Today’s News 24th December 2021

• The Inevitability Of Kamala Harris
  The Inevitability Of Kamala Harris

  Authored by Luke Thompson via SpectatorWorld.com,

  I come neither to bury Kamala nor to praise her…

  

  Commentary on her vice presidency is polarized. Harris’s well-known praise chorus is completely deranged. True, she is the first woman to become vice president, and only the second “person of color,” to use a term in vogue. These are historic achievements to those who understand history through the thick lens of demographic taxonomy.

  True, also, Harris has over the last year shown a near-total lack of the political skill generally needed to make a serious run at the presidency. She has been given large projects and failed to advance the administration’s goals. She has not improved as a speaker and comes across as indifferent, haughty and detached. Her approval ratings lag even those of her feckless boss. Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg — mediocrity made flesh — labors to supplant her as heir apparent with surprising brazenness.

  Nonetheless, just as Harris’s chromosomes and skin color will not win her the White House, nor will her weaknesses as a candidate doom her to the political sideline should Joe Biden forego a 2024 reelection run. Kamala Harris remains the person most likely to win her party’s nomination in a post-Biden world, for reasons not reducible to the familiarity that comes from four years in the vice presidency.

  The White House, it would seem, has realized this. The last week has seen a well-executed rollout of Kamala puff pieces, launched on Monday with dueling profiles — one schmaltz and one serious — in the San Francisco Chronicle and Los Angeles Times. These were followed by a CBS News piece lavishing her with praise for her heretofore unknown role in getting the bipartisan infrastructure bill across the finish line.

  As I wrote at The Spectator in July 2020, picking Harris to be VP showed concerns with the “here and now” of winning the presidential campaign rather than the governing that came later. A year into his presidency, Biden appears to be waking up to the difficult reality that pick created. Harris comes from the Democratic heartland, can tie together, however loosely, the major voting blocs of her party, enjoys an institutional position that gives her structural advantages over her prospective rivals, and will thus almost certainly be Biden’s successor should he exit, mumbling, stage left in 2024.

  There has never been a state with the influence over a single party that California exerts over the Democrats today. Nearly one in eight Americans resides in the Golden State, which went to both Clinton and Biden nearly two-to-one. Culturally, California calls the tune for affluent white liberals and progressives. Materially, its major industries — entertainment, tech, finance, public sector unions and renewable energy — fund and backstop Democratic campaigns. Only mid-century New York compares, but whereas the Empire State exercised outsized influence in both parties because it would swing between them, California is a Republican afterthought even though the GOP House leader hails from Bakersfield.

  So long as she controls California, Harris can make life very difficult for any prospective challengers seeking volunteers, operatives and dollars. If, as seems likely, Democrats demote the Iowa caucuses and give Nevada the first presidential nominating contest, having a political infrastructure in neighboring California will only become more, not less, valuable.

  The Democratic bench, already so desperately thin that Mayor Milquetoast is viewed as a plausible standard-bearer, looks even thinner when one turns southward. To put the matter bluntly, even if they do not love her, who could win Southern black voters away from Kamala Harris in a Democratic primary? Warren? No. Klobuchar? C’mon. Buttigieg? No way. Mitch Landrieu will enjoy fawning Morning Joe coverage, but it will make no difference to the eventual implausibility of his candidacy.

  Finally, Biden’s own political incentives help Harris. Even if Joe decides tomorrow to forego reelection, he’ll keep the decision a secret for as long as possible. Making himself a lame duck any earlier than necessary would bury his effectiveness in office. As a result, Biden will freeze the field by giving every indication of running for reelection even if he has no intention of following through on the threat. No other Democrat can ramp up a large political apparatus without appearing to be challenging Biden as the incumbent.

  Harris, by contrast, enjoys institutional benefits by virtue of her position. She can fly around the country, hold political rallies nominally for her own reelection as vice president, and keep close tabs on the Democratic Party apparatus. This advantage could only be checked by the active intervention of Biden himself or, failing that, from Barack Obama, who still enjoys godlike status among Democratic primary voters. Yet Obama has no reason to intervene against Harris, who has followed his model even as she lacks his rhetorical and political skills.

  And so, like it or not, Democrats ought to get used to the idea of nominating Kamala Harris if Biden doesn’t run. They’re unlikely to have much of a choice.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 00:20

• "A Woman Is A Woman, Man Is A Man": Putin Vows To Protect Russia From West's "Gender Obscurantism"
  “A Woman Is A Woman, Man Is A Man”: Putin Vows To Protect Russia From West’s “Gender Obscurantism”

  During his marathon annual year-end press conference Q&A, which this year lasted about four hours, Russian President Vladimir Putin once again vowed to defend Russian society against the intrusion of the corrupted values of the West, in particular blasting the “gender obscurantism” pushed by the United States and Europe.

  “I am a proponent of the traditional approach that a woman is a woman and a man is a man,” Putin laid out, which it goes without saying also reflects basic Biology 101 and humans’ self-understanding for thousands upon thousands of years. He continued in the remarks on gender: “A mother is a mother, a father is a father. And I hope that our society has the internal moral protection dictated by the traditional religious denominations of the Russian Federation.”

  

  Throughout the remarks he called it basic “common sense” – which strongly suggested that the opposite is currently the rule of the day in America and the West generally, where people fear being “canceled” in their jobs and during public discourse if they don’t confirm to concepts of ‘gender fluidity’ and Frankenstein reassignment surgeries, which is even increasingly being pushed on children. 

  Putin was responding to a question form a journalist over recent gender controversies in the West, and also the way it has impacted women’s sports.

  “And we learned to treat each other with respect. And what does it mean? That also means treating the foundations of our traditional spiritual culture with respect. All the peoples of the Russian Federation, I would like to stress, all of them have a certain internal moral protection against this obscurantism that you’ve just mentioned,” the Russian leader said.

  “If somebody thinks that a woman and a man are the same thing, they’re welcome to [their opinion], but a certain common sense should exist.”

  Holding up his country’s traditional values as the “antidote” to the “new ethics”, he also seemed to allude to the “spiritual values” of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has long been dominant in Russian society. 

  That’s when he likened the West’s attempts to push these things on Eastern Europe to a viral infection… “just like the coronavirus pandemic,” he said…

  “Just like with the coronavirus pandemic one can’t escape [non-traditional values coming from abroad]. We need to look for an antidote.”

  At his annual press conference, Vladimir Putin is asked about cancel culture and JK Rowling’s anti-trans opinions:

  Putin, thru translator: “If someone thinks that a man and a woman is the same thing, well let them think that. But there is common sense.” pic.twitter.com/YT4DB94XNr

  — The Recount (@therecount) December 23, 2021

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

  Referring indirectly to last summer’s Olympic Games in Tokyo which saw New Zealand transgender weightlifter Laurel Hubbard – who is a biological man – compete as a woman, Putin described situations where it’s now as simple as someone “declaring that he is a woman and starts competing in weightlifting”.

  “And it is necessary to fight this not with direct orders and shouts and accusations but with the support for our traditional values,” he asserted further. Additionally according to a description in TASS of his remarks, he “cited the example of an incident in the US when a criminal serving time for rape declared that he was female and after a transfer to a women’s prison committed the same crime in his cell.”

  The remarks also come at a time that multiple sports controversies have erupted in the US regarding trans competitors, particularly the ongoing saga of a University of Pennsylvania “male-to-female” swimmer who’s smashing all records…

  Swimming world magazine editor says trans swimmer has same advantage ‘doping’ provideshttps://t.co/H3zGVEj4zP

  — Fox News (@FoxNews) December 20, 2021

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

  In comments earlier this year Putin called imposing transgender teaching on children a “crime against humanity”…

  Every year during what the US has designated as “pride month” in June, American embassies around the world fly the rainbow flag in most embassies throughout the globe, including in Moscow and throughout Eastern Europe, where countries like Poland tend to be more conservative that Western Europe.

  Of course, there’s a notable exception: US embassies in conservative Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia and Iraq did not fly the rainbow flag this year. The Saudis, it should be remembered, is America’s closest Arab ally and partner. 

  USA embassy in Moscow puts up a pride flag. Did the state department do this in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or any other countries where being gay is a literal death sentence? https://t.co/VhK2fjP8ud

  — Chris Tomlinson (@TomlinsonCJ) June 30, 2020

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

  As Putin’s comments suggested, the whole trans and LGBTQ++ movement seems to be bound up with US foreign policy abroad. In prior months, Kremlin officials have accused US-based NGOs of intentionally trying to influence Russian society with these “new ethics” – resulting in a crackdown on the degree which they can freely operate. This as Russia has laws on the books that make it illegal to propagandize children on these issues outside of parental consent. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:55

• How To Create A Health Care Crisis
  How To Create A Health Care Crisis

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  At the CVS down the street, the lines are very long to buy home Covid testing kits, $24 a pop, limit four per customer. Everyone seemed to be buying four. Employees cannot restock fast enough. 

  We can speculate why. Are businesses demanding negative tests from the unvaccinated? Is Omicron sweeping the country and people need to confirm? Do we have another round of disease panic happening? It’s most likely that everyone in line has a different answer. My intuition, for what it is worth: this virus is everywhere. Lots of people are sick. 

  Do you have some sense that we’ve been in this place before? Another variant, another round of panics, more restrictions, models forecasting mass deaths, experts weighing in on all the things you must do, masks masks masks, exhortations from discredited experts demanding that you do things again even though they didn’t work the last time. 

  

  This is just a remarkable scene. Nearly two years after locking down to crush the virus, to stop the spread, this is where we are. It should be more than obvious that the mitigation measures did not achieve the goal and caused enormous damage. 

  The ghoul this time is: Omicron. Only one death in the US has been attributed to it. Cases of course are through the roof. It could get worse in terms of severity. At the same time, there is a well-established and once-understood tradeoff within this family of viruses between their transmissibility and their severity. More “cases” – meaning infections in this context – tends toward fewer deaths.

  South African health officials have clearly said that so far it is not resulting in severe outcomes. It killed no one in the country in which it was discovered. Still, the weary world seems always ready for another round of panic. Nothing has ever really made sense, but now the complete senselessness is on hyper-drive. 

  Universities all over the Northeast have closed and gone back to Zoom for final exams. New York events are being cancelled. Israel is blocking its citizens from travelling to some 10 countries, one of which is the US. Lockdowns are being imposed all over Europe along with ever more vicious enforcements of masks and vaccine passports. 

  Vaccine mandates and passports are spreading from city to city. And this is with a vaccine that has been widely adopted and accepted in all the countries now locking down. 

  Health authorities in Rhode Island, Maine, and many other states, are warning of impending disaster with overwhelmed hospitals and other facilities. This is because vast numbers have quit their jobs. Oh, but we are told, this has nothing to do with the vaccine requirement. No no. It’s because they found better job opportunities elsewhere. 

  Think about this. The staff and nurses 18 months ago were working like crazy and treated like heroes for exposing themselves to the virus. They were the fodder. They took a huge risk. They obtained natural immunity. These people should have been hired and given raises. But the CDC and NIH don’t like to breathe a word about natural immunity. Instead hospital management, pushed by government pressure, demanded that all staff get vaccinated on top of existing broad, safe, and effective natural immunity. 

  We’ve known about natural immunity for thousands of years. Now it is mostly denied or not spoken about. How can we account for that?

  From the point of view of doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff, that’s an insult. It’s insulting enough to cause anyone to quit on the spot. So yes, many employees just began feeling demoralized. Here is where we stand and a look at why there is a crisis. Crisis upon crisis. 

  

  It’s the same in nursing homes. 

  

  So yes, the lockdowns and mandates created the health-care crisis that they strategized to prevent. The ICUs are filling up but not necessarily only from Covid. These are health problems generated by lockdowns. Cancer. Drug overdoses. Obesity. Broken immune systems leading to virus vulnerability. 

  But the question is why. The answer is that governors in every state locked down the hospitals for Covid only, with some exceptions made for urgent non-elective surgeries. Most hospitals in this country were empty for months. They were bleeding money. Spending on health care in general actually declined 8.6%. 

  As I’ve written, In the first half of 2020, inpatient admissions fell by 20%, while outpatient visits collapsed by 35%. Visits to the emergency room crashed too, in some places by as much as 42%. By the fall of 2020, elective surgeries were down by 90% of where they would normally be. 

  The financial crisis, the lockdown crisis, the mandate crisis, the public health crisis, have all pointed to one end: a genuine medical care crisis. 

  Now the Biden administration is taking the extraordinary step of forcing military doctors and nurses into the hospitals. Does that make you want to go to the doctor? Not likely. In fact, for nearly two years now, many people have been avoiding the doctor, letting cancer screenings go by and so on. This has produced the very public health crisis that the lockdowns were intended to prevent. 

  For the first time since this disaster began in March 2020, I feel a loss of words, an inability to explain or even describe the world in which we live. We are on the precipice of disaster, with not only a public-health mess unfolding before our eyes but now we must await a Supreme Court that is only days away from deciding on the OSHA mandate that could permanently change life in America. 

  Many businesses are now fighting for their lives. CEOs of major airlines have pleaded to end the mask mandate that is so awful for their customers flying on their extremely clean planes. Fauci flat out said no. We must wear masks forever, he says. Why is he, of all people, the dictator of our businesses, communities, and lives? And it all happened so quickly and shockingly. 

  We are surrounded by the carnage of the lockdown and mandate strategy, which not only did not stop the Omicron variant. They might have made it inevitable. And yet we still have major voices such as Jeremy Faust of Harvard University writing in his influential column: “am I willing to disrupt certain aspects of life temporarily when necessary to achieve a clearly stated goal? Yes. The key is to define that goal and to implement a strategy that can deliver it. Nobody gets tired of winning. What we’re tired of is losing.”

  Yes, we are losing because of a losing strategy that favored force over social functioning, models over public-health wisdom, central planning over decentralized intelligence, coercion over persuasion, suppression over endemicity, and brutalism over rationality. As for “temporarily,” where have we heard that before? 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:30

• Rocking Around The Plastic Tree
  Rocking Around The Plastic Tree

  For some families, the search for the right Christmas tree is an annual event.

  

  For large shares of Americans and Brits though, this search may have ended a long time ago – the perfect tree already sitting safely in the attic or garage, ready for its glorious but fleeting return to the living room.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As new survey data from Statista’s Global Consumer Survey shows, it’s a different story in Germany.

  There, the home of the Christmas tree tradition, the practice is still very much alive – 42 percent of adults said they would be putting up a real tree this year, compared to 24 percent in the U.S. and just 19 percent in the United Kingdom.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:05

• Australia's Chief Pharmacist Says Public Needs To Accept Boosters & Mask Mandates For "Many Years" To Come
  Australia’s Chief Pharmacist Says Public Needs To Accept Boosters & Mask Mandates For “Many Years” To Come

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  Australia’s chief pharmacist says the public “just need to accept” they will have to take regular vaccine booster shots and continue wearing masks for “many years” to come.

  

  Asserting that the bio-security police state will become a permanent fixture, Trent Twomey, National President of the Pharmacy Guild, says Aussies will have to get a COVID booster jab “every six months” if that’s what experts tell them to do.

  “I think booster shots, just like your annual influenza shot [are] something we just need to accept, its [Covid-19] not going to be with us for many weeks and months, it’s going to be with us for many years,” said Twomey.

  The chief pharmacist stressed that in order to be considered “fully vaccinated” by authorities, people would have to get “a periodic inoculation.”

  “It’s just something we’re gonna have to do,” he added. “[If] we need one every six months, then you know what Australia, let’s get one every six months.”

  Twomey also insisted that mask wearing could remain “for a long time,” something he characterized as “not that inconvenient.”

  There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary government intervention.

  The promise that people will be made to take booster shots every 6 months for years will entrench a segregated society of the jabbed and the jabbed not.

  If the unvaccinated were hoping that restrictions on their travel and right to engage in basic lifestyle activities would end when the pandemic becomes endemic, they may need to think again.

  If technocrats like Twomey get their way, mandatory jabs and never ending mask mandates to prove compliance will become part of the new normal for potentially years or decades to come.

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 22:40

• China Gives Celebrities & Social Media Influencers 10 More Days To Pay Taxes Owed
  China Gives Celebrities & Social Media Influencers 10 More Days To Pay Taxes Owed

  Beijing has been busy in recent days preparing to implement President Xi Jinping’s “Common Prosperity” agenda by shaking down social media influencers and China’s biggest tech firms alike for contributions to the fund Xi is apparently raising to finance more economy-boosting projects in rural areas.

  As we reported the other day, Beijing just fined one of the country’s top streaming stars $210M and accused her of concealing income booked in 2019 and 2020. And just last night, it was reported that Tencent is being essentially forced to distribute $16 billion of shares from its holdings in JD.com to shareholders after getting the tap from the CCP that it’s time to share some of its winnings, and also give up some control as the CCP fundamentally hopes to weaken the power held by individual tech firms and the billionaire founders who control them.

  

  And now, tax authorities in Beijing and Shanghai are reminding social media influencers and anyone else in danger of being targeted by tax authorities that they have 10 more days to pay what they owe, or face severe punishment. The notice explicitly addresses “celebrities, internet influencers” and others who now find themselves in Beijing’s sights.

  Authorities published the warning in a notice, the SCMP reports.

  “Celebrities, internet influencers and other public figures should strictly comply with tax regulations even more,” the notice said. “Those refusing to self-assess their [tax obligation] or who have done so incorrectly will be severely punished by the tax bureau in accordance with the laws and regulations.”

  Some well-known influencers have publicly come forward to give tax money back under Beijing’s amnesty program, which will be in place through the end of the year, while publishing apologies for misguidedly withholding the money, and praising the government’s “common prosperity” agenda.

  Others have come forward to deny rumors that they have been evading taxes. Actress Qi Wei, 37, who is managed by the same influencer talent company as Viya, the influencer who was hit with the $210M fine, issued a statement on Weibo Tuesday saying the rumors that she had also evaded taxes were false.

  Did she not get the hint that Beijing doesn’t really care how much they already paid – only that right now, it’s the wealthy’s turn to pony up.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 22:15

• Bhattacharya: We Cannot Stop The Spread Of COVID, But We Can End The Pandemic
  Bhattacharya: We Cannot Stop The Spread Of COVID, But We Can End The Pandemic

  Authored by Jayanta Bhattacharya via The Brownstone Institute,

  The arrival of the omicron variant has led some politicians and public health grandees to call for a return to business closures and ‘circuit-breaker’ lockdowns.

  The variant has been found worldwide, including in the US and the UK. The variant has already surpassed delta – dominant before omicron – in the UK.

  Early reports from South Africa confirm that the variant is more transmissible but produces a milder disease, with a lower chance of hospitalization and death upon infection.

  My message is this: we can’t stop the spread of COVID, but we can end the pandemic.

  

  In October 2020, I wrote the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) along with Prof. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University and Prof. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard University.

  The centerpiece of the declaration is a call for increased focused protection of the vulnerable older population, who are more than a thousand times more likely to die from COVID infection than the young.

  We can protect the vulnerable without harming the rest of the population.

  As I stated above, we do not have any technology that can stop viral spread.

  While excellent vaccines protect the vaccinated versus hospitalization or death if infected, they provide only temporary and marginal protection versus infection and disease transmission after the second dose.

  The same is likely true for booster shots, which use the same technology as the initial doses.

  What about lockdowns? 

  It is now abundantly clear that they have failed to contain the virus while wreaking enormous collateral damage worldwide.

  The simplistic allure of lockdowns is that we can break the chain of viral transmission by staying apart.

  Only the laptop class — those who can just as easily work from home as in the office — can abide by a lockdown in actual practice, and even they have trouble.

  Essential workers who keep society going cannot afford the luxury, so the disease will keep spreading.

  Will the same policies that failed against a more virulent strain succeed in containing a more transmissible strain?

  The answer is self-evidently no. 

  The harms of lockdown on children and the non-elderly are catastrophic, including worse physical and mental health and irretrievably lost life opportunities.

  Lockdowns imposed in rich countries mean starvation, poverty, and death for the residents of poor countries.

  There is, however, a good alternative to lockdown.

  The Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) calls for a return to normal life for low-risk children and non-elderly adults.

  The principles at the heart of the GBD are as important today as they were a year ago. 

  In fact, they are more important now because we now have technological tools that make focused protection of the vulnerable much more straightforward than it was a year ago.

  First and most importantly, the vaccine.

  Because unvaccinated older people face such a high risk for a poor outcome on infection, and because the vaccine is so effective at blunting severe disease and death, vaccinating older people is the top priority if life-saving is to be the top priority.

  However, the vast majority of unvaccinated older people live in poor countries. 

  At current rates, the worldwide vaccination campaign will not be complete until the end of 2022, too late to save countless vulnerable people.

  Prioritizing those who have never previously had COVID will help preserve doses for those who would most benefit since – like the vaccine — COVID recovery provides excellent protection against future severe disease.

  Booster shots for older people also make sense.

  But to preserve doses, they should be reserved for those who have not previously had COVID and were vaccinated more than 6 to 8 months ago. 

  According to a careful study conducted by Swedish scientists, vaccine efficacy versus severe disease also starts to wane around that point, so boosting before then does not provide a substantial benefit.

  Second, we should make available effective early treatment options.

  During Florida’s summer wave, Gov. Ron DeSantis promoted the use of monoclonal antibodies – an FDA-approved treatment – by patients early in the course of the disease, an action that saved many lives. 

  Safe and inexpensive supplements like Vitamin D have been shown effective. Promising new treatments from Pfizer and a new antibody treatment for the immunocompromised by Astra Zeneca promise to become more widely available. Until that happens, they should be preserved for use by the most vulnerable when sick.

  Third, the widespread availability of inexpensive, privately conducted, rapid antigen tests in the UK has empowered everyone to make wise choices that reduce the risk of infecting vulnerable people. So far, the FDA says that these tests work to detect omicron.

  Even if you have no COVID-like symptoms, these tests accurately read whether you harbor the virus and pose a risk of spreading it to close contacts. With this test in hand, anyone can check if it is safe to visit grandma before heading over to her care home. It is a perfect tool for focused protection of the vulnerable. 

  US COVID policy should focus on making these tests cheaper and more widely available, as they are in the UK.

  Finally, since the virus very often spreads via aerosolization events, upgrades to ventilation systems in public spaces will reduce the risk of older people participating in everyday social life outside the home. 

  It is no accident that COVID disease spread is so rare on airplanes since they are all outfitted with excellent air filtration systems. Upgrading other public facilities, such as other public transportation systems, would reduce the risk of infection for the vulnerable.

  There are some hopeful signs that the political and ideological winds are shifting, while other developments signal a return to failed strategies.

  Colorado’s Democrat Governor Jared Polis recently declared that the widespread availability of vaccines spells ‘the end of the medical emergency,’ and he is resisting calls to impose new statewide mask mandates.

  Yet on the coasts, in California and New York, elected officials are renewing mask requirements for all – regardless of health or vaccination status.

  The end of the pandemic is primarily a social and political decision.

  Since we have no technology to eradicate the virus, we must learn to live with it. The fear-based lockdown policies of the past two years are no template for a healthy society.

  The good news is that with the new and effective technologies available and the focused protection ideas outlined in the GBD, we can end the pandemic if only we can muster the courage and political will to do so. 

  In Sweden and many US states that have eschewed lockdowns, the pandemic is effectively over, even as the virus continues to circulate. 

  As normal society resumes, the vast majority will find that living with the virus is not so hard after all.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:50

• Mapped: Economic Freedom Around The World
  Mapped: Economic Freedom Around The World

  How would you define a country’s economic freedom?

  The cornerstones of economic freedom by most measures are personal choice, voluntary exchange, independence to compete in markets, and security of the person and privately-owned property. Simply put, as Visual Capitalist’s Anshool Deshmukh points out, it is about the quality of political and economic institutions in countries.

  Based on the Index of Economic Freedom by the Heritage Organization, we mapped the economic freedom of 178 countries worldwide.

  

  Measures of Economic Freedom

  The index uses five broad areas to score economic freedom for each country:

  1. Size of Government: Greater government spending, taxation, and bigger government agencies tend to reduce individual choice and economic freedom.

  2. Legal System and Property Rights: The ability to accumulate private property and wealth is a central motivating force for workers and investors in a market economy, and well-functioning legal frameworks protect the rights of all citizens.

  3. Sound Money: Does earned money maintain its value, or is it lost to inflation? When inflation is high and volatile, individuals can’t plan for the future and use economic freedom effectively.

  4. Freedom to Trade Internationally: Freedom to exchange—in its broadest sense, buying, selling, making contracts, and so on—is considered essential to economic prosperity. Limited international trading options significantly reduce the potential for growth.

  5. Regulation: When governments utilize tools and impose oppressive regulations that limit the right to exchange, economic freedom typically suffers.

  World Economic Freedom by Region

  In 2021, the global average economic freedom score is 61.6, the highest its been in 27 years.

  But from Mauritius and smaller African nations being beacons of hope to East Asian and Oceanic countries epitomizing economic democracy, every region has a different story to tell.

  Let’s take a look at the economic freedom of each region in the world.

  Americas

  Even though the U.S. and Canada continue to be some of the most economically free countries globally, some markers are suffering.

  The regional average unemployment rate has risen to 6.9%, and inflation (outside of Venezuela) has increased to 5.2%. The region’s average level of public debt—already the highest globally—rose to 85.2% of its GDP during the past year.

  

  Across many Latin American countries, widespread corruption and weak protection of property rights have aggravated regulatory inefficiency and monetary instability.

  For example, Argentina’s Peronist government has recently fixed the price of 1,432 products as a response to a 3.5% price rise in September, the equivalent to a 53% increase if annualized.

  Europe

  More than half of the world’s 38 freest countries (with overall scores above 70) are in Europe. This is due to the region’s relatively extensive and long-established free-market institutions, the robust rule of law, and exceptionally strong investment freedom.

  However, Europe still struggles with a variety of policy barriers to vigorous economic expansion. This includes overly protective and costly labor regulations, which was one of the major reasons why the UK voted to leave the EU.

  

  Brexit has since had a major impact on the region.

  Even a year later, official UK figures showed a record fall in trade with the EU in January 2021, as the economy struggled with post-Brexit rules and the pandemic.

  Africa

  Dictatorships, corruption, and conflict have historically kept African nations as some of the most economically repressed in the world.

  While larger and more prosperous African nations struggle to advance economic freedom, some smaller countries are becoming the beacon of hope for the continent.

  

  Mauritius (rank 11), Seychelles (43) and Botswana (45) were the top African countries, offering the most robust policies and institutions supporting economic self-sufficiency.

  From property rights to financial freedom, small African countries are racing ahead of the continent’s largest in advancing economic autonomy as they look to build business opportunities for their citizens.

  Middle East and Central Asia

  When Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords last year, there was a sense of a new paradigm emerging in a region with a long history of strife.

  A year into the signing of this resolution, the effects have been promising. There have been bilateral initiatives within the private sector and civil society leading to increasing economic and political stability in the region.

  

  Central Asian countries once part of the Soviet Union have recently starting integrating more directly with the world economy, primarily through natural resource exports. In total, natural resources account for about 65% of exports in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, and more than 90% in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.

  Despite this progress, these countries have a long way to go in terms of economic freedom. Uzbekistan (108), Turkmenistan (167) and Tajikistan (134) are still some of the lowest-ranked countries in the world.

  East Asia and Oceania

  Despite massive populations and strong economies, countries like China and India remain mostly unfree economies. The modest improvements in scores over the last few years have been through gains in property rights, judicial effectiveness, and business freedom indicators.

  Nearby, Singapore’s economy has been ranked the freest in the world for the second year in a row. Singapore remains the only country in the world that is considered economically free in every index category.

  

  Finally, it’s worth noting that Australia and New Zealand are regional leaders, and are two of only five nations that are currently in the “free” category of the index.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:25

• Democrats' Dismal Outlook for 2022 Midterm Elections Continues To Worsen
  Democrats’ Dismal Outlook for 2022 Midterm Elections Continues To Worsen

  Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  When New Jersey Democratic Rep. Albio Sires announced that he wouldn’t seek reelection, he became the 23rd sitting Democrat in the House of Representatives to opt out of seeking another term in Congress.

