world around them can peer out and discern many strange and grotesque occurrences: Housing prices that far outpace incomes.  Total household debt at $14.56 trillion.  Crypto millionaires.  And an entire generation of Millennials that went $1.57 trillion in student loan debt for college degrees that have been debased in stature to what a high school diploma represented for prior generations.

  These represent gross misallocations of capital.  What’s more, they would’ve never come into existence or ballooned out to this magnitude without the Fed’s credit market price controls and counterfeiting operations.

  Indeed, the results of government intervention are always the same.  Stagnation, inflation, declining living standards, and widespread social disorder.  No doubt, they’ll be repeated to insanity.

  True capitalism requires an honest currency and market determined pricing.  Remember this in the weeks to come.  As prices rise, politicians and central planners – people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Janet Yellen – will look to pin inflation on evil capitalists and price gouging business owners.

  Don’t believe their lies.  Just follow the fake money back to its origin…

  There you’ll find the Fed, hard at work, applying the pavement to Karl Marx’s road to hell.

  Buckle up!

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 15:45

• Concept App Pays Users In Crypto To Name-Drop Brands 
  Concept App Pays Users In Crypto To Name-Drop Brands 

  Readers have all experienced the moment when an advertisement has creepily shown up on their social media feed after talking about it. And while companies swear they’re not using smartphone apps to tap into your conversations for advertising purposes, there’s a concept app that throws fuel on this fire. 

  The concept app brought to you by Matt Reed, a creative technologist at Red Pepper who made a tool that allowed Zoom users to create a digital twin of themselves, so they didn’t have to sit in calls – said his latest creation is still in the “development phase” but would one day allow people to name-drop brands in everyday conversations and get “immediately compensated in return.” 

  “Once permissions are granted, SayPal eavesdrops on your background microphone feed and applies advanced Natural Language Processing AI for keyword identification. If a sponsored brand is detected, you get paid. The more you name-drop, the more you earn. It’s that simple,” Reed said. 

  

  He said SayPal would send crypto to a person’s wallet for saying brand names in conversations. 

  We’re not entirely sure if the app is a joke or if Reed is for real. Because someone could repeat the word “Quesalupa” or “Big Mac” for hours and potentially get paid. There needs to be filters or perhaps geolocation for this app to viable and for brands to go along with the idea. 

  If you want a taste of a dystopic world where people get paid to name-drop brands in conversations – look no further than the movie “Idiocracy.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/15/2021 – 15:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest