- China Dominates The World's Biggest Steel Producers
China Dominates The World’s Biggest Steel Producers
Steel is a critical component of modern industry and economy, essential for the construction of buildings, automobiles, and many other appliances and infrastructure used in our daily lives.
Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte create this infographic, using data from the World Steel Association, to visualize the world’s top steel-producing countries, and highlights China’s ascent to the top, as it now makes up more than half of the world’s steel production.
The State of Global Steel Production
Global steel production in 2022 reached 1,878 million tonnes, barely surpassing the pre-pandemic production of 1,875 million tonnes in 2019.
Country 2022 Production (in million tonnes) Annual Production Change Global Share 🇨🇳 China 1013.0 -2.0% 53.9% 🇮🇳 India 124.8 5.3% 6.6% 🇯🇵 Japan 89.2 -7.9% 4.8% 🇺🇸 United States 80.5 -6.5% 4.3% 🇷🇺 Russia 71.5 -5.8% 3.8% 🇰🇷 South Korea 65.9 -6.9% 3.5% 🇩🇪 Germany 36.8 -8.8% 2.0% 🇹🇷 Türkiye 35.1 -15.0% 1.9% 🇧🇷 Brazil 34.0 -6.5% 1.8% 🇮🇷 Iran 30.6 6.8% 1.6% 🇮🇹 Italy 21.6 -13.0% 1.1% 🇹🇼 Taiwan 20.7 -12.1% 1.1% 🇻🇳 Vietnam 20.0 -15.0% 1.1% 🇲🇽 Mexico 18.2 -1.9% 1.0% 🇮🇩 Indonesia 15.6 8.3% 0.8% Rest of World 201.0 -11.2% 10.7% World Total 1878.5 -3.9% 100.0% 2022’s steel production marked a significant reduction compared to the post-pandemic rebound of 1,960 million tonnes in 2021, with a year-over-year decline of 4.2%–the largest drop since 2009, and prior to that, 1991.
This decline was spread across many of the world’s top steel producers, with only three of the top fifteen countries, India, Iran, and Indonesia, increasing their yearly production. Most of the other top steel-producing countries saw annual production declines of more than 5%, with Turkey, Italy, Taiwan, and Vietnam’s production all declining by double digits.
Even the world’s top steel-producing nation, China, experienced a modest 2% decline, which due to the country’s large production amounted to a decline of 19.8 million tonnes, more than many other nations produce in a year.
Despite India, the world’s second-largest steel producer, increasing its production by 5.3%, the country’s output still amounts to just over one-tenth of the steel produced by China.
China’s Meteoric Rise in Steel Production
Although China dominates the world’s steel production with more than a 54% share today, this hasn’t always been the case.
In 1967, the World Steel Association’s first recorded year of steel production figures, China only produced an estimated 14 million tonnes, making up barely 3% of global output. At that time, the U.S. and the USSR were competing as the world’s top steel producers at 115 and 102 million tonnes respectively, followed by Japan at 62 million tonnes.
Almost three decades later in 1996, China had successively overtaken Russia, the U.S., and Japan to become the top steel-producing nation with 101 million tonnes of steel produced that year.
The early 2000s marked a period of rapid growth for China, with consistent double-digit percentage increases in steel production each year.
The Recent Decline in China’s Steel Production
Since the early 2000s, China’s average annual growth in steel production has slowed to 3.4% over the last decade (2013-2022), a considerable decline compared to the previous decade’s (2003-2012) 15.2% average annual growth rate.
The past couple of years have seen China’s steel production decline, with 2021 and 2022 marking the first time the country’s production fell for two consecutive years in a row.
While it’s unlikely China will relinquish its position as the top steel-producing nation anytime soon, it remains to be seen whether this recent decline marks the beginning of a new trend or just a brief deviation from the country’s consistent production growth.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/22/2023 – 02:45 - Main Threat To Europe Is Resurgence In Islamic Terror Attacks, Warns French Minister Ahead Of Hosting Olympics
Main Threat To Europe Is Resurgence In Islamic Terror Attacks, Warns French Minister Ahead Of Hosting Olympics
Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,
French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin has asked the U.S. government for greater intelligence sharing and warned of a resurgence in Islamic terrorist threats in Europe ahead of France hosting global sporting events in the coming year.
During a two-day trip to Washington and New York this week, the French minister asked for more efficient Franco-American counter-terrorism cooperation and claimed Islamic terrorism remains the biggest threat to national security in Europe.
“We have come to remind them that for Europeans and for France the primary risk is Sunni Islamist terrorism and that anti-terrorist collaboration between intelligence services is absolutely essential,” Darmanin said in an interview with Agence France-Presse.
“At a time when Americans may have a more national perspective in terms of challenges (today) — white supremacy, repeated shootings, conspiracies — they must not forget what appears to us to be the primary threat in Europe: Sunni terrorism,” he added.
Darmanin was speaking ahead of his country hosting the Rugby World Cup later this year and the Olympics next summer.
He claimed there is yet again a risk of “Islamist terrorism,” which would again target France and her European neighbors, describing “an endogenous threat from people without networks but who, becoming radicalized, take action in a few hours, in a few days (…) someone who takes a knife, goes into a bakery and kills people.”
France has been a frequent target for acts of terror, both from external threats and homegrown radicalized attackers facilitated by mass immigration from the Middle East, and the historically liberal visa requirements afforded to its Islam-dominated former colonies in North Africa.
The severity of Islamist-motivated terror attacks peaked halfway through the last decade when attackers targeted a concert at the Bataclan theater, murdering 137 and injuring at least 416 people in November 2015. This was followed by a Tunisian Islamist terrorist driving a 19-ton cargo truck down the promenade in the southern city of Nice in July 2016; he rammed through a crowd celebrating Bastille Day, killing 86 people and injuring 434 others.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/22/2023 – 02:00 - US National Security Experts Urge No More Weapons For Ukraine In NY Times
US National Security Experts Urge No More Weapons For Ukraine In NY Times
Last week, The New York Times published a full-page advertisement signed by 15 U.S. national security experts about the war in Ukraine. It was headed “The U.S. Should Be a Force for Peace in the World,” and was drafted by the Eisenhower Media Network.
While condemning Russia’s invasion, the statement provides a more objective account of the crisis in Ukraine than the U.S. government or The New York Times has previously presented to the public, including the disastrous U.S. role in NATO expansion, the warnings ignored by successive U.S. administrations and the escalating tensions that ultimately led to war.
The statement calls the war an “unmitigated disaster,” and urges President Joe Biden and Congress “to end the war speedily through diplomacy, especially given the dangers of military escalation that could spiral out of control.”
This call for diplomacy by wise, experienced former insiders — U.S. diplomats, military officers and civilian officials — would have been a welcome intervention on any one of the past 442 days of this war. Yet their appeal now comes at an especially critical moment in the war.
On May 10, President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that he is delaying Ukraine’s long-awaited “spring offensive” to avoid “unacceptable” losses to Ukrainian forces.
Western policy has repeatedly put Zelenskyy in near-impossible positions, caught between the need to show signs of progress on the battlefield to justify further Western support and arms deliveries and, on the other hand, the shocking human cost of continued war represented by the fresh graveyards where tens of thousands of Ukrainians now lie buried.
It is not clear how a delay in the planned Ukrainian counter-attack would prevent it leading to unacceptable Ukrainian losses when it finally occurs, unless the delay in fact leads to scaling back and calling off many of the operations that have been planned.
Zelensky appears to be reaching a limit in terms of how many more of his people he is willing to sacrifice to satisfy Western demands for signs of military progress to hold together the Western alliance and maintain the flow of weapons and money to Ukraine.
Boris Johnson’s Role
Zelensky’s predicament is certainly the fault of Russia’s invasion, but also of his April 2022 deal with the devil in the shape of then-U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Johnson promised Zelensky that the U.K. and the “collective West” were “in it for the long run” and would back him to recover all of Ukraine’s former territory, just as long as Ukraine stopped negotiating with Russia.
Johnson was never in a position to fulfill that promise and, since he was forced to resign as prime minister, he has endorsed a Russian withdrawal only from the territory it invaded since February 2022, not a return to pre-2014 borders. Yet that compromise was exactly what he talked Zelensky out of agreeing to in April 2022, when most of the war’s dead were still alive and the framework of a peace agreement was on the table at diplomatic talks in Turkey.
Zelensky has tried desperately to hold his Western backers to Johnson’s overblown promise. But short of direct U.S. and NATO military intervention, it seems that no quantity of Western weapons can decisively break the stalemate in what has degenerated into a brutal war of attrition, fought mainly by artillery and trench and urban warfare.
A group of anti-war US veterans – including a dozen former military officers ranked as high as general – published an ad in the NY Times calling to halt arms shipments to Ukraine and end the war with peace talks
They included this graphic of NATO military bases surrounded Russia https://t.co/SCeTYLseOB pic.twitter.com/m9Ntrnjrgs
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 16, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
An American general bragged that the West has supplied Ukraine with 600 different weapons systems, but this itself creates problems. For example, the different 105 mm guns sent by the U.K., France, Germany and the U.S. all use different shells. And each time heavy losses force Ukraine to re-form survivors into new units, many of them have to be retrained on weapons and equipment they’ve never used before.
Leaked Pentagon Document
Despite U.S. deliveries of at least six types of anti-aircraft missiles — Stinger, NASAMS, Hawk, Rim-7, Avenger, and at least one Patriot missile battery — a leaked Pentagon document revealed that Ukraine’s Russian-built S-300 and Buk anti-aircraft systems still make up almost 90 percent of its main air defenses.
NATO countries have searched their weapons stockpiles for all the missiles they can provide for those systems, but Ukraine has nearly exhausted those supplies, leaving its forces newly vulnerable to Russian air strikes just as it prepares to launch its new counter-attack.
Since at least June 2022, Biden and other U.S. officials have acknowledged that the war must end in a diplomatic settlement, and have insisted that they are arming Ukraine to put it “in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.” Until now, they have claimed that each new weapons system they have sent and each Ukrainian counter-offensive have contributed to that goal and left Ukraine in a stronger position.
But the leaked Pentagon documents and recent statements by U.S. and Ukrainian officials make it clear that Ukraine’s planned spring offensive, already delayed into summer, would lack the previous element of surprise and encounter stronger Russian defenses than the offensives that recovered some of its lost territory last fall.
One leaked Pentagon document warned that “enduring Ukrainian deficiencies in training and munitions supplies probably will strain progress and exacerbate casualties during the offensive,” concluding that it would probably make smaller territorial gains than the fall offensives did.
NATO’s Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting on April 21. (NATO) How can a new offensive with mixed results and higher casualties put Ukraine in a stronger position at a currently non-existent negotiating table? If the offensive reveals that even huge quantities of Western military aid have failed to give Ukraine military superiority or reduce its casualties to a sustainable level, it could very well leave Ukraine in a weaker negotiating position, instead of a stronger one.
Meanwhile, offers to mediate peace talks have been pouring in from countries all over the world, from the Vatican to China to Brazil. It has been six months since the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley suggested publicly, after Ukraine’s military gains last fall, that the moment had come to negotiate from a position of strength. “When there’s an opportunity to negotiate, when peace can be achieved, seize it,” he said.
It would be doubly or triply tragic if, on top of the diplomatic failures that led to the war in the first place and the U.S. and U.K. undermining peace negotiations in April 2022, the chance for diplomacy that Milley wanted to seize is lost in the forlorn hope of attaining an even stronger negotiating position that is not really achievable.
If the U.S. persists in backing the plan for a Ukrainian offensive, instead of encouraging Zelenskyy to seize the moment for diplomacy, it will share considerable responsibility for the failure to seize the chance for peace, and for the appalling and ever-rising human costs of this war.
The experts who signed The New York Times statement recalled that, in 1997, 50 senior U.S. foreign policy experts warned President Bill Clinton that expanding NATO was a “policy error of historic proportions” and that, unfortunately, Clinton chose to ignore the warning. Biden, who is now pursuing his own policy error of historic proportions by prolonging this war, would do well to take the advice of today’s policy experts by helping to forge a diplomatic settlement and making the United States a force for peace in the world.
* * *
TIMELINE
1990 – U.S. assures Russia that NATO will not expand towards its border “…there would be no extension of…NATO one inch to the east,” says US Secretary of State James Baker.
1996 – U.S. weapons manufacturers form the Committee to Expand NATO, spending over $51 million lobbying Congress.
1997 – 50 foreign policy experts including former senators, retired military officers and diplomats sign an open letter stating NATO expansion to be “a policy error of historic proportions.”
1999 – NATO admits Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic to NATO. U.S. and NATO bomb Russia’s ally, Serbia.
2001 – U.S. unilaterally withdraws from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
2004 – Seven more Eastern European nations join NATO. NATO troops are now directly on Russia’s border.
2004 – Russia’s parliament passed a resolution denouncing NATO’s expansion. Putin responded by saying that Russia would “build our defense and security policy correspondingly.”
2008 – NATO leaders announced plans to bring Ukraine and Georgia, also on Russia’s borders, into NATO.
2009 – U.S. announced plans to put missile systems into Poland and Romania.
2014 – Legally elected Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, fled violence to Moscow. Russia views ouster as a coup by U.S. and NATO nations.
2016 – U.S. begins troop buildup in Europe.
2019 – U.S. unilaterally withdraws from Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty.
2020 – U.S. unilaterally withdraws from Open Skies Treaty.
2021 – Russia submits negotiation proposals while sending more forces to the border with Ukraine. U.S. and NATO officials reject the Russian proposals immediately.
Feb 24, 2022 – Russia invades Ukraine, starting the Russia-Ukraine War.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 23:30 - Hunter Biden Faces Call For Key Business Associates In The Arkansas Proceedings
Hunter Biden Faces Call For Key Business Associates In The Arkansas Proceedings
There is a new and interesting development in Arkansas where attorneys for Lunden Alexis Roberts have prepared a list of witnesses for the upcoming proceedings involving Hunter Biden’s daughter, Navy.
As previously discussed, Hunter Biden is seeking to reduce child support payments and has balked at Navy being able to use the Biden name. If successful, this could get a lot worse for Hunter in his alleged efforts to conceal his past income.
On the list are business partners at the center of the influence peddling scandal.
(Thank you to the reader who sent this possibly prophetic intersection picture).
On the list are business partners who are connected to millions of dollars acquired from foreign interests in China, Ukraine and other countries. Also on the list is New York City art gallery owner Georges Bergès who continues to sell his art. Bergès has reportedly pushed back on congressional efforts to reveal details on these proceeds and buyers even though former government ethicists have raised concerns over the sales.
The costs of these proceedings and high-priced legal team would seem to undermine claims of financial distress by Biden. However, by putting his financial worth at issue, Hunter has opened up a new front in battling over the disclosure of his past dealings. Some of his past associates are reportedly cooperating with House investigators in tracking foreign payments.
Even the Washington Post has belatedly published an editorial admitting that this is all a serious concern over influence peddling. In an editorial titled “Millions flowed to Biden family members. Don’t pretend it doesn’t matter.”
It was a bittersweet moment for many of us who have been writing about these dealings for years as newspapers like the Post downplayed the scandal or the authenticity of the laptop. Media outlets like National Public Radio (NPR) declared that it “not want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.” These disclosures have been forced into the public despite the best efforts of the Post and other media. Indeed, recently the Post’s Philip Bump derided the House investigation as a “fishing expedition . . . it’s nearly all innuendo, a big corkboard with lots of pictures but little interconnecting string.” His “witchhunt” attack was then repeated by others at the Post.
Despite these efforts, Hunter Biden appears to doing his level best to force the issue in Arkansas. It is not clear if the court will call any of these witnesses. However, since Hunter has put his finances at issue, some disclosures will need to be made.
As for Navy, she is still uncertain if the court will allow her to use the Biden name despite her father’s efforts to the contrary. While it does not appear that Hunter (who lives in a California mansion) is financially broke, his actions (and those of the President and First Lady) toward this little girl show a moral deficit and delinquency that is abundantly obvious.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 23:00 - NYC Has A Shoplifting Problem… And Kiosks Aren't Going To Stop It!
NYC Has A Shoplifting Problem… And Kiosks Aren’t Going To Stop It!
Authored by Andrea Widburg via AmericanThinker.com,
Like all Democrat-run cities that turned against police in 2020, New York City has a crime problem, including an explosive uptick in shoplifting. Fortunately for New York City store owners, Mayor Eric Adams has a plan. The problem is that, as with all lefty plans, it will cost money and almost certainly be completely useless.
Ever since the George Floyd riots caused leftist-managed cities to defund their police, all sorts of crimes have increased. In New York City, the crime that’s really taken off is shoplifting.
In the first eight months of 2021, shoplifting in New York increased by 30% over rates in 2020. Of course, one could argue that slowly ending the lockdown was what made the difference. However, that wouldn’t explain what happened in 2022. In that year, shoplifting went up by another 45% over rates in 2021, with an even better marker being the fact that it was 275% higher than a decade or so earlier.
Shoplifting may be a non-violent crime, but it has a disastrous effect on people in the community because stores, including big box stores, respond to theft in two different ways: First, they raise their prices; then when that proves ineffective, they pick up their marbles and go home by shutting down stores. In San Francisco, for example, Walgreens closed five stores due to shoplifting. Target, meanwhile, predicts that retail crime will cost it as much as $1.3 billion:
Crime-battered retail giant Target said it expects to suffer as much as a $1.3 billion hit to its bottom line because of “theft and organized crime,” according to the company’s first-quarter earnings report released Wednesday.
The Minneapolis-based chain said its profit will be squeezed by “$500 million more than what we saw last year” – when the company lost as much as $800 million from “inventory shrink.”
Considering that Target voiced its full-throated support for BLM and dug deep in its pocket to support the communist organization, one can’t help but notice an “actions have consequences” scenario at work. That’s a shame because Target used to be a very nice place. Now, though, aside from shoplifting, lots of people (me included) are fed up with its Pride shenanigans, which it’s now aimed at children. But I digress…
New York mayor Eric Adams seems to have been feeling the heat from merchants in New York City, so his office has announced a “crackdown on shoplifting plan.”
As always, though, when the government steps in to help, the devil is in the details:
Clown world intensifies. 🤡🌎
NYC plan to “crackdown” on shoplifting. 🤨 pic.twitter.com/4MHcnBgucn
— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 20, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
And yes, that screen shot is real, not a Photoshop. According to Fox 5’s full report,
The new crackdown includes giving first-time offenders intervention programs instead of prosecution, de-escalation training for retail employees, establishing neighborhood retail watch groups to share information about a theft in real-time with one another and the police, and installing kiosks in stores to connect would-be thieves with social service programs.
One of the things that everyone has noticed about shoplifters is that they’re not starved, Dickensian-style waifs stealing a loaf of bread to survive. Instead, they’re organized gangs that go in and steal merchandise that has a good retail value on the street:
San Francisco pic.twitter.com/klaiesGE2C
— Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) May 16, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Or if they’re eating what they steal, it’s party time, not starvation time:
Why is Walmart struggling in urban areas?
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) May 19, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
What’s happening is organized crime:
Last Walmart in North Portland Closing Down … they cannot overcome the losses from shoplifting.
The people of Portland voted for this so retail stores are exiting. 🤡 🌎
— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 19, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
In other words, little police kiosks promising social services (which will augment all the posters about social services in the crime-ridden NY subway) are not going to change things. Nor will friendly little “intervention programs” affect what is hardcore criminal activity. The NYC plan is taking a flyswatter to an out-of-control wild boar.
I would say that the people of NYC deserve better but, actually, they don’t. This is what they voted for. It’s not just that Adams garnered 80.4% of the vote in Manhattan, 76% in the Bronx, 70.8% in Brooklyn, and 59.8% in Queens, with only Staten Island showing the good sense to vote for Curtis Sliwa (66.4% of the votes). It’s also that a total of only 1,125,000 turned out to vote, out of a city with a population that’s close to 9,000,000.
The only ones I feel for are the conservatives (some of whom I count among my good friends) who took the time and made the effort to vote. As to those people, I’ve heard that Florida’s a nice place, as are most of the southern states.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 22:30 - Where International Travelers Spend The Most
Where International Travelers Spend The Most
When it comes to travel, some tourists spare no expense. And some cities are well suited to attract them.
From the luxurious desert city of Dubai to the city of light and love, Paris, many international travelers today are looking to tick the crème de la crème of destinations off their bucket lists. In some cases, they’re seeking out the opulent experiences they missed out on when the pandemic brought the world to a halt.
In this graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Freny Fernandez and Bhabna Banerjee use the latest research by the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) to highlight the top 10 cities where international travelers spent the most in 2022.
Cities of Opulence
Last year, Dubai took top spot, followed by nearby Doha, Qatar.
Rank City Country / Region Income from International Tourists (2022) #1 Dubai 🇦🇪 UAE $29.42B #2 Doha 🇶🇦 Qatar $16.79B #3 London 🇬🇧 UK $16.07B #4 Macau 🇲🇴 Macau SAR $15.58B #5 Amsterdam 🇳🇱 Netherlands $13.59B #6 Istanbul 🇹🇷 Türkiye $13.13B #7 Barcelona 🇪🇸 Spain $12.73B #8 New York 🇺🇸 U.S. $12.45B #9 Singapore 🇸🇬 Singapore $10.97B #10 Paris 🇫🇷 France $9.76B Singapore and Macau represented East Asia, and New York was the sole city from the Americas on the list.
It’s worth noting that this list differs somewhat from overall tourism spending, which would include domestic travel spending as well. Large countries like the United States and China fare better in that ranking.
City Spotlight: Destinations Favored by Big Spenders
When you think of luxury travel, you think of five-star hotels, Michelin-star restaurants, luxury retail outlets, and many other premium experiences. And these cities offered their international travelers just that.
#1. Dubai
From the Burj Khalifa, currently the world’s tallest building, to the desert excursions and yacht cruises, Dubai offers extravagant experiences for international visitors. The city’s reputation for tax-free, high-end shopping and its commitment to providing a luxurious experience has made it a top travel destination for luxury shoppers from around the world.
Location is another factor in the city’s success. Dubai sits at the natural crossroads between Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, and is home to one of the world’s busiest, well-connected airports.
International travelers spent close to $30 billion in the city in 2022.
#3. London
London has long been a preferred location for the ultra-wealthy, and as a result, the city has an abundance of amenities for well-heeled travelers. For one, London is home to more five star hotels than any other city. As well, London offers ultra-wealthy travelers access to a wide range of high-end designer retailers, as well as world-famous museums, galleries, and landmarks.
Of course, the UK’s largest city also sees a high overall volume of tourists overall, which adds to the $16 billion global visitors spent in the city in 2022.
#4. Macau
Known as the Las Vegas of Asia, Macau’s gambling hub has been a magnet for international tourists for years. However, as the city began re-imagining its tourism strategies post-pandemic, it has grown stronger as an international tourist destination.
Outside tourists brought in $15.6 billion in 2022, and that number is only expected to multiply further over the next decade. This growth is being fueled by China and Hong Kong, which account for the lion’s share of visits.
Note: Although Macau is now a part of China, it remains a Special Administrative Region under the “One Country, Two Systems” principle.
Transforming Travel Trends
The global travel industry continues to recover from the pandemic, which is good news for the many nations that economically rely on tourism.
As travel restrictions were lifted, many tourists flocked to remote destinations that were less traveled. However, this WTTC research is proof that the world’s iconic cities are making their way back onto tourist itineraries once again.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 22:00 - Abandon The Swamp
Abandon The Swamp
Authored by Roger Kimball via American Greatness,
Suppose a document drops in the wilderness and no one is around to hear it. Does it make a sound?
I submit that John Durham just tested this Bishop Berkeleyesque query. The special counsel spent four years beavering away in the forests of the deep state and what did he produce?
Three hundred pages telling us what, for the most part, we already knew and with the result that exactly nothing, apart from a little hand wringing, will happen.
We already knew that James Comey, Robert Mueller, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, John Brennan, Susan Rice, Michael Sussmann, Kevin Clinesmith, and all the other characters in and around the Russia Collusion Delusion had fabricated the story of Trump’s supposed connection with Russia out of whole cloth.
We already knew that they had gone out of their way to protect Hillary Clinton.
We knew that there was no predicate for obtaining a FISA warrant against Carter Page (one of many thousands of such warrants), thus opening a back door into the Trump campaign.
We knew that the surveillance apparatus of the regime had been weaponized to prevent Donald Trump from being elected and then, when he surprised everyone by winning anyway, to taint his administration and render him radioactive.
What should we make of Durham’s non-revelatory revelations? I think that, wittingly or not, they were just a big exercise in track-covering, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Well, nothing beyond the sound and fury, anyway.
Still, Durham’s bulletin is useful as a marker of the futility in which we labor. André Gide touched on this point when he reminded us that “Toutes choses sont dites déjà, mais comme personne n’écoute, il faut toujours recommencer.” Over the past five or six years, virtually everything that Durham said in his report had already been said. But because no one was listening, it is necessary to start again and say it once more.
In this spirit, I am going to say again some things I have said elsewhere, beginning with what has become my ritual invocation of British Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s observation that a week is a long time in politics. That’s time enough, as T. S. Eliot said in another context, “for a hundred indecisions, And for a hundred visions and revisions, Before the taking of a toast and tea.”
Until the night of March 5, 2023, I suspected that “The Donald Trump Show,” which has been such blockbuster entertainment, might have entered its final season. That’s still possible, of course. The people clamoring for its cancellation are many and vociferous. Moreover, they have another concession with which they propose to entertain us: “The Ron DeSantis Deliverance.” Someday, I’d like to see that show myself.
I wonder, though, about the most profitable time to air it. 2024? Perhaps. But I think the jury is still out on that. We’ll know more after DeSantis finally announces what he has already made clear, namely that he, too, is running for the presidency in 2024. He will, if the past is any guide, get a bump in the polls. But at the moment, anyway, I am inclined to think that 2024 belongs to the Donald. Why? There are many reasons.
One vivid reason was vouchsafed us during the final hours of the 2023 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) program in National Harbor, Maryland, in March. It was then that Trump addressed the crowd. C-SPAN described the speech as “remarks.” To me, the word “remarks” suggests something brief and casual. Trump’s performance was long and, for Trump, well-prepared.
As usual with the former president, the talk was peppered with digressions and offhand observations. But he was clearly following a script. Chris Christie, formerly an ally, sighed that the room was only half full (was it?) and that Trump was “not what he used to be.” Opinions about that vary. I thought the talk bristled with rhetorical electricity. And in terms of substance, it was one of the most forthright and powerful political speeches I’ve heard.
Earlier that day, Trump had won the CPAC straw poll with 62 percent of the vote. DeSantis was the runner-up with 20 percent. As of May 19, with a half a dozen Republican candidates in the field, Trump leads by 42 points. Is that significant? I don’t know. It’s early days. DeSantis hasn’t even officially declared yet, A week is a long time, etc., etc.
But right now, as of May 20, I would say this about the 2024 race on the Republican side: There are two plausible candidates: Trump and DeSantis.
DeSantis has the blessing of the donor class and Conservatism, Inc. He’s a great governor and would probably make an effective president.
Trump has the unwavering support of the MAGA millions and most allotropes of the dissident Right. There’s plenty of exasperation about Trump, not least among those who worked with him in his first term. He’s a difficult, demanding, and mercurial person. But his CPAC speech (and, more recently, his performance at a CNN “townhall” with Kaitlan Collins) demonstrated why he’s beloved by his supporters and feared and hated by his opponents.
Trump said many bold and controversial things in the course of his speech.
I’ll concentrate on two themes.
The first—it was the thing that really set heads spinning—revolved around the word “retribution.”
“In 2016,” he said, “I declared, I am your voice. Today, I add, I am your warrior, I am your justice, and for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.”
And just in case you missed that last bit, he repeated it. “I am your retribution.”
The pundits love-hated that, just as they were appalled by this promise: “I will totally obliterate the deep state.” I think he meant it, too. “I will fire the unelected bureaucrats and shadow forces who have weaponized our justice system. . . . I will put the people back in charge of this country again.”
’Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.
Could he actually do it? That’s a very good question. His track record during his first term was impressive but not dispositive, partly because he was surrounded by the swamp and its denizens. Really, he didn’t know any better. He came to office as an outsider, a naïf. He actually thought that Jim Mattis and Rex Tillerson were on his side. Imagine that.
He has been disabused of those sentiments, though who exactly he can rely on as allies remains an open question. Personnel will once again be a critical problem for Trump were he to reoccupy 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Here’s a bit of unsolicited advice that I have for the former president should he be elected again: Stay out of Washington as much as you can. Stop the newspapers. Have your mail forwarded.
Washington really is a swamp and it will consume you. And here are a few particular bits of advice:
1) Have the inauguration in Mar-a-Lago.
2) Govern from Florida as much as you can.
3) If you decide to indulge in the theater of the State of the Union Address as it has evolved, deliver it from, say, Kansas.
4) Disband the FBI. We should never have allowed a national police force to come into being.
Move the bits of the government you can’t actually destroy to other parts of the country.
Do these things instantly—the day you take office. The deep state will howl. The bureaucrats will oppose you. The lawyers will sue you. Do it anyway. Act first, deal with the consequences later.
Conduct metaphorical dawn-raids on their people and institutions just as they weaponized the Justice Department against you and your supporters. That would not only be the retribution you seek, it would also be reciprocity. Speed and thoroughness will be of the essence. If you hesitate, if you are half-hearted, you will be lost.
These are points I have made before. The focus should be on eclipsing Washington, D.C. as the seat of government. It has long been obvious to candid observers that there is something deeply dysfunctional about that overwhelmingly Democratic, welfare-addicted city. It is a partisan sinkhole. Jefferson wanted the capital moved from New York to Washington in part to bring it closer to the South, but also to place it somewhere that was officially neutral. There is nothing neutral about Washington today. The city has some impressive architecture and urban vistas. They should be preserved and staffed as tourist attractions. But the reins of power should be relocated.
The more I think about our situation, the more I believe the only hope for the republic is to downgrade the place of Washington in our public life. The business of Washington is to make government bigger—forever. That is not what the people, who pay for it, want. Legitimacy is draining out of our governing institutions at an alarming rate. Stanching that debilitating flow requires that we redirect our attention away from the greedy puppet show in Washington to the true source of legitimacy, which is with the people.
Trump is one of the few people with the temerity to attempt such a thing. Perhaps he can appease some of his critics by proposing we rename Washington to George Floyd City. I would be OK with that. In any event, the actual government of the country should be moved to some neutral ground, out of the overwhelmingly corrupt cesspool that is Washington.
The other bit of Trump’s CPAC speech that I want to mention concerns NATO. Trump did not, as some commenters asserted, “muse about Russia blowing up the NATO headquarters.” Rather, he talked about the folly of NATO spending billions to construct a huge headquarters for itself. Would they not have been better advised to construct a hardened bunker? After all, Trump pointed out, Russia could destroy the shiny new headquarters with a single missile.
Bill Kristol, seizing on the idea that Trump was musing about blowing up NATO headquarters, took to Twitter to make “the most obvious point: This man cannot be our next president.” Kristol was also aghast at Trump’s call for an “all-European NATO, with the United States as an ally but not a member.” “One of the problems with the involvement of the United States in NATO,” he said, “is that it dilutes the nationalist impulse.” Can you believe that? He actually praised “the nationalist impulse.” How Hitlerian can you get?
Unfortunately for Bill Kristol, though, those last observations come not from Trump (though he would probably agree with them) but from someone else named Kristol: Irving Kristol, Bill’s father, who in 1983 wrote an essay called “What’s Wrong With NATO?” After the Soviet Union fell, Irving Kristol went on to express doubts about the future role for NATO in European politics altogether.
If that seems surprising, it’s only because you have failed to appreciate just how long a week in politics can be.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 21:30 - Joe Biden, Habitual Racialist Demagogue: VDH
Joe Biden, Habitual Racialist Demagogue: VDH
Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via RealClear Politics,
The most recent liberal ABC News/Washington Post poll showed President Joe Biden’s approval rating at 36 percent – the lowest in history for a president at this point in his first term.
Biden’s low popularity is no mystery.
He inherited energy independence, affordable gas prices, historically low interest rates, low inflation, calm overseas, a low crime rate, and a largely closed border with legal-only immigration.
And then Biden destroyed that inheritance.
He has begged illiberal foreign governments to pump oil he refuses to drill domestically for.
He spiked inflation at the highest rate in over 40 years.
Home interest rates have skyrocketed from less than 3% to 7%.
He nearly doubled the price of gasoline.
His hare-brained retreat from Afghanistan marked the greatest humiliation of the American military in the last half-century.
Kabul is now selling billions of dollars’ worth of abandoned American equipment to terrorists and anti-American regimes.
After that fiasco, Biden foolhardily played down a possible “minor” Russia invasion of Ukraine. He implored Russia to exempt some American institutions from its cyber-attack target list.
No wonder an empowered Russian President Vladimir Putin went into Ukraine.
Biden’s family is corrupt from top to bottom.
Its influence peddling schemes increasingly are targets of congressional investigations. Biden himself is explicitly mentioned by his son Hunter as the recipient of a 10% commission on monies the family syndicate leveraged from foreign interests.
Biden promised “unity.” Instead, he habitually smears half the country as “semi-fascists” and “ultra-MAGA” extremists.
Biden is cognitively challenged and often incoherent. And he is now losing support in the polls from African Americans, once his most loyal constituency.
In response, Biden does what he has always done for some 40 years: mouth wild racist demagoguery.
This graduation season, Biden deliberately chose Howard University to scare its Black graduates into believing the greatest threat to their aspirations is “white supremacy” – but that he, Biden, has been their protector in fighting it.
Note the existential threats Biden deliberately omits.
Tens of thousands of illegal immigrants are flooding over a border Biden deliberately destroyed. Millions of incoming poor will vie for limited federal and state support with Americans who are in need.