  

  For a party with a majority that depends upon a mere handful of votes, losing 23 House veterans is a crushing blow, but more such announcements are expected as filing deadlines approach for the 2022 midterm congressional elections.

  Among other Democrats who aren’t running again are House Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth of Kentucky, Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania, Rep. David Price of North Carolina, Rep. Cheri Bustos of Illinois, Rep. Filemon Vela of Texas, and Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona.

  And no wonder, considering the latest survey results of likely voters by noted Democratic pollster and campaign strategist Doug Schoen and partner Carly Cooperman, which show majorities disapproving of President Joe Biden’s performance and holding congressional Democrats responsible for the nation’s growing list of serious problems.

  Schoen’s survey is especially telling because of the intensity of voter determination reflected in the responses. Fully 72 percent said they are “absolutely certain” to vote in November 2022 and another 28 percent said they are “very likely.”

  Numbers like those suggest 2022 could see a record midterm turnout if the present trends continue. That has to be especially worrisome for Democratic leaders because there’s virtually no good news for them in the Schoen results.

  Two-thirds, or 66 percent, of respondents agreed when asked if they believe “Joe Biden and Democrats in Congress are out of touch with hardworking Americans. They have been so focused on passing their own agenda that they’ve been ignoring Americans’ day-to-day concerns, such as the rising prices for goods and gasoline.” Only 30 percent disagreed.

  Similarly, 65 percent agreed when asked if they agree that “I thought things in the country were going to change for the better with Joe Biden’s election, but it’s just been more of the same. The country is still divided, the coronavirus pandemic is still ongoing—and now, on top of that, inflation is at a 30-year high and gasoline prices are soaring.” Thirty-one percent disagreed.

  On issue after issue, respondents expressed disagreement and dissatisfaction with the direction the country is heading with Democrats in control of the White House and both the Senate and House of Representatives:

  Democrats are blamed for rising inflation 48 percent to 31 percent for Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the surge in illegal immigration by a 33-point margin, 55 percent to 22 percent, over Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the nationwide crime surge, 48 percent to 27 percent for Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the hiring shortages plaguing business, 41 percent to 31 percent for Republicans.

  Other results are just as discouraging for Democrats.

  Asked “generally speaking, would you prefer that there be Democratic control or Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives,” 46 percent of the respondents said they prefer GOP control, while 43 percent chose Democratic control.

  Asked how concerned they are with the violent crime surge, 58 percent said they are very concerned and 31 percent said they are somewhat concerned. A huge majority of the respondents, 62 percent, said they oppose defunding the police.

  Perhaps even more disturbing for Democrats is that 69 percent of the respondents agreed that “Joe Biden and Democrats are soft on crime.”

  And 67 percent of the respondents said the country has become more divided since Biden took office, while 52 percent said they believe Biden has weakened the U.S. economy.

  Rep. Sean Maloney (D-N.Y.), who heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), is being slammed by party colleagues who fear that he’s pushing the party down the wrong strategic path.

  “Universally, we heard that there’s been too much Trump talk, not enough focus on pocketbook issues. [former Virginia Gov. Terry] McAuliffe banged the anti-Trump drum constantly on his way to losing the race for Virginia governor,” Politico recently reported.

  “But at-risk members we spoke with worry that Maloney is still embracing the Trump-as-boogeyman strategy, blasting Republicans as extreme for seeking his blessing or otherwise supporting him,” Politico stated.

  Other factors, including the bitterly partisan atmosphere, are playing into the growing list of Democrats deciding to leave the House. Sires, the Cuban immigrant who is serving his eighth term, told Roll Call on Dec. 20 that he’s leaving because “the whole atmosphere in Washington is awful. You either have to be from the left or from the extreme right, and I don’t think that’s good for the country.”

  Democrats control the House in the 117th Congress with 221 seats, versus 213 for the GOP. That means a shift of only five Democrats to vote with Republicans is required for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to lose on critical issues.

  Republicans are ebullient about their prospects, with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) warning Democrats in November that “if you are a Democrat and President Biden won your seat by 16 points, you are in a competitive race next year. You are no longer safe.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:00

• CCP Locks Down 13 Million People In Xi'an Over 200 Cases As Winter Olympics Approach
  CCP Locks Down 13 Million People In Xi’an Over 200 Cases As Winter Olympics Approach

  Chinese health authorities said Thursday they found 91 new confirmed COVID cases in Xi’an, the capital city of Central China’s Shaanxi Province, as of 1300 local time on Thursday, bringing the total cases in the western city to 234, according to Xinhua’s count. The new figures come as authorities have locked down the city as China scrambles to prevent even the hint of an omicron wave as it prepares to host the Winter Olympics.

  

  The lockdown imposed by the CCP left stretches of highway in the city eerily bare on Thursday, according to a Reuters report, as workers set up lockdown enforcement checkpoints. The number of new cases reported in the city has now increased for 7 straight days starting with Dec. 17’s report. The city has a population of 13MM, which is notably larger than NYC’s 9MM.

  So far, at least, no cases of omicron have been confirmed, according to the CCP, but there’s always the possibility that health authorities have identified (or are simply just not looking for) the strain since news of new omicron cases might engender more panic.

  While practically every other nation has abandoned the “Zero COVID” approach, Beijing has pledged to continue it, surrounding each new outbreak – however mild – with testing resources while enforcing strict and immediate localized lockdowns. Beijing’s official stance is that no COVID can be allowed to spread.

  Starting Thursday, each household in the city may only send one person to shop for necessities, once every two days, while others aren’t permitted to leave unless they have essential jobs.

  Anybody who wants to leave must test negative before departure and get clearance from employers or community-level authorities.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 20:35

• Haitians Sue Biden Admin Over "Racist Treatment" In Del Rio Border Encampment
  Haitians Sue Biden Admin Over “Racist Treatment” In Del Rio Border Encampment

  Authored by Charlotte Cuthbertson via The Epoch Times,

  Several Haitians who crossed into the United States illegally are suing the Biden administration over “racist treatment” of the approximately 15,000 Haitians who gathered in a primitive encampment in Del Rio, Texas, in September.

  

  The Haitian Bridge Alliance, a nonprofit based in California, joined 11 Haitians in filing the suit on Dec. 20, the group announced on Twitter.

  The lawsuit alleges the Biden administration mistreated the Haitians with “calculated indifference.”

  “They were denied food, water, and medical care. They were physically and verbally abused. And they were summarily expelled without an opportunity to request asylum and without consideration of the danger they would face in Haiti or Mexico,” the lawsuit charges.

  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) didn’t respond to requests for comment by The Epoch Times.

  The lawsuit alleges that the Biden administration has been using the Title 42 health directive against Haitians and other illegal immigrants.

  Title 42 was put in place in March 2020 to help curb the COVID-19 pandemic by stopping nonessential border travel.

  “Consistent with the United States’ long history of anti-Haitian and anti-Black immigration policies, the Biden administration has used the Title 42 process as a cudgel to deny thousands of Haitians an opportunity to access the U.S. asylum process,” the lawsuit states.

  Thousands of illegal immigrants, primarily Haitian nationals, started streaming across the Rio Grande—which divides Texas and Mexico—and gathering under an international bridge in Del Rio, Texas, in early September.

  The conditions quickly became crowded and squalid as law enforcement struggled to handle the overwhelming influx.

  At its height, the area held around 15,000 mostly Haitian illegal immigrants who were waiting to be processed by Border Patrol and were walking back and forth across the river to Mexico for supplies.

  

  Illegal immigrants take supplies back and forth between Acuña, Mexico, and the United States (far side) across the Rio Grande, the international boundary with Mexico, in Acuña, Mexico, on Sept. 20, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  All of the Haitians that The Epoch Times spoke to at the time had been living in Chile or Brazil for years before deciding to come to the United States.

  They all said it wasn’t an option for them to return to Haiti and that they were determined to get into the United States one way or another.

  Many had destroyed their visas and documentation from other resident countries before they crossed into the United States, as evidenced by the discarded identification documents on the Mexican side of the river. Some said they believed it would be more difficult to deport them if they discarded their papers.

  The camp was cleared by Sept. 24, with the majority of the Haitians being released into the United States to await a future court date. None were tested for COVID-19.

  DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said on Sept. 24 that approximately 2,000 Haitians had been deported to Haiti on 17 repatriation flights.

  Mayorkas said that since Sept. 9, when the Haitian crisis began to escalate, Border Patrol had encountered nearly 30,000 illegal immigrants in Del Rio.

  Of those, approximately 12,400 were released with a court date or a notice to check in at a federal immigration office within 60 days.

  Some 8,000 returned to Mexico voluntarily. Another 5,000 were being processed to determine whether they should be expelled or let go with a notice.

  

  Border Patrol drops van loads of Haitians who crossed the U.S. border illegally at local NGO Border Humanitarian Coalition to catch a bus to San Antonio or Houston, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 22, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  The lawsuit alleges that at least 99 expulsion flights to Haiti carrying more than 10,000 asylum seekers have occurred since mid-September. Customs and Border Protection didn’t respond to a request to confirm those numbers.

  One Haitian couple highlighted in the lawsuit said they came to the United States with their 1-year-old after living in Chile for several years.

  “They never received an opportunity to seek asylum or explain why they feared returning to Haiti,” the lawsuit states. The couple also allege they were shackled while being transported back to Haiti.

  DHS began to restrain illegal immigrants bound for deportation while transporting them after a group of Haitians overtook a bus and tried to flee.

  On Sept. 20, when a busload of Haitians realized they were going to be deported, they started fighting with Border Patrol agents, forced the bus to stop, and fled.

  Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) officers responded to the scene and eventually detained all the individuals.

  “When the migrants found out they were going to be sent back to Haiti, they took the bus over and they fled,” said Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, at a press conference in Del Rio on Sept. 22.

  “If it wasn’t for the men and women in uniform, DPS, we do not know what would have happened.”

  The Haitian couple in the lawsuit was returned to Haiti, and the mother and child have since traveled to Chile, while the father remains in Haiti, according to the lawsuit. “They plan to return to the United States to seek asylum,” it states.

  

  Thousands of illegal immigrants, mostly Haitians, live in a primitive, makeshift camp under the international bridge that spans the Rio Grande between the U.S. and Mexico while waiting to be detained and processed by Border Patrol, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 21, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  The lawsuit highlights also the Border Patrol horse patrol unit that sparked furor after several photographs and video footage showed agents grabbing people who illegally crossed from Mexico.

  White House officials decried the images and promised an investigation, while other critics claimed that Border Patrol agents were “whipping” the Haitians with their reins, which Border Patrol said is a technique to keep people from being trampled by the horse.

  The inspector general for the DHS subsequently refused to take up the investigation.

  The lawsuit charges senior White House and Homeland Security officials with developing a “Haitian deterrence policy,” which was “deliberately indifferent to humanitarian concerns, and focused on expelling Haitian asylum seekers as quickly as possible.”

  On a policy level, the Biden administration has been lenient on illegal immigrants, including through policy changes that allow most to be released into the United States.

  Mayorkas announced on May 22 an extension for Haitians currently eligible under the temporary protected status (TPS) program that was put in place after the 2010 earthquake.

  That allowed Haitians who were already in the United States before the earthquake to stay, as their country was deemed unsafe to return to. TPS holders get work permits and are shielded from deportation.

  The original 2010 designation for Haitians was extended several times until the Trump administration announced in January 2018 that it would end effective July 22, 2019. Subsequent lawsuits allowed the designation to remain in effect.

  On Aug. 3, Mayorkas dramatically increased the number of Haitians eligible for the program by announcing that all Haitians who had made it into the United States by July 29 this year would now be eligible to apply for TPS.

  

  Thousands of illegal immigrants amass in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 16, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  It’s difficult to know whether Haitians who have gained residency in another country, such as Chile or Brazil, are eligible for asylum in the United States.

  Asylum-seekers need to prove that they have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution in their home country because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.

  But persecution is generally considered state-sanctioned or condoned, which means the government of the alien’s home country is the sponsor of the persecution. For example, in North Korea, the regime itself persecutes Christians.

  Most claims of asylum in the United States are ultimately rejected, including roughly 90 percent of claims from Central Americans.

  A backlog of more than 1.3 million cases, with approximately 610,000 pending asylum applications, is being handled by a corps of immigration judges that numbered 539 as of April. Most asylum-seekers must wait years before their claims are adjudicated.

  The lawsuit is seeking an end to the use of Title 42 and the “Haitian deterrence policy” for the defendants and Haitian nationals in general.

  It’s also asking for the deported Haitians to be brought back to the United States to pursue asylum claims, as well as “further relief as the court deems just, equitable, and proper.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 20:10

• US, Japan Draft Plans To Set Up Attack Base In Event China Invades Taiwan
  US, Japan Draft Plans To Set Up Attack Base In Event China Invades Taiwan

  Coming days after the US and Japan reached an agreement on a new cost-sharing deal for Tokyo to continue hosting around 50,000 US troops, for which Japan will pay $9.2 billion over the next five years, which is a significant cost increase compared to what Tokyo was previously paying, a joint draft plan has been revealed for an emergency response contingency in the event China threatens to invade Taiwan.

  First reported in Japan’s Kyodo news agency on Thursday, unnamed Japanese officials detailed the plan was struck between the US and Japanese militaries, and arranges for a forward operating base to be establish on southwest islands, where the US Marine Corps would rapidly deploy troops.

  Kyodo details that “Japan’s Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military have drawn up a draft joint operation plan that would enable the setup of an attack base along the Nansei island chain in the country’s southwest in the event of a Taiwan contingency, according to Japanese government sources.”

  

  Japan’s armed forces would primarily be responsible for providing logistical support, especially setting up vital ammunition and supply lines. This comes as the past year has seen Tokyo go from a much more neutral stance on the Taiwan issue to firmly and vocally being in Washington’s corner, which has resulted in Beijing lashing out with warnings and threats on multiple occasions. 

  Beijing is certain to react fiercely to the Kyodo news report, which additionally notes that “Such a deployment, however, would make the islands the target of attack by China’s military, putting the lives of residents there at risk. Legal changes would be needed in Japan to realize the plan, the sources said.”

  The US side has yet to confirm the agreement for the emergency plans, which appears part of longtime Washington efforts which began in earnest under the Trump administration to shore up regional allies to “stand up” to China, which has included plans for US missile bases – though so far there’s no regional ally willing to make itself target #1 for China’s formidable counter-measures by agreeing to host coastal missiles.

  According to The Hill, “Washington and Tokyo would likely reach an agreement to start creating an official version of such a plan at the 2+2 dialogue, a high-level security meeting between diplomatic and defense officials in January.”

  That the US and Japanese militaries were in talks to put in place plans for intervention in the event of a PLA offensive on Taiwan was first reported in Chinese state-linked media in November. For example The South China Morning Post at the time wrote, “China has been warned to stay alert to the possibility Japan will intervene militarily in the event of an attack on Taiwan.”

  #Japan and US have drafted a joint plan to set up an attack base along the Nansei island chain if #Taiwan comes under threat by #China, according to Japanese government sources, reports @kyodo_official. https://t.co/b35wtVL8fC

  — Steve Herman (@W7VOA) December 23, 2021

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

  The report cited that “A research paper said recent gestures of support for the island indicate that Japan and the United States have been discussing the scenario and are making plans to deter Beijing from using force to take the island.”

  Meanwhile, Beijing and Tokyo have continued trading threats and accusations over fishing and territorial rights in disputed islands – which in the recent past has looked poised to become a militarized dispute. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 19:45

• Victor Davis Hanson: Please, Stop The 'Coup' Porn!
  Victor Davis Hanson: Please, Stop The ‘Coup’ Porn!

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  In a recent Washington Post op-ed, three retired generals, Paul Eaton, Antonio Taguba, and Steven Anderson warn of a supposedly impending coup should Donald Trump be elected in 2024.

  The column seemed strangely timed to coincide with a storm of recent Democratic talking points that a re-elected Trump, or even a Republican sweep of the 2022 midterms, would spell a virtual end of democracy.

  

  Ironies abound.

  From Election Day in 2020 to Inauguration Day 2021, we were told by the Left that democracy was resilient and rightly rid the nation of Trump.

  The hard Left, for one of the rare times in U.S. history, was now in complete control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.

  Spiking inflation, supply-chain shortages, near-record gas prices, open borders, the flight from Afghanistan, multi-trillion-dollar deficits, and polarizing racial rhetoric all followed.

  In response to these events, Joe Biden’s popularity utterly collapsed. His own cognitive challenges multiplied the unpopularity of his failed policies.

  In reaction, the Left again pivoted. It suddenly announced that should it lose congressional power in 2022 or the presidency in 2024, democracy was all but doomed.

  Apparently, what changed Democrats’ views was that democracy was working all too well in expressing widespread public disgust . . . with the Left.

  Even more ironies followed.

  The three retired generals shrilly write of the dangers of insurrection and coups. Yet the FBI found no such insurrection or conspiracy in the buffoonish riot on January 6.

  Only serial media misinformation and lies turned a ragtag band of misfits into an existential threat to the nation.

  Almost every media talking point turned out to be untrue. No Capitol police officer died at the hands of the mob. (Early reports that Officer Brian Sicknick had been beaten into a coma by protesters were incorrect. The Washington, D.C., medical examiner ruled Sicknick died the next day of a stroke.) The media all but ignored the lethal police shooting of a military veteran and unarmed petite female trespasser, for the apparent crime of trying to enter Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office through a broken window. There were no gun-toting “insurrectionists” arrested inside the Capitol.

  Another irony. The three retired generals say nothing about the Russia collusion hoax in which Obama administration officials at the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the CIA helped to seed a fake dossier — paid for by candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Ex-British intelligence operative Christopher Steele’s made-up opposition research was designed first to derail Trump’s campaign, then to disable his transition and finally sabotage his presidency. All that seems rather coup-like.

  In truth, coups were regularly discussed during the last four years — but only in the context of a by-any-means-necessary way of deposing Donald Trump extralegally before his term ran out.

  In August 2020, two retired officers John Nagl and Paul Yingling, urged Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley to remove Trump from office if Milley felt it necessary after a contested election.

  Both officers knew that the law forbids Milley from interfering in the chain of command, given his mere advisory role to the president.

  Yet Milley himself had dangerously violated his purview at least twice. He once ordered subordinate officers to report to him first should Donald Trump consider any nuclear action against China. And Milley additionally called his Chinese communist counterpart to warn him that he would tip the Chinese off about any preemptive American strike on China.

  Earlier, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama Pentagon legal official, wrote a now infamous essay in Foreign Policy, listing the choices available in removing Donald Trump from his less than two-week-old presidency. Among the possible means, she listed a potential military coup.

  Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice forbids even retired military officers publicly attacking or disparaging their current commander-in-chief. Yet several retired generals and admirals serially did just that during the last administration, smearing their president in every imaginable way, from being a Mussolini-like fascist to a veritable Nazi.

  The officers published in the Washington Post are clueless as to why the military is now suffering its most dismal public approval ratings of the modern era — with only 45 percent of the public registering trust and confidence in their armed forces.