Since Biden was elected, there have been nearly 7 million illegal entries.
Some 100,000 Americans now die each year from Mexican-produced fentanyl and other opioids shipped across a wide-open border.
Biden did not mention that nearly 10,000 African Americans are murdered each year, over 90% of them killed by other African Americans.
Biden first should heal his own racism before he fabricates it in others.
He fueled his early Senate career with homages to southern Democratic segregationists such as Senator James O. Eastland, D-Miss. Biden even bragged that Eastland “never called me ‘boy.'” Biden gave eulogies for former Dixiecrat Sen. Strom Thurmond and former Klansman Sen. Robert Byrd.
Of school busing, a younger Senator Biden thundered, “My children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle.”
Biden in 2008 patronized former President Barack Obama in racist terms as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”
In 2012, Biden condescended to a group of accomplished Black professionals that the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would “put y’all back in chains.”
As a presidential candidate in 2020, he dismissed two Black journalists, respectively with the putdowns “you ain’t Black” and “junkie.”
His fabricated “Corn Pop” he-man autobiographical tales are utterly racist.
As president he has referred to two prominent people of color as “boy.” He still uses the term “Negro” to refer to Blacks.
Biden never cites data to support his wild accusations that white supremacy poses the nation’s greatest threat.
The 2020 riots, the lengthiest in our history, left up to 40 people dead, destroyed $2 billion in property, led to 14,000 arrests, spanned 120 days of mass looting, and arson, and saw mobs torching police precincts, federal courthouses, and an historic church.
That violence was engineered by radicals in Antifa and Black Lives Matter.
In the January 6 Capitol protests, the only person confirmed to have been killed at that event was an unarmed military veteran and Trump supporter, Ashli Babbitt. She was lethally shot by a Capitol police officer for the misdemeanor of attempting to enter through a broken window.
If “white supremacy” is our “greatest” terrorist threat, surely crime statistics would reveal such an existential peril.
Yet federal hate- and interracial-crime data show that so-called whites are considerably unrepresented demographically in such racially motivated violence.
Far from galvanizing the public, Biden’s monotonous racial demagoguery is turning it off.
The military suffers a vast drop in enlistments that began once Biden’s Pentagon brass, without evidence, likewise began demagoguing about supposed “white rage” in the ranks.
Only 37% of independents in a recent poll now support Biden. Some 70% of the public in other polls opposes a second Biden run.
So on spec, a panicked Biden now turns to what he has done for decades – inflammatory racial demagoguery.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 21:00 - "Not Our Beliefs" – Bud Light Distributor Sends Out Public Plea to Bring Back Customers
“Not Our Beliefs” – Bud Light Distributor Sends Out Public Plea to Bring Back Customers
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,
A Bud Light distributor in Alabama issued a public plea to bring back customers who boycotted the brand after it produced a can with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney’s face.
Steve Tatum, with the Montgomery-based Bama Budweiser distributor, deployed a radio advertisement for several area stations, pleading with customers to purchase Bud Light again.
In April and during the first week of May, sales of Bud Light were down significantly, while sales of other Anheuser-Busch products also dropped amid the Mulvaney backlash.
“We too at Bama Budweiser are upset about it and have made our feelings known to the top leadership at Anheuser-Busch,” Tatum said in the ad, according to multiple news reports.
“The voice of the consumer has been heard, and Anheuser-Busch has taken action.”
‘#BudLightPartner’
Like Anheuser-Busch’s leadership, Tatum also tried to distance Bud Light from Mulvaney, a biological male who had posted the custom-made Bud Light can and used a hashtag “#BudLightPartner” in early April, drawing significant ire from consumers and conservative celebrities. Several popular country singers, including Travis Tritt and John Rich, said they wouldn’t serve the beer, while Kid Rock posted a video of him shooting up cases of Bud Light.
“We at Bama Budweiser, an independent wholesaler, employ around 100 people who live here, work here, and our children go to school here,” Tatum said in the ad.
“We do not, and as I said before, did not support this issue involving Dylan Mulvaney. There was one single can made. It was not for sale and wasn’t properly approved. As a result, the Bud Light brand has new leadership.”
Tatum added:
“Dylan Mulvaney is not under contract with Bud Light. The videos you may have seen are Mulvaney’s own social media posts that went viral and many web-based news outlets have distorted the story. You deserve to know the truth, and life is too short to let a couple of individuals decide what you can eat or drink or spend your hard-earned money on. And remember, making friends is our business, not enemies.”
Drop in Sales
Latest industry data shows that Bud Light’s sales dropped in the first week of May, falling 23.6 percent in the week ending May 6, reported Beer Business Daily using Nielsen IQ data. In the final week of April, sales for the beer dropped 23.3 percent, the data show.
“Trends aren’t getting much worse, but certainly not getting any better either,” Beer Business Daily wrote in a commentary on the figures.
Tatum told AL.com that he’s received positive feedback for his ad campaign. However, he said that there has been no response from Anheuser-Busch or Bud Light corporate officials.
“I’m just trying to look after Bama Budweiser,” he said. “I’ve worked too hard to give it all away.”
The distributor added to Newsweek that “I felt like we had to get a message out there,” adding: “We are tied to a corporation, but that’s not necessarily our beliefs in our market here in Alabama.”
Sales volumes for Anheuser-Busch products also dropped 9.7 percent for the first week in May, up from the 11.4 percent decline in late April, according to industry data. Anheuser-Busch, which has headquarters in the Netherlands, also makes Budweiser, Michelob, Stella Artois, and Beck’s, among other beers.
‘Misinformation and Confusion’
Anheuser-Busch CEO Michel Doukeris told the Financial Times in a recent interview that his company believes the Bud Light boycott was triggered by “misinformation and confusion” circulating on social media and sought to distance his firm from Mulvaney. He said that Mulvaney wasn’t part of an official marketing campaign and that “one can” was produced with Mulvaney’s face.
“It was one post. It was not an advertisement,” Doukeris told the outlet.
He alleged viral videos of billboards with images of the Bud Light can with Mulvaney’s face on it inserted “electronically,” although he did not address why Mulvaney wrote the hashtag on social media suggesting a partnership.
Initially, Anheuser-Busch USA CEO Brendan Whitworth released a statement that did not address the boycott or the Mulvaney partnership.
The company “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people,” he said in a statement, which was criticized by conservatives.
In the meantime, Anheuser-Busch InBev had its stock downgraded recently by an HSBC analyst who said the firm is now dealing with a “Bud Light crisis” of sorts. There are “deeper problems” than Anheuser-Busch would like to admit publicly after its marketing engagement with the transgender influencer became a hot topic, the analyst said.
‘The Tide Has Turned’
While some analysts and researchers say that boycotts of large corporations rarely work, a former Anheuser-Busch, Anson Frericks, said last week that the Bud Light one is actually working.
“Now, the tide has turned. A poll conducted earlier this year shows that 68 percent of Americans think that companies that speak out on social issues do it as a marketing ploy,” he wrote.
“And a study out earlier this month shows that Americans are much more likely to distrust institutions they view as politicized—even when they take political positions that align with their views. In today’s heated political environment, the surest course for companies—particularly those in high-visibility, competitive markets—is to focus on their brand and stay out of the debates.”
The Epoch Times has contacted Anheuser-Busch multiple times for comment about the sales and controversy.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 20:30 - "Isolated Event" Again? All Voters Of New York County Falsely Identified As Democrats In Voter IDs
“Isolated Event” Again? All Voters Of New York County Falsely Identified As Democrats In Voter IDs
Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,
All voters of Nassau County, New York, were identified as Democrats on their voter ID cards irrespective of political affiliation due to a botch-up by a printing company, triggering accusations about “sabotaging elections” ahead of the upcoming primaries.
The primaries are scheduled for June. Voters of the county, amounting to nearly a million, began to receive their voter ID cards on Tuesday, with voters supporting Republicans, Independents, or another political party surprised to see themselves identified as Democrats in the cards, according to NBC. “We’re already starting to get phone calls from people, saying ‘I’m a registered Republican, I’m a registered Conservative—how come I’m being identified as a Democrat? Who changed my registration?’ And they’re quite upset about it,” said Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman.
“There’s a lot of confusion, there’s a lot of people emotionally upset about this,” he added. Blakeman, a Republican, is pinning the blame on Rochester-based Phoenix Graphics, the printing company hired by Nassau County’s Board of Elections to print the voter ID cards.
The printing company called it an “isolated event” that was the result of a human error. “We apologize for our mistake, especially to Nassau County officials, who bear no responsibility for this problem.”
However, this is not the first time that Phoenix Graphics has committed such a mistake. In 2020, Phoenix messed up absentee ballots for 99,000 voters in Brooklyn. The printing firm had erroneously sent mailings to voters containing return envelopes having the names and addresses of other people.
The campaign for Kari Lake (R-Ariz.), who is running for the post of Arizona Governor, slammed the incident.
“A ‘printing error’ in Nassau County, N.Y. led to every voter in that county being listed as a Democrat. There’s that word again. ‘Printer error.’ This is just their blanket excuse for sabotaging elections and hoping nobody calls them on it,” the campaign said in a May 21 tweet.
Since New York is a closed primary state, voters registered as belonging to a party are not allowed to vote for any other party. As such, if a GOP supporter is identified as Democrat in the voter registration system, the individual would be barred from casting votes for the Republican primary.
Trust in Elections
Out of the 972,000 voters in the county, Democrats account for around 40 percent. At a press conference, Blakeman ruled out partisanship as a cause for the mishap and said that the county is investigating the matter.
“I don’t think the Democratic Party is engaged in a conspiracy to create havoc in their own primaries. I don’t think the Democratic Party wants a bunch of Republicans showing up to vote in their primaries,” said Blakeman, according to the New York Post.
However, some voters are now questioning the election process due to the typo error. “I have no faith in this country today, as far as what the politics are,” said George Klein, a voter from Nassau. “I’m going to vote Republican primary day, and Democrat on that is not going to affect it,” he said referring to the erroneous ID card he received.
During the 2022 midterms, only 56 percent of Republicans thought the elections will be administered “very” or “somewhat” well, according to Pew Research.
Accurate Voter ID Cards
According to Phoenix Graphics, they are correcting the error and will send out new and accurate voter ID cards soon without any additional cost to taxpayers.
Democratic County Election Commissioner Jim Scheuerman told the New York Post that Phoenix will be paying around $300,000 required to resend the correct registration cards to the county’s voters.
Phoenix was contracted more than ten years ago via a sealed-bid process. Officials with Nassau County’s Board of Elections are reportedly not ruling out considering other vendors to ensure that the recent mistake doesn’t occur again, according to Fox.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 19:30 - Crypto Calm Before The Smile
Crypto Calm Before The Smile
By Marcel Kasumovich and Kartikey Sinha of One River Asset Management
1. Adapt or die. It’s clever, even if overused. The finite nature of life is what makes it so precious. Embracing adaptation over comfort, the joy of the struggle. Hundreds of brainy quotes are at your fingertips to give credibility to the mantra. Maya Angelou is my mom’s personal favorite: “If you don’t like something, change it. If you can’t change it, change your attitude.” There is no try in adaptation – you either do or you don’t. Crypto asset markets choose “do.”
2. Adaption is evident in natural cycles, naturally. Biodiverse ecosystems strengthen the resilience of cycles. Of course, the same is true of economic systems and financial markets. But our instincts are to resist. Intervening to stop forest fires that are disruptive to homes that probably shouldn’t be there. Intervening to guard against losses of banks that probably shouldn’t exist. Intervention leans against natural cycles, lessens diversity, and weakens resilience.
3. Intervention requires great humility. We don’t know what we don’t know. Yet, intervention is often executed with a force of certainty. If banks were not bailed out, we were certain to enter a Great Depression. The unintended consequence of intervention must be less than the social strains of soup kitchens in Central Park. Intervention centralizes debt to government balance sheets, leaving rich countries with unsustainable obligations. It brings generational fragility.
4. The crypto asset ecosystem stands in sharp contrast. It demands adaptive resilience. Take US dollar stablecoin. Total assets are roughly $130 billion today, on par with October 2021. Dollars chose to stay in the digital ecosystem despite a sharp rise in US interest rates, a crash in crypto asset markets, and the annihilation of poorly designed stablecoin. Resilience. Then, strains in the US banking system led to a rapid shift of stablecoin to USDT and away from USDC, raising Tether’s share to 46% of the Ethereum stablecoin supply. Adaptation.
5. Why has US dollar stablecoin been so durable? Its velocity demonstrates it is well designed and useful. A total of $1,952 billion stablecoin transactions settled on the Ethereum blockchain in the first quarter. Ethereum US dollar stablecoin assets averaged $95 billion over the same period. So, the entire stock of stablecoin turned over 20 times in the quarter, or roughly once every 4-5 days. And that doesn’t include off-chain transactions. It makes USD stablecoin the most efficient collateral in the global financial system. Bank runs are for banks.
6. Now, resilience also changes the nature of cycles. We know that cycles of the weather are simply defined – hot in the summer, cold in the winter. But the amplitudes and timing are highly nonlinear. No two cycles are the same. Crypto asset prices and activity have surged this year. Bitcoin was up more than 80% at its peak this year, transaction volumes have leapt to record levels, and bitcoin mining fees have garnered the third-highest share of revenue in its history. Historically, these would be signs of excess.
7. But derivative markets are clearly not flashing red. On the contrary, the signals are remarkably bland. Bitcoin’s three-month volatility expectation is near historic lows at 47%, the skew in option markets is neutral, and the cost of futures leverage is near-zero versus more than 10% annualized during past periods of rapid price gains. Surprised? It’s the benefit of no intervention and increased resilience. Last cycle’s crypto crash is bringing far more discipline to the current cycle.
8. It got us thinking – the “Royal us” in this case, including Kartikey, a member of our Digital Labs. How does bitcoin’s price and volatility adjust to the demand for leverage?
We take funding rates implied by the bitcoin perpetual futures from 2018-2022, partition them into percentile ranges, and then evaluate bitcoin’s volatility. Figure 1 shows a happy smile relationship, a dream for risk managing a portfolio.
There’s information content on both extremes – risk rises when the cost of leverage is extremely low and extremely high, in the boom and bust respectively.
9 . The same smile emerges with the absolute move in bitcoin price returns across different stages of the leverage cycle from 2018 to 2022 (Figure 2). But the return profile is more of a jump in the extremes.
When bitcoin funding rates are in the 0-10 percentile range, the average daily bitcoin return is (1.02%), roughly seven-times the sample average. On the other extreme in the 90-100 percentile range, bitcoin’s average daily return is 2.11%. Outside of those extremes are long phases of calm, like the current one.
10. The resilience of digital asset markets ensures the previous cycle won’t be repeated. A surge in economic transactions can occur without speculative excess – we’ve already seen it this year. This is encouraging for developers as price signals are more valuable when not polluted by excess speculation. A virtuous cycle emerges. But we can’t extrapolate the calm. Extremes can be identified by funding rates and volatility markets – analytics when integrated to systematic strategies will leave any crypto asset manager smiling, just like bitcoin’s volatility curve.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 19:00 - Despite Denials, Experts Say Fentanyl-Laced Marijuana Is A Growing Problem
Despite Denials, Experts Say Fentanyl-Laced Marijuana Is A Growing Problem
Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Twenty-one states, plus the District of Columbia, have legalized recreational marijuana for adults as of April 2023. And while marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, 88 percent of adults think it should be legalized for medical and recreational use, according to an October 2022 Pew Research Center survey—a significant increase from 1999’s 31 percent.
Cannabis plants grow inside of Thrive Cannabis’ production facility in Simcoe, Ontario, on April 13, 2021. (The Canadian Press/Tara Walton) Additionally, 55 million Americans currently use marijuana, and 45 percent of the population has tried it at least once, according to the National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics.
But as attitudes and state laws change regarding marijuana—and its use increases—reports of marijuana laced with substances like the synthetic opioid fentanyl, are also increasing.
“One of the trends that we saw secondary to the pandemic was individuals stopped reporting opioid use as their primary drug of choice, and it seems to be replaced with marijuana and methamphetamine,” Teresa Russell, the director of criminal justice outreach in Dayton, Ohio, told The Epoch Times. Russell works between the county jail and community health and treatment facilities.
Russell explained that when someone is booked into the jail and needs to detox, they’re asked about drugs they’ve taken and must take a urine drug screen. Russell said it’s becoming increasingly common for someone to say they’ve only used marijuana but then pop positive for fentanyl.
Teresa Russell, treatment coordinator at the Montgomery County jail, in Dayton, Ohio, on Oct. 30, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times) “They genuinely don’t know that [opioids are] in there,” Russell said. “They have no idea what’s actually being put inside their substances. That’s an ongoing trend of what we’re seeing.”
When explicitly asked if marijuana is being laced with fentanyl and showing up on drug screens, Russell confirmed that’s what she’s seeing.
“We hear that not just from my team here in the jail from our intake screens, but we’re hearing that from our outreach partners.”
NORML, a nonprofit public-interest advocacy group pushing for the legalization of marijuana, is quick to downplay the issue of fentanyl-laced marijuana.
“Rarely a week goes by without police or other public officials warning about so-called ‘fentanyl-laced’ weed. Upon closer inspection, however, there’s little if any truth behind these sensational claims,” NORML says on its site.
“It’s controversial,” Russell said of fentanyl-laced marijuana, “But I have urine drug screens that show it.”
Russell isn’t the only one sounding the alarm on what she believes is a growing issue.
Cases
On Feb. 10, two students at North Mac High School in Illinois, were found to be in possession and under the influence of marijuana, and two field tests administered by the Virden Police Department found that the marijuana was positive for fentanyl.
Kyle Hacke, the superintendent of North Mac, said in a statement, “We are fairly certain our students did not know they were ingesting fentanyl. Fentanyl-laced drugs … continue to show up in small communities like ours nationwide. We implore you to speak with your children and take necessary steps to combat this danger.”
On Nov. 17, 2022, police in Leeds, Alabama, charged Jose Ingnacio Medina-Estrada with murder after he allegedly sold marijuana that was laced with fentanyl. The buyer—who believed he was only purchasing marijuana according to LPD Chief Paul Irwin—immediately died as a result.
“This needs to serve as a notice to all individuals who are purchasing drugs. Drugs can take your life immediately or will control you and eventually destroy your life and everything you care about,” Irwin said.
Fentanyl, firearms, and cash confiscated by DEA Los Angeles. (Courtesy of DEA Los Angeles) On Oct. 20, 2022, the Summerville Police Department in South Carolina released a statement via Facebook that read, “The Summerville Police Department has seized Marijuana that has tested presumptive for Amphetamines and Fentanyl. The laced Marijuana was seized during two apparent drug overdose investigations and it is possible the laced Marijuana played a factor in the overdoses. We are asking the community to stay safe and to be careful.”
On Nov. 18, 2021, the Connecticut State Department of Public Health (DPH) issued a press release that stated there were 39 overdose incidents involving fentanyl-laced weed in 2021. However, upon further forensic analysis, only one of those cases could be confirmed to involve fentanyl-laced marijuana.
In its dismissal of fentanyl-laced marijuana, NORML points to the Connecticut case, and the forensic analysis. However, the article NORML cites also states: “Chris Boyle, a spokesperson for DPH, said a full analysis has now revealed at least 30 of the 39 overdoses were among patients with histories of opioid use.
“Anything bought off the street, including cannabis, has the potential to contain other substances, one of those being fentanyl,’ Boyle told the media. “CT DPH has documented evidence, from not just the State Police Forensics Lab, but from the DEA lab as verification of the seized drug sample, that cannabis was contaminated with fentanyl.’”
Increasing Prevalence
According to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that’s primarily manufactured in countries like China and then smuggled into the United States via Mexico.
“Fentanyl is being mixed in with other illicit drugs to increase the potency of the drug, sold as powders and nasal sprays, and increasingly pressed into pills made to look like legitimate prescription opioids,” the DEA states.
“There is significant risk that illegal drugs have been intentionally contaminated with fentanyl.”
That’s something Howard Barker, the Director of Community Relations at New Life House, a sober living program for men in California, is seeing firsthand. Barker told The Epoch Times that he’s seeing a trend with fentanyl-laced marijuana that he first witnessed with cocaine.
“I remember the first few times years ago that we started seeing overdoses happen with things like cocaine, and fentanyl was cut into things like cocaine, and we’re like, ‘There’s no way. Why would you ever put fentanyl in cocaine?’
“I have been doing this professionally for over a decade, and I didn’t believe it. I said, ‘That doesn’t even make sense logically.’ You know, if a user is going to get cocaine and go up, the last thing they want to do is go down.
“It’s similar with cannabis. If you have someone going for cannabis, and they’re hoping to smoke weed, the last thing they want to do is use one of the most potent opiates on the planet. But that’s what’s happening.”
Cannabis samples at Calalyst Cannabis in Santa Ana, Calif., on Feb. 18, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times) “Dealers have found that because of how addictive fentanyl is, and how potent it is, they start putting it in these other substances, and it’s very, very cheap to do, and they’re able to one, get more bang for their buck, two, potentially hook users, and three, [dealers] find themselves in a position where the folks that like it are coming back for more.”
Barker added that while the majority of street dealers aren’t cutting marijuana with fentanyl, it’s still a growing problem.
“The problem with fentanyl is that it’s really Russian Roulette,” he said.
“So even if the majority of the time you’re buying weed on the streets you’re not getting weed laced with fentanyl, if there’s even that small chance that it could happen—and you happen to be the person that gets it—the old scary horror stories about drug abuse, ‘you do it one time, and you’re gonna die,’ that didn’t really use to be true 20 years ago, unfortunately, those cliches have become true.”
In addition to New Life House, recovery centers nationwide are trying to raise awareness about the growing prevalence of fentanyl-laced weed.
“Authorities around the country are responding to opioid overdoses daily, and fentanyl is increasingly being found in counterfeit prescription opioid pills, meth, and cocaine. Now, that’s extended to marijuana,” The Recovery Village warns.
“Although marijuana is probably less likely to be intentionally laced with other psychoactive substances than many other illicit drugs, this situation does occur. It is more likely to occur in cases where individuals who are selling a drug illicitly are attempting to bulk up the product and get more profits or when very low-quality cannabis is laced with some other drug to enhance its psychoactive effects,” the American Addiction Centers states.
First Drug
Barker, who’s been in recovery for years and previously voted to legalize marijuana, believes Americans were lied to regarding marijuana.
“We were really lied to as a society,” Barker said. “And that’s why this stuff has just been pushed through time and time again, state by state by state, without resistance. And now we’re seeing that there’s just a lot of unintended consequences that nobody was aware of. Whether we were deliberately misinformed or whether we just didn’t have the data. But now that the data has come out, we’ve chosen not to act because there’s too much money behind [legalizing marijuana].”
Joints in the 1970s had 1–3 mg of THC—the psychoactive component in marijuana—and a near equal amount of CBD—which is touted for its potential in treating seizures. Most joints in Colorado today contain 18–25 mg THC, with much less CBD. (David McNew/Getty Images) Barker added, “Regardless of what the mainstream media will tell you, cannabis is a gateway drug. I have tremendous amounts of anecdotal evidence from being in this industry for a long time to support that. Talk to anyone with substance abuse issues and ask them what the first substance they used that kind of broke down the taboos and exposed them to that world, and 99.99 percent of them are going to say cannabis.”
For the 12-month period that ended in October 2022, the FDA reported more than 101,750 fatal overdoses in the United States, many due to illicit fentanyl.
The DEA didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ multiple requests for comment about the prevalence of fentanyl-laced marijuana.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 18:30 - China Bans Micron As Supplier Over 'Major National Security Risk'
China Bans Micron As Supplier Over ‘Major National Security Risk’
In retaliation over a sweeping US ban on selling advanced chip-making technology to China, Beijing is now banning major Chinese firms from doing business with Micron Technology, claiming that its products pose a ‘major national-security risk,’ the Wall Street Journal reports.
On Sunday, the Cyberspace Administration of China said that Micron failed a national security review, and that its products contain “significant security risks” that would affect national security. The agency has warned operators of key Chinese information infrastructure (telecom firms and state-owned banks in particular) against purchasing Micron products.
“We are evaluating the conclusion and assessing our next steps,” Micron told the Journal. “We look forward to continuing to engage in discussions with Chinese authorities.”
The Chinese ban came less than two months after Beijing announced an investigation on imports from Micron, the largest memory-chip maker in the U.S., in what seemed a political gesture aimed at hitting back at a sweeping ban Washington put in place late last year on selling advanced chip-making technology to China.
Chinese officials believe certain American companies lobbied the Biden administration to institute the ban. The Micron probe suggested Beijing zeroed in on Micron as a particular target. It also comes as China has broadly ratcheted up pressure on foreign businesses in a bid to fortify its economy from foreign influence. -WSJ
According to Lester Ross, a Beijing-based lawyer at WilmerHale which advises US companies doing business in China, the impact could be broader than initially thought.
“Other domestic customers may also consider this to be a political signal to stop buying, and even replace, their products,” he said.
The action against Micron follows Beijing’s condemnation of a recent statement issued by President Joe Biden and the leaders of six other countries which have pledged to take action against the transfer of sensitive technology to China, and to protect nations from what they’ve characterized as Chinese intimidation tactics.
China, meanwhile, called the Group of Seven as fostering “Western rules” that lack international credibility.
According to anonymous Chinese officials, Beijing is pondering whether to send Commerce Minister Wang Wentao to Washington DC to meet with his US counterpart, instead of sending him to Detroit for a meeting of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation trade ministers.
“Such a bilateral meeting must be conducted on the basis of mutual respect,” said one of the officials.
On Sunday, Biden told reporters after the G-7 meeting that the US wants to open more lines of communication with China. “Then this silly balloon that was carrying two freight cars worth of spy equipment was flying over the United States and it got shot down and everything changed in terms of talking to one another,” he said. “I think you’re going to see that begin to thaw very shortly.”
China has been looking for ways to retaliate against intensified U.S. sanctions against Chinese companies. It has held back its required green light for mergers that involve American companies such as Intel as the U.S.-China technology war intensifies.
But Chinese officials have also been wary of punching too hard as to further limit Chinese companies’ access to advanced Western technology.
Micron represents an easy target for Beijing because Chinese companies can easily switch out its products for those made by competitors such as Samsung and SK Hynix, according to analysts and Western business executives who have consulted with Chinese authorities. -WSJ
Approximately 10% of Micron revenue comes from China, according to Gavekal Dragonomics.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 18:00 - The End Game For The Debt Ceiling
The End Game For The Debt Ceiling
By Howard Wang of Convoy Investments
The US debt ceiling crisis
Currently there is considerable political tension and bickering surrounding the US debt ceiling, resembling the dinner table dynamics of a financially troubled and debt laden family. Over the past few years, I have frequently discussed the escalating US sovereign debt level due to its growing significance in shaping politics, economics, and markets. Struggles like the ongoing debt ceiling issue are likely to become a regular part of our society.
In this letter, I provide context regarding the current debt ceiling impasse, which I believe will have limited short-term impact. More importantly, I delve into the long-term outlook on US debt, discuss some potential solutions to address this issue, and examine the implications for markets and the economy.
Near-term impact of the debt ceiling
While the current round of debt ceiling talks make for good political theatrics, it is unlikely to have substantial practical ramifications on the economy. In the short term, the market anticipates that the US government will likely resolve this crisis. Market indicators suggest a low 1% per year probability of default on US debt over the next five years, slightly higher than during the 2011 and 2013 debt ceiling crises
Markets expect the debt ceiling to be raised without significant practical consequences. The impasse has had minimal impact on US borrowing costs, which have continued to slowly trend down since the end of last year in line with inflation.
Additionally, the US stock market maintains its upward trajectory in 2023.
The relatively benign outlook is likely due to fact that the underlying economics of the US budget were greatly improved by the pandemic, which allowed the US to secure low financing rates while printing money to generate inflation, and boost GDP growth and federal tax income. However, as indicated by the following chart, this positive trajectory is rapidly deteriorating due to rising interest rates, a return to more normal levels of inflation, and a slowing economy.
This pattern is also evident when considering the total debt level as a percentage of GDP. After the initial spike caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the ratio steadily declined but is now on the rise once again.
I largely agree with market sentiment that the current debt ceiling does not pose a significant immediate threat. However, I believe we are approaching a critical juncture where mounting debt levels, increasing financing costs, a slowing economy, and an expanding government footprint could compound and create an exponential problem.
What is the end game of continuously increasing the debt ceiling?
As the US has the ability to print its own money, the debt ceiling can be repeatedly raised for the time being. One key metric for assessing the sustainability is the cost of servicing debt as a percentage of the US federal government’s income (taxes). This is analogous to examining the monthly payments compared to income when determining whether one can afford a house. Let’s consider the rough math:
The current debt stands at approximately 125% of GDP. At the current 4% treasury rate, debt servicing costs would amount to 5% of GDP per year once the 4% cost extends to all maturities, which will take some time.
The federal government collects 15-20% of GDP as tax revenue, a consistent figure since World War II.
This means that 25-33% of federal income would go toward debt servicing, which is high but still manageable. For instance, at the personal level, the recommended threshold for housing mortgage payment is typically 30% of income.
Presently, this ratio is actually a bit lower, at around 20% of federal income. Much of the existing debt carries lower interest rates locked in from the last few decades. However, this ratio will rise rapidly as we retire older, cheaper debt and replace it with more expensive new debt. The following chart illustrates the portion of federal income allocated to debt servicing. We are already experiencing the rapid upward swing.
This ratio would deteriorate further if total debt levels increase or if market financing costs rise. For example, at 200% of GDP and a 4% financing cost, interest payments would consume nearly half of federal income. Alternatively, if interest rates were to suddenly rise faster than our GDP growth rate, the total cost of rolling and raising new debt would increase. Either scenario could initiate a downward spiral toward a debt crisis, where the federal government needs to do substantial borrowing to service existing debt, all the while facing higher cost of financing due to the deteriorating balance sheet.
So, how significant is the debt problem we must address? The current debt ceiling stands at $31.4 trillion. According to projections from the US Congress, we will need to issue an additional $130 trillion over the next 30 years, projected to reach around 200% of GDP.
Issuing and managing $130 trillion in debt will pose the most substantial financial challenge for the next generation of Americans. Debt levels have now reached a point where they significantly impact politics, the economy, and financial markets. Gone are the days when Congress, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve could operate relatively independently. We are already witnessing conflicts in managing objectives such as inflation, financial stability, recession, and the debt ceiling. These conflicts will only worsen. For instance, I believe the Federal Reserve will gradually shift its focus from managing inflation to assisting the Treasury department in managing national debt, albeit discreetly.
Debt has become pervasive, affecting nearly every aspect of our economy and government. The following chart provides a rough illustration of the interconnectedness that previously existed as more independent components.
So how do we deal with the debt?
The following are some of the levers that will determine whether we handle the debt issue in a healthy manner
or allow it to spiral out of control. With the exception of the last lever, all the proposed solutions have painful
side effects1) Maintain higher inflation than interest rates
This approach would increase GDP income faster than interest rate costs, boosting income relative to debt. For example, post-Covid inflation has greatly benefited the US government’s budget as prices and income grew far faster than the cost of debt.
However, higher inflation often comes with higher borrowing costs and other economic challenges, as we have recently experienced. Therefore, we cannot rely solely on inflating away the debt. Instead, I expect the Federal Reserve to maintain steady moderate inflation slightly higher than their 2% target, likely around that of 10-year treasury rates (around 3-4%).
2) Decrease the value of the dollar
Lowering the value of the dollar is similar to generating domestic inflation in foreign exchange terms. This approach would enhance US competitiveness, reduce trade deficits, and increase GDP. Following a significant surge during Covid, the dollar has begun to depreciate, and I anticipate that the Federal Reserve will encourage a gradual decline in its value.
On the flip side, it is crucial to manage the dollar carefully since its stability has played a significant role in its status as the reserve currency, affording numerous benefits to the US. Additionally, as the dollar weakens, the US will experience imported inflation, which will gradually erode the average American’s standard of living. This cure will not come without painful side effects.
3) Use quantitative easing to keep borrowing costs artificially low
This has the obvious benefit of allowing the US to manage its own borrowing costs and to lock in longer term debt when long rates are appropriately low. Simultaneously, lower interest rates encourage shor-tterm growth, further boosting federal income. This strategy worked exceedingly well in the 2010s.
This strategy enables the US to manage its borrowing costs and secure long-term debt when long-term rates are suitably low. Simultaneously, lower interest rates stimulated short-term growth, further increasing federal income. This approach proved highly effective during the 2010s. However, it is worth noting that since the US government would essentially be purchasing its own bonds, there are limitations to this strategy. After all, the Federal Reserve cannot own the entire market. Since Covid, the Federal Reserve has held approximately 30% of all US debt.
I suspect this figure could be increased if necessary. Nevertheless, this strategy must be employed strategically as there are limitations. Carefully managing the financing costs is crucial because of its significant impact on the future of our federal balance sheet. A mere 1% change in financing rates can drastically alter the trajectory of our budget, as shown below in the projections from the congressional budget office.
4) Increase taxes
Raising taxes on a given size of GDP would augment federal tax income. Historically, the US government has collected roughly 15-20% of GDP as tax revenue since World War II.
Increasing taxes will create economic pain and face much political resistance, but may become necessary if the debt situation becomes dire enough. So we should anticipate potential increases in income taxes, wealth taxes, estate taxes, property taxes, and tariffs.
5) Reduce government spending
Reducing government spending is challenging since, aside from spikes and drops during wartime and times like the Covid pandemic, the size of our government has consistently expanded. As our country ages and programs like Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid become more expensive, we can expect government spending to continue growing.