  The nation is clearly not blaming the courageous soldiers in the enlisted ranks. But it has had enough of the Pentagon’s loud top brass who seem more interested in stirring up political divisions at home than adopting winning strategies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, or deterring China and Russia.

  The officer corps too often broadcasts its woke credentials, calibrated for career advancement. Top-ranking officers upon retirement too predictably head for corporate defense contractor boards and procurement lobbying firms.

  To restore the military’s reputation, officers should eschew politics to focus on restoring strategic deterrence and military readiness. They should keep clear of divisive domestic issues. They should stop virtue signaling to the media and influential members of Congress.

  But most importantly, officers should quit all their coup porn talk — either to remove a president they don’t like, or to project their own reckless, insurrectionary behavior onto their political opponents.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 19:20

• Putin Names Russia's "Number One Partner" At Year-End Press Conference
  Putin Names Russia’s “Number One Partner” At Year-End Press Conference

  Delivering remarks on a wide range of issues during the Russian president’s annual year-end press conference where he holds a long Q&A session with the press and public, Putin named Russia’s number one partner on the global stage. 

  While a decade ago his answer would have perhaps come as a shock given the two countries’ tense history and rivalry, particularly through the 20th century – it should come as no surprise now, after both find themselves firmly in Washington’s geopolitical and economic crosshairs… China, Putin named as an unprecedented partner of close cooperation from trade to technology to defense. 

  

  Russia is “China’s number one partner,” the Russian president asserted, describing to the press conference that President Xi Jinping and he “have very trusting relations and it helps us build good business ties as well.” Putin stressed that Xi “is an obvious leader” and that recent meetings and cooperative endeavors “brings us closer together.”

  Here’s more according to an official English translation of Putin’s remarks featured in Russian state media reports:

  “We are cooperating in the field of security. The Chinese Army is equipped to a significant extent with the world’s most advanced weapons systems. We are even developing certain high-tech weapons together,” the Russian leader went on.

  He said that there has been nothing like Russia and China’s current relations in history before, and remarked that this serves as a “stabilizing factor” on the world stage.

  Xi and Putin met last week in a virtual conference, which came on the heels of Putin meeting with Biden for a much more tense, though generally positive exchange. 

  During this latest Xi-Putin summit, the Russian leader hailed his friendship with Xi as something closer than allies. Xi had also been cited in Chinese state media describing that the Russian president had “firmly supported China in defending its core interests and opposed attempts to divide China and Russia,” according to CCTV.

  Russian President Putin had a marathon 4 hr long year ending annual presser; No mention of India (nor any questions). Lot of focus on Ukraine, China. Called ties with Xi Jinping “very trustful personal relationship” https://t.co/J4qtJVWp4e

  — Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) December 23, 2021

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

  Importantly, following that meeting Xi had declared formal support for this central security concern of Russia’s: 

  Putin won support from Xi for his push to obtain binding security guarantees for Russia from the West, a Kremlin official said, according to Reuters.

  Russia wants the United States and NATO to guarantee the military alliance will not expand further eastward or deploy weapons systems in Ukraine and other countries on Russia’s border.

  Putin during his Thursday year-end conference addressed the emerging Ukraine crisis 2.0, after last month Washington and Kiev accused the Kremlin of a major military build-up threatening Ukraine…

  “We are not the ones who are threatening someone,” Putin began. “Are we the ones who went there, to the US borders, or to the borders of the United Kingdom or somewhere? They came to us, and now they still say: no, now Ukraine will join NATO as well.”

  Xi has affirmed he stands by Russia’s firm stance on countering NATO expansion eastward…

  Xi Jinping backs Vladimir Putin’s demand for Nato to halt eastwards expansion https://t.co/ANBzBWmk3i

  — David Reynolds (@SurferObserver) December 15, 2021

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

  Days ago the Kremlin sought to initiate urgent dialogue with the West by submitting a draft document of “security guarantees” – centered on the central demand of no more NATO expansion eastward. Reports this week suggest that Russia and the US have agreed to meet over the matter in January. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:55

• Life Expectancy In 2020 Fell 2.3% To 77 Years. Does This Justify The COVID Panic?
  Life Expectancy In 2020 Fell 2.3% To 77 Years. Does This Justify The COVID Panic?

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  According to a new report released Wednesday by the Centers for Disease Control, the life expectancy at birth in the United States fell to 77.0 years in 2020, falling from 2019’s life expectancy of 78.8 years. The report also noted an increase of mortality with age-adjusted mortality in the US rising from 715.2 per 100,000 in 2019 to 836.4 per 100,000 in 2020. 

  Media reporting on the CDC’s report provide a variety of statistics on one-year percentage changes, no doubt with an eye toward maximizing the perceived effect of covid-19 on American health.  But what are the trends when we look at these numbers in the larger context? That is, just how much has life expectancy and mortality swung from what we’ve experienced in recent decades?  A closer look at these numbers suggests that covid does not exactly represent an epochal change in life expectancy, health, or healthcare.

  Moreover, the new numbers also help illustrate how efforts by journalists earlier this year to describe covid-19 as “deadlier” than the 1918 flu were wildly off the mark. 

  

  Just How Much Did Life Expectancy Fall in 2020?

  When the CDC released preliminary numbers on 2020’s life expectancy earlier this year, many sources claimed life expectancy “fell off a cliff.” This week the tradition continued with The Daily Mail, for example, publishing this graph with a curiously truncated y axis:

  

  If we take a longer historical view of life expectancy figures—with a normal y axis—things look a little different:

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021) 

  In 2020, life expectancy fell from 78.8 years in 2019 to 77 years in 2020. That’s a drop of 2.3 percent. However, we also find that 2020’s life expectancy of 77 years was equal to that of 2001, a period not exactly of the distant past before penicillin. Nor were the gains between 2001 and 2020 particularly impressive. Life expectancy in the US didn’t budge more than one-tenth of a year between 2010 and 2019, going back and forth between 78.7 and 78.8. This means from 2001 to 2010, life expectancy increased only 2.2 percent. (Compare, for example, with the increase from 1971 to 1980 when life expectancy increased by 3.6 percent). In other words, it didn’t take much for life expectancy to return to a level from 20-years prior. The past twenty years has not exactly been a period of great progress in this regard.

  A historical view also reveals that recent and ongoing attempts to compare the covid-19 pandemic to the flu epidemic of 1918 are hardly appropriate. From 1917 to 1918, life expectancy is estimated to have fallen by an enormous 23 percent, falling from 50.9 to 39.1.

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  (The case of 1918 does provide a helpful reminder, however, that epidemics do not necessarily signal a departure from larger trends. By 1919, the life expectancy in the US had rebounded with the measure increasing to a new high of 60.8 in 1921.)

  Changes in Age-Adjusted Mortality

  The CDC on Wednesday also released new finalized year-end numbers for mortality in 2020.  From this data we see changes in life expectancy and mortality were driven overwhelmingly by deaths among adults. As the new report shows, mortality from 2019 to 2020 was virtually unchanged in the under-15 population, and for children under 5, mortality actually declined.

  More important still is age-adjusted mortality. This shows us changes in mortality while taking into account the fact that the population is aging overall—and thus more likely to experience disease and death than is a younger population. From 2019 to 2020, age-adjusted mortality in the US rose from 715.2 per 100,000 to 836.4 per 100,000. That’s an increase of nearly 17 percent. Yet, again, the rise should hardly be panic-inducing. This rise brings age-adjusted mortality back to 2003 levels—a period not exactly in the distant past. 

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  A larger historical view also shows that recent efforts to compare covid to the 1918 flu in terms of mortality wildly overstate the impact of the current situation. From 1917 to 1918, the age-adjusted mortality rate increased by 392 per 100,000. From 2019 to 2020, the increase was 120 per 100,000.  

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  The point here, of course, is not that covid deaths over the past eighteen months are insignificant. Indeed, even if we make no distinction between covid deaths and noncovid deaths since early 2020, it’s clear more Americans have indeed been dying from all causes. And that’s hardly something to celebrate or ignore. Moreover, the CDC’s report is an unpleasant reminder that life expectancy in the US had already all but screeched to a halt in the decade leading up to 2020. This was likely due to a continued and rapid rise in obesity—rising nearly 40 percent from 2000 to 2018—which has in turn fueled both heart disease and diabetes. Both these conditions are factors known to substantially increase the severity of covid-19.

  Nevertheless, it remains important to obtain some much-needed context when examining a disease which is being used to justify unprecedented increases in state power over even the most basic personal and economic activities of ordinary people. Even considering recent data on life expectancy and mortality, it remains extremely unclear why 2020’s changes in these metrics would justify the extreme panic and human rights violations that resulted from stay-at-home edicts and coerced medication.

  American citizens are nowadays subjected to a nonstop drumbeat of claims about “unprecedented” levels of mortality. We’re even told covid is just like the flu of 1918. And to what end? Apparently, to rob people of their livelihoods if they refuse to receive a vaccine. It’s to attempt to make pariahs of anyone who makes health decisions of which the regime does not approve. It’s to continue to justify 2020’s ineffectual lockdowns. It’s to justify government spending at levels unprecedented in peacetime. It’s to deny that natural immunity provides meaningful resistance to the disease. Yet all this rhetoric occurs at a time when age-adjusted mortality and life expectancy is not exactly “off the charts” if we look beyond the confines of just the last few years.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:30

• New Satellite Images Purport To Show Russian Force Build-Up Near Ukraine
  New Satellite Images Purport To Show Russian Force Build-Up Near Ukraine

  New satellite photos made public by Maxar appear to confirm the large-scale presence of Russian military hardware, including Iskander mobile short-range ballistic missiles, deployed within 200 miles of Ukraine’s border, according to a CBS correspondent. Some pundits are suggesting this as further “proof” of the continued Russian force build-up threatening Ukraine. 