Implementing any cuts will be painful and face considerable political resistance. However, we may find ourselves with no choice but to tighten our belts, so we should prepare for potential reductions in discretionary spending in the future, along with associated economic pains.
6) Related to above, semi-defaults on certain obligations like social security
I anticipate that we may witness soft defaults on mandatory spending, such as scaling back on Social Security. For instance, the Social Security Trust Fund is projected to deplete within the next ten years due to deficits.
Consequently, the program is anticipated to accumulate massive annual deficits, reaching up to $9 trillion per year by 2090, exacerbating the existing US debt issues.
It is highly likely that the next generation of US retirees will not receive the Social Security benefits promised to them.
7) Increase real GDP
This is by far the most desirable solution, as it entails no downsides. It is also how the US managed to overcome its World War II debts. The success of this approach largely hinges on the US’s ability to maintain leadership in cutting-edge fields like AI. The provided chart showcases the long-term evolution of the US stock market as a proxy to the US economy. US stock market capitalization as % of the world experienced continuous growth from 1900 to 1970 as the US emerged as the world superpower after the two World Wars. Subsequently, the rest of the world rebuilt and advanced, with countries like Japan rising to prominence and taking away global share. Since 1990, the US has once again regained global market share, largely on the back of technological advancements.
I remain optimistic about the future of the US economy, primarily due to the massive leverage potential in technology, which tends to be a winner-takes-all industry. The head start and ecosystem that the US has cultivated in fields like AI provide our greatest hope for addressing our government’s precarious finances.
I believe that US debt will pose a significant problem requiring a combination of all seven levers to resolve. The more we can rely on the last lever of real economic growth, the less painful the process will be. I believe the US will grapple with substantial debt issues while simultaneously serving as a beacon of global growth and innovation.
From an investment standpoint, I expect high volatility, characterized by both extreme highs and lows. Diversification of currencies and assets will be crucial, especially as central banks are forced to become more prominent players in the market, resulting in more black swan events. However, I believe maintaining exposure to US equities, particularly in technology sectors at reasonable valuations, will be key to long-term success.
Because of my expectation of higher-than-anticipated inflation, I think it is important to hedge against inflation directly through commodities, TIPS (Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities), and a small allocation to gold or cryptocurrencies if you believe in the long-term potential of that asset class. Specifically, switching to TIPS early on is recommended due to its relatively small market size compared to nominal bonds, which I hold a bearish view on in the long term. I believe gone are the days of the traditional 60/40 stock/bond portfolio. You’ll like need a 60/40 portfolio of stocks and inflation hedge assets.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 17:30 - Irony? Guess Which Nation Produces The World's Most Honey
Irony? Guess Which Nation Produces The World’s Most Honey
China is not only the country in the world producing the most honey, but it also leads in revenue per capita generated with one of nature’s oldest and most widely used sweeteners.
As Statista’s Florain Zandt reports, according to calculations based on Statista Market Insights and World Bank population data, China’s honey industry made $17 per inhabitant of the country in 2021. Two of the other spots in the top 8 are claimed by Asian countries as well.
You will find more infographics at Statista
As Statista’s chart shows, Indonesia and Vietnam come in sixth and seventh with a per-capita revenue of $6.5 and $6.0, respectively. This reflects the importance of Asian markets for global honey production. In 2021, almost half of the world’s honey came out of countries from this geographic region. Other important honey markets include Canada, North Macedonia and Switzerland.
Honey from Asia, especially China, has been the subject of intense scrutiny by market watchdogs in recent years. India, a country traditionally opposed to many of China’s endeavors in politics and business, is increasingly focused on uncovering the amount of honey exported from the People’s Republic allegedly cut with cheaper and lower-quality syrup.
Looking at the total market value of sweeteners worldwide, honey had a share of 28 percent of the total global revenue of $145 billion.
While artificial sweeteners like saccharin or stevia contributed $21.7 billion, sugar was responsible for $82.3 billion.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 17:00 - Bill Gates 'Blackmailed' By Jeffrey Epstein Over Affair With Russian Bridge Player
Bill Gates ‘Blackmailed’ By Jeffrey Epstein Over Affair With Russian Bridge Player
Remember when Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said he ‘only had dinner’ with Jeffrey Epstein?
FLASHBACK: Bill Gates is asked if his ex-wife Melinda was warning him about Jeffrey Epstein sexually compromising him:
Bill responded “No — I had dinner with him, and that’s all.” pic.twitter.com/xaVincPcAA
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Turns out (ok, we’ve known for a while) that’s a total lie – as the two also had a Russian bridge player in common, Mila Antonova.
Mila Antonova, screenshot (YouTube) According to the Wall Street Journal, Gates met Antonova in 2010 at a bridge competition, leading to an affair. Three years later, after Gates associate Boris Nikolic referred her to Jeffrey Epstein to help raise $500K for an online bridge business which failed to pan out, Epstein paid for her to attend coding classes.
In 2014, Antonova “stayed briefly at an apartment in New York City provided by Epstein” but claims not to have met with the guy who paid for her education.
Then in 2017, the pedophile financier allegedly blackmailed Gates over the affair – demanding in an email that the Microsoft co-founder to reimburse him for Antonova’s education. Given the de minimis amount involved for both men, Gates interpreted this 2017 email as threat to expose his 2010 affair.
So, poor boner-killer Bill was actually an Epstein victim all along, you see, and everyone interviewed for the report says they knew nothing about Epstein’s pedophile sex-trafficking operation and was ‘disgusted with what he did,’ etc.
Jes Staley, Lawrence Summers, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Gates, Boris Nikolic But in March of 2013, long before the two had thrown out their BFF bracelets, they were hanging out at the house of Thorbjørn Jagland, then chair of the Nobel Peace Prize committee where the pair allegedly discussed ” the security situation in Afghanistan as part of Mr. Gates’ work on polio eradication,” according to a spokeswoman for the billionaire. We’re sure.
While he was working on the charitable fund, Epstein met in 2013 with Gates and Norwegian officials who were visitors to Epstein’s townhouse. Epstein told one former Gates Foundation employee that he knew the Norwegians, and could help Gates win a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to eradicate polio.
Here’s what else is contained in the report (some known, some unknown).
- “Starting in 2011, Gates had more than a half dozen meetings scheduled with Epstein, including dinners at Epstein’s New York townhouse, documents show. “
- Gates flew on Epstein’s ‘lolita express’ plane from New Jersey to Florida in March, 2013. “That same month the two men met in France with an official on the Nobel Peace Prize committee.” (that official being its chair, Thorbjørn Jagland)
While he was working on the charitable fund, Epstein met in 2013 with Gates and Norwegian officials who were visitors to Epstein’s townhouse. Epstein told one former Gates Foundation employee that he knew the Norwegians, and could help Gates win a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to eradicate polio.
- In 2012, Epstein pitched Gates on a failed investment in a multibillion-dollar, JPMorgan-run charitable fund with a minimum contribution of $100 million.
The deal went sideways. In messages to Jes Staley and Mary Erdoes, Epstein essentially coached the JPMorgan execs on how to pitch the fund to Gates’ team.
“In essence this [fund] will allow Bill to have access to higher quality people , investment , allocation , governance without upsetting either his marriage or the sensitvites of the current foundation employees,” Epstein wrote on Aug. 16, 2011.
The next day, Epstein wrote: “Bill is terribly frustrated. He woud! like to boost some of the things that are working without taking away from thoses that are not.”
Six weeks later on Oct. 2, Epstein sent another email to Staley and Erdoes criticizing a JPMorgan presentation. “the presentation , is not tailored to bill.. He is the only person , the only one, that counts.”
The charitable fund never got off the ground. “The firm didn’t need him as a client,” a JPMorgan spokesman said of Epstein. “The firm didn’t need him for introductions. Knowing what we know today, we wish we had never done business with him.” A spokesman for the bank said Erdoes declined to comment. A lawyer for Staley, who is no longer at JPMorgan, didn’t respond to a request for comment. Staley has previously said he regrets his friendship with Epstein. -WSJ
But – given that this deal fell through in 2012 or so, and the two were hobnobbing at the Nobel Peace Price Committee Chairman’s house in 2013, it’s obvious that the two mended fences and moved on.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 16:00 - FDA Advisers Back Maternal RSV Vaccine As Pfizer Says Safety Concerns Can Be Studied Post-Approval
FDA Advisers Back Maternal RSV Vaccine As Pfizer Says Safety Concerns Can Be Studied Post-Approval
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) voiced support on May 18 for Pfizer’s maternal RSV vaccine even after several expressed concerns over premature births.
A person walks past a Pfizer logo in the Manhattan borough of New York on April 1, 2021. (Carlo Allegri/Reuters) Outside experts on the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee unanimously said data from two trials run by Pfizer were sufficient to support the vaccine being effective at preventing RSV disease in infants. They also voted 10–4 in the affirmative when asked if the data from the trials were sufficient to demonstrate the safety of the vaccine.
The votes set up FDA clearance for what would be the first maternal vaccine for the respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV.
Pfizer’s vaccine, a recombinant protein subunit shot, targets the RSV A and RSV B subgroups in a 120 microgram dose that would be given to pregnant women in the second or third trimester. The goal would be to relay antibodies against RSV to fetuses, conferring protection that is supposed to last through the first year of life.
The vaccine was 81.8 percent efficacious through 90 days after birth against severe lower respiratory tract illness due to RSV. The efficacy dropped to 69.4 percent after another 90 days.
For any RSV-positive medically attended lower respiratory tract illness, the vaccine started at 57.1 percent efficacy and dropped to 51.3 percent over the same timeframe, according to data from a phase 3 trial that included about 3,500 vaccinated pregnant women.
The efficacy for medically attended lower respiratory tract illness from any cause was just 2.5 percent at 180 days and 5.1 percent at 360 days.
FDA staffers said in a briefing document that the trial showed “successful vaccine efficacy,” and the advisers seconded that view with their unanimous vote.
But multiple experts expressed concerns about the risk of the vaccine causing premature births, a risk found in a similar product made by GlaxoSmithKline that prompted the company to halt testing in 2022.
In Pfizer’s trial, there were more premature deliveries in the vaccinated arm than the placebo arm—5.7 percent in the former versus 4.7 percent in the latter.
“That is hanging over this program,” Dr. Paul Offit, one of the FDA’s advisers, said during Thursday’s meeting.
The FDA declined to comment on the issue during the meeting, though staffers wrote in a brief that there was “potential uncertainty” regarding premature births.
Pfizer executives said Pfizer’s vaccine has important differences from the GlaxoSmithKline one, including the way they’re stabilized. They also acknowledged that there was “an overall significant difference in preterm births” between the arms but said the difference was not statistically significant and was driven primarily by data from sites in South Africa.
“I think we need to place all of this in context. As you’ve already heard, the overall results show no statistically significant difference. The results are driven by the upper- and middle-income countries with the high-income countries not showing this difference,” Dr. William Gruber, Pfizer’s senior vice president for vaccine clinical research and panelists, told panelists. “And as you’ve heard from us, as well as the FDA, there’s the real opportunity, then, to look at this during the period of pharmacovigilance, when we have larger numbers of women being vaccinated, to determine whether or not there is, in fact, any sort of a signal.”
“But the evidence to this point provides no real support when we take the totality of it based on the Pfizer vaccine for an increased risk of prematurity, and we can investigate that, again, post-approval,” he added later.
The quote drew criticism from Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), a doctor who criticized a similar comment made about Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
“Most drugs carry side effects. When considering maternal vaccinations, significant complications such as severe premature births or even pre-term and neonatal deaths may be present. The notion of vaccinating populations to determine whether or not there will be any side effects leads to a mistrust in the FDA, public health, and the medical community,” Murphy told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.
Dr. Iona Munjal, a Pfizer senior director for vaccines, noted during the meeting that there were more deaths in the placebo group. “When you look at poor outcomes like death or poor neonatal outcomes in our study, we don’t see those poor outcomes,” she said. “And this is probably due to the fact that most of the infants are born very near term and not proximally related to the vaccine.”
A colorized scanning electron micrograph shows human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) virions shedding from human lung epithelial cells. (NIAID via The Epoch Times) RSV
RSV peaks in the United States during the winter, with very low levels during the summer and fall. It primarily affects children under the age of 1, though it also impacts older children. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates 100 to 300 children die each year from RSV, though a death certificate review for the 12 years ending in 2016 identified just 478 in that population, including 315 younger than age 1.
Approximately 68 percent of infants are infected before they turn 1, panel members heard, and U.S. officials say the vaccine would help curb a major reason for hospitalization.
The vaccine and others like it are “designed to overcome the shortcomings of previous efforts … [and] represent structural immunology and molecular engineering over empiric vaccinology against a respiratory virus that exacts its heaviest disease burden in the youngest and older adults,” Dr. David Kaslow, the director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, told the panel.
The Pfizer vaccine efficacy for hospitalizations due to RSV was 67.7 percent at 90 days but dropped to just 33.3 percent at 360 days, according to the trial data.
Only one RSV vaccine is currently available in the United States. It is only for adults aged 60 and older.
Votes
Many panelists said they were convinced by the high efficacy data, despite concerns about the premature births.
“If the vaccine actually lives up to the data that we’ve seen today, I can guarantee that many infants and their parents will breathe easier in the coming years,” Dr. Jay Portnoy, one of the members, said.
Some said there’s a need for a vaccine.
“If there’s anything real there, we want to make sure we are aware of this. But this really does address a real, real strong need; there isn’t another option here for prevention,” Adam Berger, one of the panelists, said. “And it really could save a lot of lives. So I do think a lot of this is going to lie on the postmarketing requirements.”
The FDA lists required studies for drug and vaccine manufacturers to carry out in letters of authorization and approval.
Others echoed Pfizer in asserting that observational data, or looking at outcomes in women who receive the vaccine after it is cleared, would clear up whether premature birth is a side effect.
“Observational studies, as we go forward will fairly quickly give us an answer. If there is a problem there,” Dr. Arnold Monto, another member, said. “We learned how to bite the bullet and get things out during the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine approvals.”
Dr. Henry Bernstein, another member, said he had reservations due to not wanting another situation like the quick removal of a rotavirus vaccine following a spike in cases of intussusception, a life-threatening condition. Intussusception following vaccination “was not statistically significant until it was more widely used,” he said.
While all members said the efficacy data support licensure, Offit, Bernstein, Holly Janes, and Dr. Hana El Sahly said the safety data were not sufficient.
“If you’re in any sense risking premature births with this vaccine, I think there’ll be a big price to pay. And so I just don’t feel we have enough data to be reassuring,” Offit said.
“There was too much uncertainty,” Janes added. “And I’m uncomfortable with the notion of kicking the can down the road … toward post-marketing surveillance studies. I think it’s a bit different to rely on surveillance studies to sort of confirm what appears to be a safe product whereas here, I think the signals are such that the post-marketing surveillance data would be asked to refute what is sort of a potential hypothesis here, and I think that’s a higher bar.”
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 15:30 - Biden Taunts Russia At G7 When Asked About "Colossal Risk" Of Escalation
Biden Taunts Russia At G7 When Asked About “Colossal Risk” Of Escalation
President Joe Biden taunted Russia while speaking with reporters Sunday at the G-7 summit in Japan. The big decision which has been a main talking point at the meeting was the White House telling European allies that the US will allow them to export F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine if they desire.
This has led to questions over whether this escalation in policy could bring NATO and Russia into direct clash. Here’s how a particular exchange went as the G7 wrapped up:
Journalist asks Biden about Russia saying that giving Ukraine F-16s is a “colossal risk” .
Biden: It is, FOR THEM.
U.S. President Biden while at the G7 Summit in Hiroshima, Japan was asked what his Response was to Russia who stated yesterday if F-16 Multirole Fighter Aircraft are provided to Ukraine it will be a “Colossal Risk to the West” with Biden stating, “It is for them”. pic.twitter.com/sKjJnN2d9g
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky also presented a stance of ‘toughness’ and optimism concerning the war. In a speech marking the end of the G-7 he urged the Western allies to ensure that Russia is the “last aggressor”.
He called Ukraine’s own 10-point peace plan the world’s “salvation from war,” and emphasized that “We will paralyze other potential aggressors.”
“When everyone who wants war sees how determined the world is when it wants peace, there will be no point to start a war,” he said.
His words came on the heels of Biden unveiling another $375million military aid package featuring more ammo, vehicles, and weapons. But news of the fall of Bakhmut clearly put a damper on the G7 proceedings for those officials gathered in Hiroshima. Zelensky appeared to offer some degree of confirmation that Ukraine no longer holds the city, following the Saturday announcement from Wagner:
The reports that Zelensky supposedly confirmed loss of Bakhmut city are from what I can tell inaccurate. Here he clearly says “I think no” in answer to “the Russians say they’ve taken Bakhmut” before saying that the city is no longer, only in hearts. pic.twitter.com/ThBcDL1oNo
— Oliver Carroll (@olliecarroll) May 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
As for Biden, he attempted to present the loss of Bakhmut as in the end more devastating for the Russian side, claiming that it suffered a huge number of casualties:
“There is a discussion about Bakhmut – whether or not it’s been lost or whatever,” he said.
“Well, the truth of the matter is the Russians have suffered over 100,000 casualties in Bakhmut. That’s hard to make up. So whether or not there are troops in Bakhmut occupying, there are not many buildings left standing in Bakhmut. It’s a pretty devastated city. But they have been able to move in a direction that they’ve been able to lock down an awful lot of the Russian forces, including the Wagner Group.”
Biden made this statement in the context of the upcoming counter-offensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the possible transfer of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine. According to the U.S. president, F-16s “would not have helped (the Ukrainian army in Bakhmut).”
It’s unclear where the US president got these numbers, but they have been echoed before by some Pentagon and intelligence officials. It seems Washington’s new narrative will be to consider Bakhmut only an extremely costly Pyrrhic victory for the Russian side.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 15:00 - This Year's Emmy For Outstanding Reality Series Goes to…
This Year’s Emmy For Outstanding Reality Series Goes to…
By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities
This Year’s Emmy for Outstanding Reality Series Goes to…
The Debt Ceiling.
Voters were just amazed at how much was made from such a flimsy topic. Others commented that the debt ceiling had become tired, worn, and too predictable, but this year’s cast of characters brought out some new energy. While highly unusual to be given an award for a series that hasn’t been finished, it just stood out as being deserving of the recognition. Critics claimed that it was manufactured, unbelievable, and with one-dimensional characters constrained by an unbelievable script, but the audience is always right!
How can this move markets when 95% of people believe that a default cannot happen? Even those who think that it could happen don’t believe that it is likely. Yet, markets moved on a series of headlines, including the ever popular “the meeting ended abruptly in disagreement” followed by “they are heading back to the table”.
Who out there wasn’t gripped by the tale? The “behind the scenes” end of season reveal should be exciting. Just imagine senior political officials huddled in an office, apparently discussing the fate of the nation’s debt, but in reality are all logged into their trading accounts to make sure that they buy or sell ahead of the news. Ok, I’m sure that the last part didn’t happen, but it is kind of funny (in a sad way) to think about, as insider trading isn’t prohibited in any way on the hill and the headlines, especially late in the week, seemed to be perfect for triggering buy programs and later a sell program or two.
In any case, the debt ceiling continues to take up a lot of focus for markets. Probably far too much focus as default seems unlikely, and despite the “world is ending” arguments, I don’t see a default (that is cured within a few days or a week) as being devastating. Longer-term maybe, but I’d likely buy any “default dip”.
In the meantime, the S&P (up 1.7%) and Nasdaq (up 3.0%) posted strong weeks even as rates rose rather significantly. I didn’t believe that we would see much of a “debt ceiling resolved” bounce since I don’t think that many have been shorting against the debt ceiling specifically.
Next Week
Last week, Academy was a lead manager on Bank of NY’s 3NC2 bonds. Always exciting for Academy when we get selected for such a senior role. I spent much of the week away from the screens, as we travelled from Peoria to Kiawah and then on to DC and Virginia. I got to spend time with several of our generals and admirals and look forward to doing a more geopolitical slanted macro piece early next week. China was front and center, as was the dollar, but more on that on Tuesday.
On Tuesday we get NVDA earnings. The stock is up over 110% year-to-date and is a focal point for the AI theme. When looking at markets for the past month (S&P up 1.4% and Nasdaq up 4.9%), I’m pretty sure that if you pull the “AI themed stocks” out of the S&P 500 it would have been negative.
AI is the growth story and undoubtedly is changing the world. Everyone is examining AI and thinking about not just how to use it, but how to keep their jobs relevant in an AI driven world. I’m fully on board with that, but have valuations gotten ahead of themselves? Is AI really big enough (and soon enough) to prop up the entire market? However, I can see the rationale and could be convinced that there is a lot more to come. On the other hand, I’m old enough to remember the “metaverse” (and that rally) and a time when companies that were changing their names to include “blockchain” saw significant pops. Everything about the AI story seems much bigger than either of those examples, but the market seems to have a habit of getting ahead of itself. In a market where there has been so little to like (I keep seeing stats complaining about the lack of breadth), it is easy to gravitate to the one story that has legs. The NVDA earnings (and call) could be the biggest market driver of any release this earnings season, which is an accomplishment in its own right!
In between flights, checking in and out of hotel rooms, discussing geopolitics, digesting debt ceiling headlines, and getting smarter about the AI revolution, I did think a bit about the economy. We saw some “mixed” data last week, but nothing that changes my view that the best is behind us. Rather than haphazardly pulling together some charts, I will go back to an old favorite – the Citi Economic Surprise Index.
A few weeks ago we postulated that we would see a downturn in the “surprise” index. The “surprise” index is interesting because it is “relative”. Just because it is declining doesn’t mean that the data is bad. It could just be that expectations got so strong that even “good” data created a negative surprise. This time around, the data has gotten weaker, since I’m finding very few positive economists (which, as a contrarian, scares me as I’m definitely part of the consensus).
As the data deteriorates, forecasts will be lowered. I do think that once we make it through the debt ceiling (which really seems like just a bad idea for a reality TV series) and the AI earnings, we will see some economic bears get some airtime. As data disappoints, those that were looking for a downturn in the data (and expecting a recession) will get some more attention, which should act as a headwind for risk.
By the middle of next week, we will be back to focusing on the economy and what that means for markets (and that won’t be supportive).
In the meantime, I just want to thank all of Academy’s customers, not just for the business and opportunities that you provide us with, but for all of the discussions and information sharing which makes us smarter and better able to serve you!
Thanks again! And if I sound too harsh on DC and the time spent on the debt ceiling, I actually toned down my comments and I am pretty sure that my editors will do the same!
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/21/2023 – 14:30
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