  It comes as Ukraine’s media and political leaders are claiming “There are 122,000 Russian servicemen deployed at a 200-km distance to the borders of Ukraine, as well as another 143,500 at a distance of 400 km.”

  NEW: Photos show Russian troops & equipment, including hundreds of tanks, self-propelled artillery and an Iskander mobile short-range ballistic missile are deployed in a training area located approx 160 miles north of the Russia – Ukraine border.
  📸: @Maxar pic.twitter.com/qXkj7V1yeI

  — Elizabeth Campbell (@ECampbell360) December 23, 2021

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

  Kiev has charged that the Kremlin is planning to begin offensive operations aimed at annexing pro-Russia areas of Eastern Ukraine sometime in January, which Putin and other top officials have continued to deny, saying that where Russia stations its troops in its own territory shouldn’t be taken as a threat to any neighbor or outside power. 

  As to the reports of missiles and other major hardware being moved near Ukraine, this is a specific threat the foreign ministry has hinted at in the past few days, explaining that if Brussels and Washington shut the door on dialogue over the recently submitted draft “security proposals” document, then Russia will have no choice but to initiate “military-technical” measures. However, it remains that all of this equipment is still far away from the actual Ukrainian border, very firmly within Russia’s sovereign territory.

  But the reality is that pretty much all of Europe is already within range of Russia’s conventional ballistic arsenal anyway, as The Dispatch notes in examining the new security proposals being pitched to NATO:

  Article 6 would ban the deployment of intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles by the US in Europe, despite the fact that Russia has already deployed dual-capable SS-26 “Iskander” missiles in Kaliningrad that can reach much of central Europe and has developed intermediate-range missiles that cover large swaths of the continent from the western military district of Russia. Such a self-abnegating undertaking would run the risk of reproducing the missile imbalance that the USSR created in the 1970s that European leaders worried would decouple the defense of Europe from that of the United States and, at the same time, remove whatever incentive Russia might have to reach arms control agreements to limit such missile deployments on their part. 

  Concerning this draft document which is intended to jumpstart urgent dialogue between Moscow, NATO and the US, Putin on Thursday said there’s been an agreement for both sides to meet in Geneva next month to hammer out an agreement on ‘no further NATO expansion eastward’. 

  Russia has wrapped up a modernization effort that had only partially begun in 2014.

  Moscow could use Iskander missiles to knock out Ukraine’s runways, airports, and fighters on the ground.

  And it’s already begun cyberattacks on Ukrainian networks to prepare the battlefield.

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) December 23, 2021

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

  However, the White House as of Thursday afternoon is disputing the degree to which there’s been an agreement to meet. Psaki rejected the reports of a firm meeting date in place.

  Watch the White House press secretary contradict what Putin said earlier in the day:

  .@MajorCBS presses @PressSec on potential Biden/Putin meeting: Is this Jan. time more likely than not since he aired it publicly?
  We have also said that we are looking ahead to talks in early Jan.
  Why won’t you confirm it then?
  B/c we haven’t finalized the details of them yet. pic.twitter.com/Ydrz492r4p

  — Elizabeth Campbell (@ECampbell360) December 23, 2021

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

  Meanwhile, Putin during his major end of year Q&A press conference had a severe rebuke for NATO, addressing the issue of reversing course on past promises: 

  “We are not the ones who are threatening someone. Are we the ones who went there, to the US borders, or to the borders of the United Kingdom or somewhere? They came to us, and now they still say: no, now Ukraine will join NATO as well.”

  He described further, “Not a single inch to the East – that’s what we were told in the 90s. So what? Cheated. They just cheated insolently.” He explained: “[There were] five waves of NATO enlargement. And now, please, in Romania, in Poland, there are corresponding [military] systems.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:05

• "Terrible!": CNN Turns On Biden, Highlights Horrendous Economic Polling While Making Jimmy Carter Comparisons
  “Terrible!”: CNN Turns On Biden, Highlights Horrendous Economic Polling While Making Jimmy Carter Comparisons

  CNN on Thursday spent an entire segment bashing President Biden after a poll revealed that his economic ratings are ‘worse than Jimmy Carter’s.’

  “Just how bad is it?” host John Berman asked senior data reporter Harry Enten.

  “Terrible,” Enten replied, before pointing to Biden’s net approval rating.

  

  “Look at Joe Biden in 2021. Minus 15 points. He’s well under water. That is even lower than Jimmy Carter was in a CBS News / NYT poll at the beginning of January, 1978 when he was minus 8 points.”

  “When it comes to the economy, there is pretty much nothing good that can be said about Joe Biden’s numbers, when it comes to the American public.“

  Watch:

  CNN just ENDED Biden on LIVE TV, calling his polling on the economy “TERRIBLE” and comparing him to *Jimmy Carter*

  WATCH. pic.twitter.com/lnv5kyxRDb

  — Danny De Urbina (@dannydeurbina) December 23, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 17:40

• 7 Staffers In Top Pentagon Delegation Test Positive For Covid, Despite All Being Vaxxed
  7 Staffers In Top Pentagon Delegation Test Positive For Covid, Despite All Being Vaxxed

  Despite the Pentagon recently touting that across armed services and the DoD about 97-98% of all personnel have been fully vaccinated, there’s been a new Covid outbreak among the highest ranks.

  “Seven staffers who traveled with Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks last week tested positive for COVID-19, the Pentagon announced,” according to The Hill. She’s the second highest ranking Pentagon official in the United States government, and on that trip last week had traveled to several large US military bases. 

  

  Hicks herself has so far tested negative for Covid-19, according to a follow-up statement by Pentagon press secretary John Kirby. He said that contact tracing is still ongoing. 

  “We are also contacting hotels, bases and support personnel who may have come in contact with the traveling party,” Kirby added. The high level nature of the delegation means that the infected staff members would have come into contact with top Generals and Colonels and other officers at multiple bases and command centers.

  The Hill lists that the deputy Pentagon chief visited the following: “the Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Michigan, then traveled to Colorado to visit the U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Space Command, and the U.S. Space Force Space Training and Readiness Command.”

  “Hicks also visited the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii, the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado in California; and the U.S. Strategic Command in Nebraska.”

  The staff members who tested positive are currently in quarantine, with Kirby underscoring upon announcing the small outbreak that “We continue to treat the prevention of the spread of COVID-19 with utmost seriousness and care.”

  Meanwhile, the Army, Air Force, and Marines have begun the process for discharging hundreds of service members who failed to get vaccinated by their respective branch deadlines. “The Army said it has reprimanded more than 2,700 soldiers and will begin discharge proceedings in January, while the Air Force has discharged at least 27 members,” NBC recently reported.

  The Omicron variant has begun to appear within the US military…

  NEW: More than 360,000 boosters doses or third doses have been given at DoD facilities: Pentagon official.

  DoD has detected 10 cases of the Omicron COVID-19 variant within the military health system so far, spokesman John Kirby said in emailed statement.

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) December 20, 2021

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

  But the deeply awkward irony remains, underscored in these latest infections among the Pentagon’s highest ranks: without doubt those officers and staffers traveling with Deputy Secretary Hicks were fully vaccinated – and possibly also had received the booster as well. And yet the vaccine did not prevent infection in these cases.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 17:15

• Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 2
  Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 2

  Picking up where we left off with the first five of Deutsche Bank’s Top 10 Themes For 2022, here is Part 2 of what the bank thinks will be the biggest themes of the coming year. Themes covered include i) Antitrust (or competition) renaissance; ii) The end of free money in stock markets; iii) Space: a worrying geopolitical frontier; iv) Central Bank Digital Currencies: Growing into reality and v) ESG bonds go mainstream. (click here for Part 1 which covers the following themes 1) An overheating economy; 2) Covid optimism; 3) A hypersonic labor market and inflation; 4) Corporate focus on asset efficiency; 5). Inventory glut. )

  * * *

  6. Antitrust (or competition) renaissance, by Luke Templeman

  Like it or not, US companies will likely face tougher competition in 2022. The rest of the western world is likely to follow suit. An executive order issued by President Biden in July argued that over the last several decades, “competition has weakened in too many markets”. It blamed this for widening racial, income, and wealth inequalities, as well as suppressing worker power. A “whole-of-government” effort was promised on 72 initiatives. That followed just months after the chair of the Federal Trade Commission was given to Lina Khan who is known for her work on anti-trust and competition issues.

  If Biden’s initiatives have teeth, companies may be about to witness a sharp reversal of the trend towards less competition seen over the past few decades. The following charts show just two indicators that life has become more difficult for new companies in the US.

  

  The result of diluted competition is that corporate profit margins have grown. Last quarter’s results showed that profit margins in S&P 500 companies have hit multi-decade highs (despite covid) and have almost doubled to 11.2 per cent (on a four-quarter rolling basis). That has helped corporate earnings comfortably outpace GDP over the last two decades.

  Of course, falling costs of labor and capital over the last few decades have helped boost profits. But in a textbook competitive market, these advantages should be competed out and/or passed onto customers.

  The tighter competition has been, in part, due to consolidation after rule changes in the 1980s gave corporates the confidence to ramp-up mergers and acquisitions. Hence a lower number of large firms in many markets. For instance, only a handful of mobile carriers and airlines compared with their numbers 20 years ago. Meanwhile, there is an open-ended question of whether some large technology groups stifle or promote competition. Some argue that scale delivers cheap goods to customers; other say it reduces innovation and the incentive to spend on capex and workers.

  Regardless of the reason for less competition, Biden appears to have the political will to boost it. And this desire will be undergirded by the will of workers. Post-covid, many workers, particularly low paid staff, have significantly greater bargaining power. As a result, long-standing discontent with wages lagging profits are morphing into action. Large firms, including Amazon, Disney, and McDonald’s, have all given pay rises since covid.

  So, with political will at the top supported by worker power at the bottom, the companies stuck in the middle should expect that 2022 will usher in an era of greater competition, an easier time for new entrants, and more hurdles to mega-acquisitions. It could mean that companies come to see high profit margins as an anomaly rather than the norm.

  * * *

  7. The end of free money in stock markets, Luke Templeman

  “Will the stock market crash in 2022 as the Fed tapers and likely raises rates?” While many investors fret over this question, the forgotten theme that may accompany the end of free money is not whether stock markets will crash. Rather, it is how investors may be forced, for the first time in a decade, to consider how the end of free money may reorder equity markets on the inside.

  The end of stimulus is certain to slow the money flow into equity markets. And if rising interest rates push bond yields higher, investors will have options elsewhere in bond markets and other rate-sensitive investments that have been ignored in recent years. As investments aside from equities become more appealing, frustrated active asset managers may finally witness the return of fundamental investing.

  Equity markets will be shocked by the return of fundamentals. After all, in the era of free money, many frustrated ‘value’ managers have given up. The following charts show that as markets recovered from the financial crisis, traditional ‘value’ investing became very difficult.

  The reason for the underperformance of ‘value’ is not simply explained by the outperformance of technology ‘growth’ stocks. It is also because the financial crisis catalyzed the era of super-cheap money. A significant proportion of this poured into equity markets, much through passive funds which bought the index. As a result, all stocks began to move in similar ways regardless of the profitability of the underlying companies. The following chart shows that between the 2008 financial crisis and covid, the dispersion (or spread) of stock returns disconnected from the dispersion of returns on equity. In other words, even though corporate profits were more different, their stock prices remained similar.

  

  Since covid, stock markets have flirted with the idea of once again discriminating between companies with strong and weak profitability. But the stimulus-fuelled rally has largely ended that. Investors are, once again, simply throwing their money at the entire stock market, particularly in passive funds.

  In 2022, as equity markets lose the flood of money that has propped up all stocks over the last decade, investors may be forced to become more discerning. There are signs this is beginning to happen. Postcovid, the dispersion of returns is higher than it has been in almost a decade.

  Accelerating the return of fundamentalism could be a tightening in business conditions. Wage pressure, exposure to ESG issues, and the Biden administration’s desire to increase competition, will likely have a disproportionate effect on poor quality companies that investors have hitherto propped up. That will further highlight the gap to market values and widen the differences between companies.

  None of this means overall equity markets will crash. Rather, it may lead to a reordering within equity markets as we witness the return of fundamental value investing. Finally, active managers may be back in vogue.

  * * *

  8. Space: a worrying geopolitical frontier, Galina Pozdnyakova

  Against the backdrop of rising geo-political tensions between several countries, 2022 is shaping up to be the year when tensions over the potential for the militarization of space become a top geo-political negotiation topic.

  The problem is that most parties have an incentive to avoid agreeing on new rules. Many would rather keep space as a ‘wild west’. Of course, several countries have national space laws, and international treaties such as the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 are in place. Yet they do not adequately govern modern weaponisation of space technologies. And with no consensus over boundaries and control over space objects, and blurred lines between defence and weapons systems, the risk of conflict is rising.

  The reality of the military threat in space will be amplified in 2022 as politicians digest recent high-profile events. The Russian ASAT test in November showed that the country can take down satellites – an ability also demonstrated by the US (2008), China (2007) and India (2019). Meanwhile, France recently became the fourth country to launch electromagnetic-monitoring military satellites, following the US,  China, and Russia.

  The importance of space has surged in the past few years as falling launch costs have led to an increased number of satellites in orbit and, thus, and increased dependence upon them. Aside from military uses, future conflicts will certainly target communications, GPS, and finance applications that all rely on satellites.

  

  Countries have quickly taken the military risks of space more seriously. Over autumn, QUAD leaders agreed to finalize “Space Situational Awareness Memorandum of Understanding” this year. Separately, the UK pushed a resolution on “threatening and irresponsible space behaviours” which passed the first stage at the UN and will be reviewed in December.

  Responding to the threats, new military space divisions have popped up over the last two years. Japan’s Space Operations Squadron and the UK’s Space Command were both created since 2020. They follow the creation of China’s Strategic Support Force in 2015, and the US Space Force in 2019. The latter will receive a 13 per cent budget increase in 2022.

  The 2022 completion of the Chinese space station, Tiangong, will also mark a shift in soft space power. It will increase China’s scientific research capabilities and its collaboration with other countries. The station’s advanced technologies and equipment, as well as modular design, will allow for multiple use cases. Meanwhile, the International Space Station is only approved to operate until 2024.

  So 2022 will likely be the year where space becomes the next frontier of an arms race between key global powers. Layering these issues on top of existing geopolitical tensions will create an unusual situation for world leaders. Everyone wants everyone else to play by the rules. Yet the rules of space are antiquated and there is a heavy incentive for most powers to avoid cementing new ones. The tensions above the Earth appear set to amplify tensions on it. Space threats are already becoming a topic of geo-political negotiation and, in 2022, they will likely become front-and-center.

  * * *

  9. Central Bank Digital Currencies: Growing into reality, Marion Laboure

  There is a clear move towards a cashless society (as a mean of payment) and CBDCs is set to progressively replace cash. The question is no longer « if » but « when » and « how ». Today, 86 per cent of central banks are developing a CBDC; 60 per cent are experimenting at the proof-of-concept stage. Central banks representing about a fifth of the world’s population are likely to issue a general purpose CBDC in the next two years. We believe that a large majority of countries will have a CBDC live in the next five to six years.

  Emerging economies will lead the race. They will move quicker and with higher adoption than advanced economies. The Bahamas and the Eastern Caribbean are live; China will be live in February 2022. In five years, many emerging economies will have moved; including many Asian countries. The ECB/Fed will soon start piloting projects and, if successful, are expected to be live around 2025-26. The main barriers for advanced economies are: cultural/privacy; low interest rates; older demography, heavily reliance on cards.

  A CBDC itself is not going to rebalance the international order between the US and China. But this is the Chinese global, 360 strategy with very advanced payments technologies which is creating an advantage to pay in their currencies and will continue to gain market share. China benefits from advanced payments systems (especially settlement technologies) that could change the deal and attract merchants and vendors to use this new, more efficient currency. The Chinese government has made tremendous efforts to internationalize the renminbi, like the US intervention in the early twentieth century. China aims to become a world leader in science and innovation by 2050. China is also massively investing in advanced technologies and is currently the second largest investor in artificial intelligence enterprises after the US. Indeed, China appears on track to have an “AI ecosystem” built by 2030.

  

  * * *

  10. ESG bonds go mainstream, Luke Templeman

  Amongst the many themes turbocharged by the covid catalyst, ESG bond issuance is one of the most prominent. In 2022, ESG bond issuance is set to go mainstream. Investors have taken notice. In fact, the holdings of ESG bond exchange-traded funds have tripled to over $45bn since the covid outbreak. As the chart below shows, that surge of interest follows years of very little growth.

  

  The growth of ESG bonds appears to have breached a tipping point. Not just because investors are keen to hold ESG debt, but also because corporates see that ESG issues now affect their business and investment risk. Indeed, in our recent survey, 19 per cent of corporate debt issuers say that over the last 12 months, environmental factors have impacted their rating. A smaller, but still material proportion, report that social and governance factors have had an impact.

  Now that there is a firm nexus between ESG issues and business risk, ESG instruments (primarily bonds) have become a gateway through which corporates begin to address their impact on problems like climate change. Since early last year, over half of corporates have either offered their first ESG instrument or are currently preparing to do so.

  Some of the strongest issuance in 2022 will likely be of sustainability-linked bonds. These bonds, which have quickly become very popular, generally offer corporates an interest rate discount if they hit certain ESG targets. From a base of close to zero two years ago, sustainability-linked bonds have comprised up to half the ESG bond issuance in the second half of 2021.

  Investors have quickly fallen in love with sustainability-linked bonds. Just over half of investors say these types of bonds are the most promising instrument out of a pool of ESG assets. That is over double the next highest response, which is European green bonds, with 21 per cent.

  Driving sustainability-linked bonds is the sudden growth in the number of businesses that publish quantifiable ESG performance targets. Indeed, a third of corporate debt issuers have already started to do so since 2020. A further 21 per cent will begin publishing in the next 12 months and that will leave only 6 per cent without any plans to do so.

  Aside from investor demand and published corporate targets that have laid the platform for the growth of sustainability-linked bonds in 2022, corporates have discovered the ‘signalling’ benefits. Just over 60 per cent of companies in our survey said the main benefit of their company’s ESG instrument was that it “enables us to convey our sustainability strategy”. A further 22 per cent say these instruments expand their investor base. Meanwhile, half say there are pricing benefits.

  Definitions on how to do ESG investing ‘well’ differ given the breath-taking pace at which it is evolving. Regardless, corporates and investors have now created the market for ESG bonds. With companies starting to publish specific ESG targets, it seems inevitable that in 2022 there will be a surge in issuance from corporates and strong appetite from investors.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 16:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest