Today’s News 25th December 2020

• Is "It's A Wonderful Life" The Perfect Christmas Film?
  Is “It’s A Wonderful Life” The Perfect Christmas Film?

  Authored by Alexander Larman via The Critic,

  This Christmas, more than any other, people will be slumped in front of their televisions, glass of something strong and dark in hand, looking in vain through the schedules to see if anything worthwhile is on. While some may be disappointed at the absence of festive ghost stories, entertainment will usually come down to a few old warhorses that viewers are trying to derive their annual distraction from, with the light and frothy likes of The Holiday and Love Actually vying for attention with Miracle on 34th Street or one of the innumerable versions of A Christmas Carol.

  

  Yet the more discerning will look elsewhere, and then the choice comes down to one of a couple of classics set around Christmas, namely The Apartment or It’s A Wonderful Life. Billy Wilder’s wonderfully cynical, morose and wise film grows in stature and relevance every year, fully attuned to the essential murkiness of a premise revolving around an office underling lending his apartment to his superiors for their adulterous affairs. It is (hopefully) not a picture that will have the woke brigade up in arms, as it comprehensively takes the side of the individual, flawed and pathetic though he might be, against the faceless corporate structure that has trapped him.

  As, in an entirely different way, does It’s A Wonderful Life. Yet while Wilder’s film has always been hailed as a classic, there has been a marked shift in attitudes towards Frank Capra’s picture. When it was released on 20 December 1946, it was not particularly popular, being a financial disappointment and regarded as inferior to earlier Capra films as Mr Smith Goes To Washington and the screwball comedy It Happened One Night.

  Although one might have imagined that its release coincided with a grateful nation being delighted to be free of the shackles of a lengthy, expensive and all-consuming war, something about it failed to chime with audiences or critics. Bosley Crowther, the influential critic of The New York Times, wrote:

  The weakness of this picture, from this reviewer’s point of view, is the sentimentality of it—its illusory concept of life. Mr. Capra’s nice people are charming, his small town is a quite beguiling place and his pattern for solving problems is most optimistic and facile. But somehow, they all resemble theatrical attitudes, rather than average realities.

  Thanks to a cleverly orchestrated marketing campaign, it was nominated for five Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor for its star James Stewart. It was beaten by the more obviously patriotic The Best Years of Our Lives, about American servicemen adjusting to civilian life after WWII, although Capra did win a Golden Globe for Best Director. And then it fell out of favour for three decades. It unexpectedly became a festive perennial in 1976, when it passed into the public domain and could be freely shown without expensive licensing fees. Subsequently, it has become one of the most popular films of the 20th century, and probably the best-known and most loved picture starring Stewart and directed by Capra. It is eulogised as a hymn to optimism, to family and Christmas. Why, then, does it begin with a depressed man about to kill himself?

  It is received wisdom that It’s A Wonderful Life is a sentimental exercise in all-American wish-fulfilment. As so often, received wisdom is incorrect. It is instead a more complex and nuanced film than that. It was based on a short story by the author Philip van Doren Stern, “The Greatest Gift”, which was both inspired by A Christmas Carol and, more tenuously, by the work of Edgar Allan Poe, which Stern was an expert in. The story was published at Christmas 1944, found its way to a film studio, who paid a substantial $10,000 for the rights, and, after Cary Grant turned down the leading role, ended up being made by Capra.

  In its initial, potentially Grant-starring conception, with scripts by Dalton Trumbo and the playwright Clifford Odets, the film was to revolve around a politician who had become increasingly jaded and world-weary, as he sees how compromised and unhappy he has become. After losing a vital election, he attempts to kill himself, before he is shown exactly how worthwhile and useful all of his initiatives have been by being presented with a parallel existence in which he had been a businessman rather than having followed a career in politics.

  It would have been an intriguing film, no doubt with something worthwhile to say, but Cary Grant in a picture about the necessary compromises of politics does not entirely shout out “festive cheer”. So the script was rewritten by Capra and other collaborators (who loathed him, calling him “that horrid man” and “a very arrogant son of a bitch”), Stewart was cast in the central role of George Bailey, “a Good Sam who doesn’t know that he’s a Good Sam”, with Donna Reed as his wife, and it was filmed with great character actors including Thomas Mitchell as the amiable drunk Uncle Billy, Lionel Barrymore as the villainous banker Potter and Gloria Grahame as the good-time girl Violet. The all-powerful Hays Code ensured that the film stopped short of anything other than suggestion when it came to how flirtatious Violet’s activities with Bailey, and others, were.

  The reason why It’s A Wonderful Life succeeds so admirably – but also why it may have surprised viewers on first release – is that, for a piece of heart-warming Christmas entertainment, it breaks several central rules. Not only does it begin with a scene of attempted suicide, but its storyline does not revolve around the expected narrative progression of an ordinary man being raised to greatness through hard work, luck and brilliance, but rather an ordinary man remaining ordinary, if decent, through self-sacrifice, bad luck and an unwillingness to push himself forward to the front of the queue.

  Capra contrasts George’s mundane, often difficult existence with the glamorous and successful life of his war hero brother Harry, who George saved from drowning as a child but at the cost of the hearing in his left ear. This contrast finds its grimmest apogee halfway through the film. Harry is returning to his hometown of Bedford Falls a fêted veteran, and George, who has accidentally given Potter $8000 in cash from his bank, leading to certain ruin and arrest, has decided that he must kill himself so that his family will be spared the shame that will come from his downfall.

  As iterations of the Christmas spirit go, this one is decidedly unorthodox. As a journalist acquaintance of mine wrote the other day, after watching the film for the first time, “I was expecting something warmly uplifting and what I got was ‘make peace with your shit life and your endless list of crushing disappointments, for you may have saved someone from drowning once’… the angel only appears in the last half hour anyway, the rest of it might as well be called “It’s a life of missed opportunities and regret”.

  

  Scene from Frank Capra’s, “It’s a Wonderful Life”, with Jimmy Stewart and “Clarence” the Angel, played by Henry Travers. Movie still. (Photo by John Springer Collection/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images)

  Ah yes, the angel. Where the film moves into the realms of the metaphysical is in the character of the bumbling guardian angel Clarence, who appears to George when he is on the brink of suicide, and convinces him not to kill himself by showing what would have happened had he never lived: the idyllic town of Bedford Falls is thus transformed into a sleazy, vice-ridden hell-hole called Pottersville, and George sees how his own, quiet influence has made his home town a respectable, decent place. (It would not be the modern world without at least one critic praising Pottersville as “a place of sex, women, fun … it jumps.”.)

  Yet the most affecting part of It’s A Wonderful Life comes at the conclusion, in which George finds his friends rallying round him in his distress, rescuing him from his nightmare, as his now sidelined brother toasts him as “the richest man in town”. It is a moving and heart-warming tribute to solidarity in adversity, and, at a time when most people will be stuck without friends or extended family at home this Christmas, a timely reminder that affection and loyalty can surface in the most difficult of circumstances.

  And the film’s central device, of a parallel life unfolding as its protagonist looks on before he realises that everything has, in fact, been for the best, has subsequently appeared in everything from Last Temptation of Christ to La La Land. I have my own, heretical view that Martin Scorsese intended Taxi Driver as a kind of twisted counterpoint to It’s A Wonderful Life, in which Travis Bickle, well and truly stuck in Pottersville, comes to see Jodie Foster’s teen prostitute as his very own equivalent of a friendly guardian angel, although the bloody and ironic resolution to Scorsese’s film is a million miles away from the good cheer of Capra’s.

  We are told (or threatened) that Paul McCartney is writing a musical based on the film, although given the odd tension that has existed between bland sentiment and experimental grittiness in McCartney’s post-Beatles career it is impossible to know whether it will be genuinely fascinating or deeply embarrassing. But certainly, it is unlikely to outstrip the original, itself one of the most accomplished and misunderstood films ever made. So raise a glass to life not having been quite what you wanted, because this year, of all years, that is something that everyone can fully get behind.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 23:30

• A Very COVID Christmas: Visualizing The Pandemic's Impact On Festive Spending
  A Very COVID Christmas: Visualizing The Pandemic’s Impact On Festive Spending

  From mass job losses to not seeing family and friends for months on end, the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed people to their limits in 2020.

  As an incredibly difficult year draws to a close, Visual Capitalist’s Katie Jones notes that people are starting to accept that this festive season will be anything but typical. But while a portion of consumers have reined in their spending due to financial uncertainty, others are spreading Christmas cheer by indulging in gifts for their loved ones.

  The graphic above from Raconteur explores how consumers’ festive spending in the U.S. and UK has changed as a result of the ongoing pandemic.

  

  Will the shift trigger permanent changes in the retail industry?

  Festive Budget Breakdown

  According creative agency Kinetic, half of all UK adults surveyed believe this Christmas is more important than ever before, with that figure rising to three quarters for 18-34 year olds.

  However, given consumers’ concerns over the future of the economy, they are expected to reduce spending during the festive season. In the U.S. for example, spending will decline by 7% to $1,387 per household.

  When it comes to how consumers plan to spend their hard-earned cash, some interesting insights emerge. As many have saved significantly on socializing and travel—which is down 34% year-on-year—they plan to put this money towards items for themselves instead of gifts and gift cards for others. These items include clothes, at-home entertainment, and home furnishings.

  It therefore comes as little surprise that the global online home decor market is estimated to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of almost 13% between 2020-2024 with revenue of over $80 billion.

  Dampening the Christmas Spirit?

  Unsurprisingly, over half of all U.S. consumers are anxious about shopping in-store this holiday season. The vast majority have health and safety concerns, with 71% being the most worried about dealing with others who aren’t taking the virus seriously. This is closely followed by being around, or too close to others in stores.

  Therefore, when it comes to physical shopping, people feel more comfortable in local stores or at outdoor markets and much less so in shopping malls.

  Safety in Online Shopping

  Considering this change in mindset, almost 60% of UK consumers said that they will be shopping online more this Christmas.

  Here’s a closer look at how they plan to shop differently during the 2020 holiday season:

  

  But while ecommerce sales are expected to spike over Christmas, delivery speeds and shipping delays are also major concerns for consumers. As a result, many of them started their shopping much earlier this year to avoid disappointment. In fact, over half of all UK shoppers had started their Christmas shopping before November had even arrived.

  Bidding Adieu to 2020

  The end to a painful year for many can’t come soon enough. But boarded-up storefronts, and “for sale” signs serve as a harsh reminder of the fragility of the retail sector and its reliance on consumer sentiment.

  Even as we march forward guided by the hope of an effective vaccine, the future of retail remains uncertain. For consumers, their confidence will build once more, but how they choose to spend their money following the festive season will be more important for businesses and the economy than ever before.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 23:00

• What If Jesus Had Been Born In The American Police State?
  What If Jesus Had Been Born In The American Police State?

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “When the song of the angels is stilled, when the star in the sky is gone, when the kings and princes are home, when the shepherds are back with their flocks, the work of Christmas begins: to find the lost, to heal the broken, to feed the hungry, to release the prisoner, to rebuild the nations, to bring peace among the people, to make music in the heart.”

  – Howard Thurman

  The Christmas story of a baby born in a manger is a familiar one.

  The Roman Empire, a police state in its own right, had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any of the inns, they stayed in a stable (a barn), where Mary gave birth to a baby boy, Jesus. Warned that the government planned to kill the baby, Jesus’ family fled with him to Egypt until it was safe to return to their native land.

  Yet what if Jesus had been born 2,000 years later?

  

  What if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, Jesus had been born at this moment in time? What kind of reception would Jesus and his family be given? Would we recognize the Christ child’s humanity, let alone his divinity? Would we treat him any differently than he was treated by the Roman Empire? If his family were forced to flee violence in their native country and sought refuge and asylum within our borders, what sanctuary would we offer them?

  A singular number of churches across the country have asked those very questions in recent years, and their conclusions were depicted with unnerving accuracy by nativity scenes in which Jesus and his family are separated, segregated and caged in individual chain-link pens, topped by barbed wire fencing.

  Those nativity scenes were a pointed attempt to remind the modern world that the narrative about the birth of Jesus is one that speaks on multiple fronts to a world that has allowed the life, teachings and crucifixion of Jesus to be drowned out by partisan politics, secularism, materialism and war, all driven by a manipulative shadow government called the Deep State.

  The modern-day church has largely shied away from applying Jesus’ teachings to modern problems such as war, poverty, immigration, etc., but thankfully there have been individuals throughout history who ask themselves and the world: what would Jesus do?

  What would Jesus—the baby born in Bethlehem who grew into an itinerant preacher and revolutionary activist, who not only died challenging the police state of his day (namely, the Roman Empire) but spent his adult life speaking truth to power, challenging the status quo of his day, and pushing back against the abuses of the Roman Empire—do about the injustices of our  modern age?

  Dietrich Bonhoeffer asked himself what Jesus would have done about the horrors perpetrated by Hitler and his assassins. The answer: Bonhoeffer was executed by Hitler for attempting to undermine the tyranny at the heart of Nazi Germany.

  Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn asked himself what Jesus would have done about the soul-destroying gulags and labor camps of the Soviet Union. The answer: Solzhenitsyn found his voice and used it to speak out about government oppression and brutality.

  Martin Luther King Jr. asked himself what Jesus would have done about America’s warmongering. The answer: declaring “my conscience leaves me no other choice,” King risked widespread condemnation when he publicly opposed the Vietnam War on moral and economic grounds.

  Even now, despite the popularity of the phrase “What Would Jesus Do?” (WWJD) in Christian circles, there remains a disconnect in the modern church between the teachings of Christ and the suffering of what Jesus in Matthew 25 refers to as the “least of these.”

  Yet this is not a theological gray area: Jesus was unequivocal about his views on many things, not the least of which was charity, compassion, war, tyranny and love.

  After all, Jesus—the revered preacher, teacher, radical and prophet—was born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of the American police state. When he grew up, he had powerful, profound things to say, things that would change how we view people, alter government policies and change the world. “Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and “Love your enemies” are just a few examples of his most profound and revolutionary teachings.

  When confronted by those in authority, Jesus did not shy away from speaking truth to power. Indeed, his teachings undermined the political and religious establishment of his day. It cost him his life. He was eventually crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.

  Can you imagine what Jesus’ life would have been like if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, he had been born and raised in the American police state?

  Consider the following if you will.

  Had Jesus been born in the era of the America police state, rather than traveling to Bethlehem for a census, Jesus’ parents would have been mailed a 28-page American Community Survey, a mandatory government questionnaire documenting their habits, household inhabitants, work schedule, how many toilets are in your home, etc. The penalty for not responding to this invasive survey can go as high as $5,000.

  Instead of being born in a manger, Jesus might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and shepherds bringing gifts, however, the baby’s parents might have been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on prosecuting them for the home birth. One couple in Washington had all three of their children removed after social services objected to the two youngest being birthed in an unassisted home delivery.

  Had Jesus been born in a hospital, his blood and DNA would have been taken without his parents’ knowledge or consent and entered into a government biobank. While most states require newborn screening, a growing number are holding onto that genetic material long-term for research, analysis and purposes yet to be disclosed.

  Then again, had Jesus’ parents been undocumented immigrants, they and the newborn baby might have been shuffled to a profit-driven, private prison for illegals where they first would have been separated from each other, the children detained in make-shift cages, and the parents eventually turned into cheap, forced laborers for corporations such as Starbucks, Microsoft, Walmart, and Victoria’s Secret. There’s quite a lot of money to be made from imprisoning immigrants, especially when taxpayers are footing the bill.

  From the time he was old enough to attend school, Jesus would have been drilled in lessons of compliance and obedience to government authorities, while learning little about his own rights. Had he been daring enough to speak out against injustice while still in school, he might have found himself tasered or beaten by a school resource officer, or at the very least suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that punishes minor infractions as harshly as more serious offenses.

  Had Jesus disappeared for a few hours let alone days as a 12-year-old, his parents would have been handcuffed, arrested and jailed for parental negligence. Parents across the country have been arrested for far less “offenses” such as allowing their children to walk to the park unaccompanied and play in their front yard alone.

  Rather than disappearing from the history books from his early teenaged years to adulthood, Jesus’ movements and personal data—including his biometrics—would have been documented, tracked, monitored and filed by governmental agencies and corporations such as Google and Microsoft. Incredibly, 95 percent of school districts share their student records with outside companies that are contracted to manage data, which they then use to market products to us.

  From the moment Jesus made contact with an “extremist” such as John the Baptist, he would have been flagged for surveillance because of his association with a prominent activist, peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11, the FBI has actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations on a broad range of activist groups, from animal rights groups to poverty relief, anti-war groups and other such “extremist” organizations.

  Jesus’ anti-government views would certainly have resulted in him being labeled a domestic extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

  While traveling from community to community, Jesus might have been reported to government officials as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” programs. Many states, including New York, are providing individuals with phone apps that allow them to take photos of suspicious activity and report them to their state Intelligence Center, where they are reviewed and forwarded to law-enforcement agencies.

  Rather than being permitted to live as an itinerant preacher, Jesus might have found himself threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping outside. In fact, the number of cities that have resorted to criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping, sleeping in vehicles, loitering and begging in public has doubled.

  Viewed by the government as a dissident and a potential threat to its power, Jesus might have had government spies planted among his followers to monitor his activities, report on his movements, and entrap him into breaking the law. Such Judases today—called informants—often receive hefty paychecks from the government for their treachery.

  Had Jesus used the internet to spread his radical message of peace and love, he might have found his blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine his integrity, discredit him or plant incriminating information online about him. At the very least, he would have had his website hacked and his email monitored.

  Had Jesus attempted to feed large crowds of people, he would have been threatened with arrest for violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food without a permit. Florida officials arrested a 90-year-old man for feeding the homeless on a public beach.

  Had Jesus spoken publicly about his 40 days in the desert and his conversations with the devil, he might have been labeled mentally ill and detained in a psych ward against his will for a mandatory involuntary psychiatric hold with no access to family or friends. One Virginia man was arrested, strip searched, handcuffed to a table, diagnosed as having “mental health issues,” and locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait.

  Without a doubt, had Jesus attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and rage against the materialism of religious institutions, he would have been charged with a hate crime. Currently, 45 states and the federal government have hate crime laws on the books.

  Had anyone reported Jesus to the police as being potentially dangerous, he might have found himself confronted—and killed—by police officers for whom any perceived act of non-compliance (a twitch, a question, a frown) can result in them shooting first and asking questions later.

  Rather than having armed guards capture Jesus in a public place, government officials would have ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on Jesus and his followers, complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are upwards of 80,000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year, many on unsuspecting Americans who have no defense against such government invaders, even when such raids are done in error.

  Instead of being detained by Roman guards, Jesus might have been made to “disappear” into a secret government detention center where he would have been interrogated, tortured and subjected to all manner of abuses. Chicago police have “disappeared” more than 7,000 people into a secret, off-the-books interrogation warehouse at Homan Square.

  Charged with treason and labeled a domestic terrorist, Jesus might have been sentenced to a life-term in a private prison where he would have been forced to provide slave labor for corporations or put to death by way of the electric chair or a lethal mixture of drugs.

  Indeed, as I show in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, given the nature of government then and now, it is painfully evident that whether Jesus had been born in our modern age or his own, he still would have died at the hands of a police state.

  Thus, as we draw near to Christmas with its celebrations and gift-giving, we would do well to remember that what happened on that starry night in Bethlehem is only part of the story. That baby in the manger grew up to be a man who did not turn away from evil but instead spoke out against it, and we must do no less.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 22:30

• Crappy Holidays & Other Economic Carols For 2020
  Crappy Holidays & Other Economic Carols For 2020

  While singing of all sorts is officially off the table in Newsom’s Californiastan, the kind gentle folk at BMO Capital Markets offer the following ‘Economic Carols’ for your entertainment…

  

  It’s Beginning To Look A Lot Like Stimulus

  (sung to the tune of It’s Beginning To Look A Lot Like Christmas)

  It’s beginning to look a lot like stimulus
  Everywhere you go;
  Tossing out fives and tens, in billions once again
  With CRB and EI still to flow

  It’s beginning to look a lot like stimulus,
  Nobody in the store,
  But the prettiest sight to see is the CEWS cheque that will be
  On your own front door.

  More federal transfers and stabilization money
  Is the wish of Kenney and Ford;
  Wealth taxes and basic income
  With the NDP strikes a chord;
  And Bay Street can hardly wait
  for a fiscal anchor thrown overboard.

  It’s beginning to look a lot like stimulus,
  Everywhere you go;
  There’s vacancy in the hotel, and in the condo as well,
  But credit continues to flow.

  It’s beginning to look a lot like stimulus,
  Soon the expansion will start,
  And the question it will bring to investors with a ring:
  Will our credit rating fall apart?

  – Robert Kavcic

  Here Comes Tesla Stock

  (sung to the tune of Here Comes Santa Claus)

  Here comes Tesla Stock, here comes Tesla Stock,
  right down S&P Lane
  Apple and Amazon and all the tech names
  pulling on the reins
  Bells are ringing, traders singing, all is merry and bright
  So load your orders and say your prayers,
  ’cause Tesla Stock joins tonight

  Here comes Tesla Stock, here comes Tesla Stock,
  right down S&P Lane
  It’s got a bag that’s filled with cars for boys and girls again
  See those EVs pullin’ past you, oh what a beautiful sight
  So jump in bed and cover your head,
  ’cause Tesla Stock joins tonight

  Here comes Tesla Stock, here comes Tesla Stock,
  right down S&P Lane
  It doesn’t care if you’re rich or poor, it loves you just the same
  Tesla Stock knows we’re all good indexers,
  that makes everything right
  So close your eyes and buy it dear,
  ’cause Tesla Stock joins tonight

  Here comes Tesla Stock, here comes Tesla Stock,
  right down S&P Lane
  It’ll come around when chimes ring out
  that its P/E is soarin’ again
  Tracking Error will come to none if we just follow it tight
  So let’s give thanks to the lithium car,
  ’cause Tesla Stock joins tonight

  – Douglas Porter

  I’ll Be Home For Christmas

  I’ll be home for Christmas
  You can count on me
  Please have food and firewood
  And all else by delivery

  Christmas eve will find me
  Where the TV light gleams
  I’ll be (most definitely) home for Christmas
  Not only in my dreams

  I’ll be (no real options) home for Christmas
  That is the reality
  Those in T-O, and all Ontario
  Will stack pizza boxes by the tree

  Christmas eve will find me
  Gazing blankly at the screens
  I’ll be (where else?) home for Christmas
  Not only in my dreams

  – Douglas Porter

  Housing Wonderland

  (sung to the tune of Winter Wonderland)

  Door bells ring
  Are you listening
  In the main
  Prices are glistening
  A startling sight
  Owners are happy tonight
  Walking in a housing wonderland

  Gone away is the commuter
  Here to stay is a new bird
  It sings a new song
  As we telework along
  Walking in a housing wonderland

  In the city we can build a condo
  Then pretend that folks will stick around
  They’ll say: Are you crazy?
  We’ll say: Yes man
  As you can do the job from out of town

  Later on
  We’ll aspire
  As we lift prices higher
  To face unafraid
  The debts that we’ve made
  Walking in a housing wonderland

  In the suburbs we can build a mansion
  And pretend the market won’t slow down
  We’ll have lots of fun with mister mansion
  Until the bill collectors come around

  When Covid goes
  Ain’t it thrilling
  Though your rate gets a climbing
  We’ll panic and pay
  Bid prices up and away
  Walking in a housing wonderland

  – Sal Guatieri

  Blue Brexit

  (sung to the tune of Blue Christmas)

  I’ll have a blue Brexit without EU
  I’ll be so blue just leaving without EU
  Governance, subsidies; can’t forget those fisheries
  Won’t be the same, if Brussels is not here with me

  And when those blue tariffs start risin’
  That’s when those blue growth rates start fallin’
  We’ll be doin’ all right, in Tier 3 lockdown Christmas night
  But I’ll have a blue, blue, blue, blue Brexit

  – Jennifer Lee

  Crappy Holidays

  (sung to the tune of Happy Holidays)

  Crappy Holiday
  Crappy Holiday
  While the lockdown bells keep ringing
  May your larders be well stocked

  Crappy Holiday
  Crappy Holiday
  May the calendar stop bringing
  Crappy Holidays to you

  It’s the holiday season
  And Ursula is coming ’round
  The Recovery Fund is off of the ground
  When Pres. Lagarde gets into town
  She’ll be coming down the chimney, down
  Coming down the chimney, down

  It’s the holiday season
  And Rishi Sunak has got a scheme
  For furloughed workers who need more esteem
  But borrowing soared the Labour Party did scream
  He’ll be coming down the chimney, down
  Coming down the chimney, down

  BoJo wants some big trade deals, and some for steel
  And lots of goodies for you and for me
  So leave the talks, no deal… we walk
  With our financial industry

  It’s the holiday season
  With the whoop-de-do and hickory dock
  And don’t forget to hang up your sock
  ’Cause just exactly at 12 o’clock
  We’ll be leaving the customs union
  Leaving the customs union
  Leaving the customs union, down!

  – Jennifer Lee

  Bitcoin the Crypto Currency: Redux

  (sung to the tune of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer)

  You know Zcash and SwiftCoin
  And Ethereum and IOTA
  Monero and Lite Coin
  And Dash and Ripple
  But do you recall
  The most famous Crypto of all?

  Bitcoin the crypto currency
  Had a very rapid rise
  And if you ever saw it
  You couldn’t wear all the gold it now buys
  All of the other currencies
  Used to laugh and call it names
  They never let poor Bitcoin
  Play in any currency games

  Then one rocky COVID year
  CME came to say
  Bitcoin with your blockchain air tight
  Won’t you join our trading platform tonight?

  Then all the traders loved it
  Even as some shouted out “Ponzi”
  “Bitcoin the crypto currency
  You’ll come back one day, just see!”

  – Douglas Porter

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 22:00

• Global Outrage Follows Trump Pardons Of Blackwater Mercenaries Who Killed 17 Iraqis
  Global Outrage Follows Trump Pardons Of Blackwater Mercenaries Who Killed 17 Iraqis

  Authored by Brett Wilkins via via CommonDreams.org,

  A senior United Nations human rights official on Wednesday added her voice to the chorus of condemnation of President Donald Trump’s pardons for four U.S. mercenaries convicted of massacring 17 Iraqi civilians in 2007. 

  Marta Hurtado, a spokesperson for the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), said in statement that the agency is “deeply concerned” by Trump’s December 22 pardon of former Blackwater guards Paul Slough, Evan Liberty, Dustin Heard, and Nicholas Slatten. The four men were sentenced to 12 years to life in prison for crimes including for first-degree murder for their roles in the September 16, 2007 Nisour Square massacre in central Baghdad.  “Pardoning them contributes to impunity and has the effect of emboldening others to commit such crimes in the future,” Hurtado said of the Blackwater guards. 

  

  “By investigating these crimes and completing legal proceedings, the U.S. complied with its obligations under international law,” she added. “The U.N. Human Rights Office calls on the U.S. to renew its commitment to fighting impunity for gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law, as well as to uphold its obligations to ensure accountability for such crimes.”

  In one of the most publicized crimes of the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, Blackwater mercenaries were escorting a diplomatic convoy when, apparently unprovoked, they opened fire in the crowded square with machine guns, grenade launchers, and other weapons in broad daylight. 

  “The shooting started like rain,” recalled survivor Fareed Walid Hassan, who said he witnessed a woman dragging her dead young son as she fled for her life. Another victim, Mohassin Kadhim, was shot dead as she shielded her son in her arms.

  Survivor Mohammed Kinani’s son Ali, age 9, was shot in the head as they sat in their car.

  As Donald Trump tonight pardons Blackwater contractors convicted of murdering Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square, Iraq, it’s worth (re)watching my rather intense exchange with Blackwater founder Erik Prince on this very issue, back in 2019, on @AJHeadtoHead:pic.twitter.com/7f4unXn1zz

  — Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) December 23, 2020

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

  “I was standing in shock looking at him as the door opened, and his brain fell on the ground between my feet,” Kinani said.

  When the shooting finally stopped after 15 horrific minutes, 17 Iraqis—men, women, and children; people fleeing in cars and on foot; a man with his arms raised in surrender—lay dead. Twenty others were injured, some severely, including one victim wounded by a grenade launched into a nearby girls’ school.

  As Common Dreams reported Wednesday, Trump’s pardon of the convicted war criminals was roundly condemned by peace activists, journalists, progressive politicians, prosecutors, and others.

  Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, tweeted Tuesday that “Trump could have pardoned whistleblowers Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden. Instead he chose to pardon four Blackwater mercenaries who murdered 17 Iraqi civilians, including two boys [aged] 8 and 11, in an unprovoked attack on a crowd of unarmed people.”

  By pardoning war criminals (Blackwater) over whistleblowers (Assange), Trump missed a huge opportunity to sell himself as anti-establishment.

  — Max Abrahms (@MaxAbrahms) December 23, 2020

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

  Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner lamented in an MSNBC interview that “it seems like there’s no line Donald Trump won’t cross.”

  “To this old prosecutor, it feels like what he just did was like an indiscriminate drive-by on the rule of law,” Kirschner continued. “I mean, he pardons people who are lying to the FBI as part of the Russia probe. He pardons Republicans who were either stealing from their donors, committing campaign finance violations, or engaged in insider training.” 

  Take a look at this story about Dustin Heard, one of the four Blackwater murderers pardoned yesterday. One interesting thing about this decision is that you find, on the few sites still allowing comments, a LOT of disgust and shock from US Iraq vets…https://t.co/21bxgwgLnh pic.twitter.com/2Zf4aIgPqv

  — The War Nerd (@TheWarNerd) December 24, 2020

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

  “What galls me the most and hits home for me personally is [that]… these four Blackwater contractors… slaughtered innocent, unarmed, Iraqi men, women, and children,” he added.

  “That was prosecuted… three times by my former office, the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia. The lead prosecutor, a gentleman named Pat Martin, is somebody I tried murder cases with. He poured his heart and soul into fighting for justice for those Iraqi victims.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 21:30

• Ex-Apple Engineer Unveils "Glitterbomb 3.0" Device To Combat Porch Pirates 
  Ex-Apple Engineer Unveils “Glitterbomb 3.0” Device To Combat Porch Pirates 

  This year has been awfully stressful for retailers and package delivery companies, strained by the virus pandemic surge in e-commerce. About three billion packages will traverse the country’s shipping infrastructure this year – about 800 million more than last year, leaving many packages, once delivered to consumers, susceptible to porch pirates. 

  Former NASA and Apple engineer Mark Rober spent the last three years developing the “Glitterbomb” device to combat porch pirates or anyone who steals packages from doorsteps. 

  Evolution Of The Glitterbomb Device 

  

  Days ago, Rober released the “Glitterbomb 3.0” in a YouTube video, which he explains holds more glitter, has four canisters of fart sprays, added LED strobes, wireless charging on a doormat, and handles laced with glue. 

  

  The goal of the Glitterbomb 3.0 is to bait and track porch pirates with the device’s GPS and record the moment when thieves open the box, disguised as Bose headphones. 

  

  Rober said he sent the Glitterbomb 3.0 to “houses all across America” to capture porch pirates. 

  The fun begins around the seven-minute mark of the video, where scenes of people stealing the box from porches transitions to them opening it at home. 

  When the porch pirates open the box, a glitter bomb explodes, putting them in a daze. Then the device sprays them with skunk spray and blinds them with ultra-bright LEDs, while cameras embedded within capture and log the video onto the cloud as GPS logs their location. 

  So how do you buy one of these things? 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 21:00

• Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch Sells For Paltry $22 Million After $100M Listing
  Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch Sells For Paltry $22 Million After $100M Listing

  The late ‘King of Pop’ Michael Jackson’s iconic (but more recently notorious and infamous) 2,700 acre Neverland Ranch has sold for $22 million after it initially listed in 2015 for $100 million. 

  According to the Wall Street Journal this week, public records reveal it’s been bought by former Jackson business associate and billionaire Ron Burkle. Jackson died in 2009 at the age of 50 officially of acute propofol and benzodiazepine intoxication, the dangerous hospital-grade drug cocktail he would use to be put to sleep by his doctor, who was later convicted of involuntary manslaughter over the death.

  

  Neverland Ranch for years induced awe and curiosity among the public as it not only had its own amusement park complete with Ferris wheel, a merry-go-round, and railroad, but a small zoo as well. It also had its own staff. Modeled as a fantasyland and replete with children’s toys, all based on “Peter Pan”, Jackson purchased it in 1987 for an estimated $19.5 million.

  The WSJ noted that the ranch has gone through a series of price drops over the past years. No doubt this is likely due its being associated with multiple child molestation allegations and scandals centered on Jackson during the last decade of his life: 

  “The property, located about 40 miles from Santa Barbara, had been on and off the market for years, first listing for $100 million in 2015 and undergoing several price cuts. It was listed for $31 million last year, The Wall Street Journal reported.

  Mr. Jackson’s estate co-owned the ranch with a fund managed by Colony Capital , a real-estate investment trust. Amid financial struggles, Mr. Jackson had defaulted on a loan backed by the ranch and Colony bought the note in 2008, putting the property’s title into a joint venture it formed with the pop star.”

  Neverland Ranch was first raided and searched extensively by police related to the 2005 People vs. Jackson trial, in which he’d been accused of molesting a 13-year old boy in 2003. Though he was acquitted in that case he later settled for a massive sum in another case, and possibly when other accusers came forward as well.

  The 2003 documentary Living with Michael Jackson is what triggered authorities to take a closer look at the multiple allegations then surfacing, which included scandalous footage of Jackson holding a teenage boy close while they clasped hands.

  EXCLUSIVE: Ron Burkle, a onetime associate of Michael Jackson and co-founder of Yucaipa Cos., has bought the late pop star’s onetime Neverland Ranch for $22 million. https://t.co/ej2fvxntJK via @WSJ

  — Katherine Clarke (@KathyClarkeNYC) December 24, 2020

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

  After this and subsequent allegations he had molested children at the ranch, and with widespread attention paid to the scenario of him using the enticing fantasy world environment to lure unsuspecting families and their children there by personal invitation, he stopped living there altogether by the mid-2000s.

  This was further driven home by the 2019 Netflix true crime documentary series Leaving Neverland in which Wade Robson and James Safechuck described years of sexual abuse in horrifying detail. Much of it took place on the ranch. Upon Jackson’s death there were reports that his will bestowed the ranch to a family trust.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 20:30

• Russia Reopens Soviet-Era Lab To Develop Weapons For Arctic Sub-Zero Conditions
  Russia Reopens Soviet-Era Lab To Develop Weapons For Arctic Sub-Zero Conditions

  Russia is believed to be greatly expanding and beefing up its ability to wage warfare in extreme cold and icy conditions after it was announced Thursday that a Soviet-era laboratory has been reconstituted and newly opened in order to test weapons in Arctic weather.

  “The Central Scientific-Research Institute for Precision Machine Engineering, that makes weapons for Russia’s military, said it had restored testing chambers to simulate extreme conditions,” Reuters reports of the facility which was shut down since the the end of the Soviet Union in 1991. 

  

  The Institute issued a press release saying “the certification is the final step towards restoring this unique technological capability that had been lost after the fall of the USSR.” The complex’s test chambers will actually be able to simulate a variety of conditions to also include extreme heat as well as wet weather.

  Russian media cited a senior technician, Sergei Karasev, as detailing further:

  He said the test site will begin work on a number of weapons, including rifles, specially-made grenade launchers and small caliber cannons in “extreme temperatures” as low as minus 60 degrees.

  The conditions are designed to mimic environments like the Arctic, but the facility will also recreate a number of other potential battlefields. Tests to see whether weapons can withstand tropical climes will be carried out in a combined heat and rain chamber, while a dust chamber mimics the pressures that deserts exert on firing mechanisms.

  Typically when temperatures reach such extremes as minus 60 degrees Celsius, cars and machinery break down unless they are specially outfitted to operate in the extreme cold. 

  Without extensive protections even a person’s face can become frostbitten in just minutes after being exposed to such temperatures. 

  The post-Cold War picture of Russia as weak and declining is outdated. Today’s Russia is formidable in cyberspace and a resurgent global power, from Crimea to Syria to the Arctic and beyond, writes Kathryn E. Stoner. https://t.co/1t0L8EErBK

  — The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) December 23, 2020

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

  In remote locations like Russia’s Sakha Republic (Yakutia) for example, schools, colleges and public places will only stay open until temperatures as low as -52°C, but upon reaching that limit will shut down for safety reasons.

  Much standard military equipment would also not work properly in these conditions, hence Russia’s focus on developing and testing weapons that are optimal in Arctic conditions. The plan is to also simulate how battlefield tactics would change in extreme and varied conditions.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 20:00

• Luongo: End The Great American Myth – Secession, Not Revolution
  Luongo: End The Great American Myth – Secession, Not Revolution

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  I remember the 1970’s driving around New York City with my family during the holidays like they were yesterday.

  Back then the talk in the front seat of the car between my parents was New York City’s bankruptcy. My dad, NYPD at the time, was as much a part of this as anyone since the Police pension fund helped bail out the city government back then.

  The West Side Highway fell down and because of that I grew up with a fear of heights and, especially bridges. I really hated taking the back way (New Jersey) into Staten Island. The mere mention of the Outer Bridge crossing would nearly put me into a panic attack.

  I remember thinking then, “If these people can’t pay the bills now, what’s it going to be in ten or twenty years?” Sure, I was a naive ten or eleven at the time and had no idea about capital flight, but the sentiment was sound.

  Even then the Emperor was naked to this child’s eyes. This was Rome near the end and the Sword of Damocles hung over the heads of my generation in ways we could barely articulate.

  So, for me, the idea of the U.S. breaking up into its component parts has been a constant companion most of my adult life. And, as a libertarian, I always think in terms of secession first, rather than revolution. It sits on my shoulder whispering in my ear the truth of what’s in front of us.

  We’ve reached a very important moment in world history. It is that moment where the promises of classical liberalism are failing in the face of a creeping totalitarian nightmare.

  America as mythology has always stood as the ‘shining house on the hill’ for this enlightened idea that the wishes of the individual pursuing his bliss creates the community and culture which lifts the world out of a Hobbesian State of Nature.

  The war of all against all, (bellum omnium contra omnes).

  

  But America as Mythology and America as Reality are two vastly different rough beasts. And it is that difference between them that is being exploited today by The Davos Crowd to set the process in motion for their next victory.

  Brandon Smith at Alt-Market brought up the trap conservatives are being led into today in his recent article. He argues, quite persuasively, that the ‘right’ is being radicalized into thinking about an armed civil war to fight the corporatist left-wing useful idiots in an orgy of violence.

  To be clear, what I believe is happening is that conservatives are being prodded and provoked, not to separate and organize but to centralize. I think they want us to support actions like martial law which would be considered totalitarian. Conservatives, the only stalwart defenders of civil liberties, using military suppression and abandoning the Bill of Rights to maintain political power? That is a dream come true for the globalists in the long term. And despite people’s faith in Trump, there are far too many banking elites and globalists within his cabinet to ensure that such power will not be abused or used against us later.

  Nothing would give Klaus Schwab and The Davos Crowd more pleasure than turning us into them — willing to use indiscriminate violence to push otherwise humble and decent people into crazed killers and repudiate their inherent meekness, their inherent desire to pursue their bliss, allowing everyone else that same courtesy.

  But, leftism as practiced today, is aggressive. It is rapacious and rests on the idea that no one can exist outside their preferred outcome lest anyone see their world for the nightmare it truly is.

  Secession is not only not an option, it is expressly verboten.

  I’ve made the argument that violence, not secession, is one very possible outcome of where the current political divide is taking us. Brandon uses the situation in Germany in the 1920s/30s as his historical guide. In short, Fascism rose to meet the violence of the Communists with the old monied elite providing the means for the conflict.

  The parallels to today are striking. In November’s issue of Gold Goats ‘n Guns I likened the rising frustration of the American right to that of the Fremen Jihad of Frank Herbert’s classic Dune.

  When you marginalize the tens of millions of people who produce the goods which sustain their false reality, when you remove their ability to speak their mind and make their voices heard, when you insult them, berate them, hector them and beat them then you will bear the consequences when the sleeper awakens, in Herbert’s words.

  This isn’t a threat or an open letter of defiance. This is an observation of what always comes next. These people know that they have been lied to, their children spiritually separated from them. The election was a cruel joke meant to rub our noses in their complete power over us. You can
  see it every day on Twitter.

  What comes next will benothing short of a Fremenesque jihad by the 70+ million people who voted for Donald Trump. If his allies prove the systematic thievery of the election it will fuel a simmering anger to boiling over into a near-religious frenzy.

  Because these are people who still believe in the Mythology of America, they are very susceptible to this programming. That mythology is worth fighting for in their minds.

  Brandon Smith, however, is making a finer point which I tend to agree with. And that is that secession, not revolution, is always the better option rather than the pre-packaged violent one which the oligarchs always seem to prepare for us.

  To broaden Brandon’s point, I want to challenge the precepts of that American mythology in the hope we can avoid the kind of religious war that is brewing.

  There are two wars which bear most of the weight of that mythology — The American Revolution and the U.S. Civil War.

  The first one is the good war. It is the foundation of the mythology. We know the narrative: brave colonials fought a war of independence, a war of secession, from the evil English. It brought forth the Founding Fathers, the Declaration of Independence and all the symbology of our shared American identity.

  That mythology, while simplistic, held a core truth, that there are some things worth fighting for, when pushed to an extreme.

  However, was 1770’s America that extreme a place? Was war the only practical outcome? Or was it the dream of those men whose tolerance for tyranny shallower than the norm. In other words, could America have seceded more peacefully in ten or twenty years’ time?

  Viewed that way, this was a war of secession that the English and the Colonies didn’t have to fight. There may have been an equitable way out of conflict. But the colonies chose war just as much as the Crown did if we’re being honest with ourselves.

  The Civil War, on the other hand, is supposed to be the shameful one. And from the Mythology side it truly is. Lincoln’s war can only be characterized as a war to prevent secession in the same way that Crown fought to prevent the colonies from seceding.

  The mythology states this was the war we had to fight to prevent slavery’s survival into the 20th century. But, was it that? Slavery may have been a dividing line to stoke the passions but it wasn’t the big factor driving the states apart, the Tariff of Abomination was.

  Again, if we’re being honest with ourselves wasn’t Lincoln’s war where the ideals of the American Revolution – a compact between the sovereign states – were finally betrayed?

  Aren’t we reaping the whirlwind of that war today with a Supreme Court who believes it has the power to ignore interstate grievances because none of the justices, even Thomas and Alito, believe in the compact of equals today?

  Remember, the South was more than willing to leave in peace. And any reasons Lincoln had for fighting the war over the seizure of Federal property, i.e. the proximate cause for the events at Fort Sumter, could have been worked out, again, equitably as gentlemen, rather than through the butchering of 600,000 Americans over four years.

  From the Mythology Lincoln is the Great Uniter and Buchanan, his predecessor, the Worst President in History simply because he refused to either bail out the railroad banks in 1857 or prevent the South’s secession in 1860.

  What if the mythology of America today has these two wars backwards? What if all the conservatives mourning the Constitution today thanks to a feckless Supreme Court and treasonous Congress have it all wrong? What if the America they mourn the death of today died in 1865 not 2020?

  Would that America still be worth finally fighting a bloody civil war for? Because that’s what The Davos Crowd is daring Donald Trump to do.

  What if the better response is to do what the South tried to do and failed.

  Simply walk away and say, “No more.”

  Because fighting the bloody war of all against all, becoming raving fascists rising up to stop the rapacious (and economically backwards) communists in the process is always the wrong option.

  Secession is always an option. Opting out of the hyper-collectivizing impulses of in-group/out-group bias is always the right choice. They want us to throw the first punch, to lash out, fire first out of fear, c.f. Fort Sumter, to justify their brutality afterwards.

  But, as I said in the quote above, the states with the grievances today are the ones that produce the wealth of this fiction known as the U.S. It’s where the food is grown, the electricity generated, the goods produced and people aren’t shitting in the streets.

  The food lines may be long in Texas but there’s still food to distribute.

  The balance of power in the U.S. today in real terms is reverse of what existed in 1860. Post-Trump America looks a lot different than pre-Lincoln.

  Because of that and the reality that the people pulling off this great coup against sanity are some of the most unimpressive leaders in history, the potential for a successful secession is far higher than it was for the Confederacy.

  Brandon Smith is right that they invoke the Confederacy to shame conservatives as racists, conflating issues separated by more than 150 years of history. This is why the all-out assault on the history of the war, whitewashing it of any nuance.

  Theirs is a mind-virus that grows beyond the ability of the oligarchy to control. And it is truly best to not just walk but run away from such people. Better to let them sink into their own cesspit of ideological rabbit holes while keeping the lines of trade open, if they have anything worth selling, of course.

  They will turn on themselves soon enough.

  Having grown up a Yankee and matured as a Southerner I’ve seen this descent of the American mythology from both perspectives. The eleven year-old me knew this day would come.

  The Mythology of America is just that, mythology, worth using as the basis for the new story rather than a shackle keeping us chained down, staring at the Abyss and despairing at what was lost.

  New York was a dream not a fixture in the night sky. God didn’t put his finger on the Empire State Building and spin the world.

  Because Texas was too big for it to ever stay in balance, even if he did. And California is one bad day away from Big One which washes it from our memory.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you are ready to stop mourning America and start rebuilding something better.

  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  LTC: MWWdCHbMmn1yuyMSZX55ENJnQo8DXCFg5k
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  XMR: 48Whbhyg8TNXiNV2LNkjeuJJU55CNt5m1XDtP3jWZK2xf5GNsbU2ZwHLDJTQ5oTU3uaJPN8oQooRpSQ2CPMJvX8pVTqthmu

  Brave – click the Triangle on your Brave Search Bar

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 19:30

• US Refugee Admissions At All-Time Low In 2020
  US Refugee Admissions At All-Time Low In 2020

  In the 2020 fiscal year, only around 3,000 people were granted asylum in the United States – an all-time-low, according to numbers by the U.S. Department of State. 

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, the number is lower than in the years 2002 and 2003, shortly after the passing of the Patriot Act, when the U.S. still received 27,000 and 28,000 refugees, respectively.

  The maximum number of refugees the U.S. is accepting has been further slashed to 18,000 for FY 2020, which is the lowest cap on record with the Department of State. In FY 2019, the then cap of 30,000 asylum seekers were admitted

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Refugees from Asia have historically been the largest group of people being granted asylum in the U.S. 

  Almost 45 percent of grantees since 1975 came from that continent (excluding South Asia), with the biggest influxes from Vietnam around 1980, Hmong and Laotians up to around 1992 and from Myanmar and Bhutan around 2008.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 19:00

• Goldman's Four Lessons From 2020
  Goldman’s Four Lessons From 2020

  In what is likely his last note of the year, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius takes a look at what 2020 has taught him about the economy and the practice of economic forecasting, and writes that “at this early stage, we see four lessons with potentially more general implications. First, incorporating real-time data into a standard GDP and employment framework can yield large benefits, especially in a crisis. Second, forecasters need to be flexible and eclectic in order to add value, especially in a crisis. Third, Keynesian policy prescriptions have now triumphed in two successive crises [ZH translation: one can always “fix” debt with more debt, until one day everything comes crashing down]. Fourth, people and market economies have a remarkable capacity to adapt.

  

  Amusingly, Hatzius starts off rather humble – for a change – admitting that pretty much everything he predicted a year ago would happen… was dead wrong:

  We recently reviewed our ten questions for the US economy in 2020, the answers we gave a year ago, and what actually happened. Most of our answers were wrong because the pandemic pushed the economy into its deepest (though probably also shortest) recession on record.

  Of course, to those managing money based on the bank’s recos and forecasts, this admission will hardly help offset the losses, but just so the introspective Goldman chief economist can demonstrate his true contrition for having been wrong again, he has published a note in which he promises that he has learned his lesson. Or rather four:

  … while holding ourselves accountable for last year’s predictions is always important, a more interesting question might be what we can learn from the way 2020 unfolded after the pandemic had appeared on the radar screen—from the earliest reported Chinese cases in January to the start of the global vaccination campaign in December.

  At this early stage—and we emphasize that our conclusions might change once the pandemic is truly behind us—we see four lessons with broader implications for economic forecasting.

  Said lessons are listed below, as follows:

  1. The benefits of real-time data, which of course is actually useful compared to seasonally adjusted, goal-seeked and manipulated “government data” whose only purpose is political validation and propaganda.

  When the pandemic hit China in January, we were slow to recognize its global scale. Well into February, we focused on the “spillover” effects from economic weakness in China on US growth, working through trade links, tourism, and supply chain disruptions. Only at the end of February—after the lockdowns in northern Italy—did we start to treat the virus like the global shock it was.

  But that downgrade set the stage for a series of dramatic further cuts over the following month, as shown in Exhibit 1. At the same time, we held on to a relatively optimistic view of the shape of the rebound after the initial plunge, lifting our 2021 GDP growth forecast to far above-trend rates.

  

  One key reason why we felt confident in slashing our Q2 GDP numbers so aggressively was the timely and granular information about the real-time performance of the economy from cellphone locations, credit and charge card transactions, worker panels, and other real-time data sets. This information was available publicly, but we invested a substantial amount of resources in making it compatible with standard economic measures such as GDP and payroll employment. Once the economy hit bottom in April, the framework confirmed that the recovery was proceeding swiftly in the short term, which also raised our confidence in the optimistic longer-term view, with a sharp rebound in Q3 and ongoing strength in 2021. The broader lesson is incorporating real-time data into a standard economic accounting framework can yield large benefits, especially in a crisis.

  2. It’s better to be a fox than a hedgehog, or the “we get our best lessons from books” excuse.

  Professor Philip Tetlock of the University of Pennsylvania is best known as the co-author of Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction and the founder of the Good Judgment Project. In an earlier book on forecasting, he introduced his distinction between two forecaster archetypes, “hedgehogs” and “foxes”. Hedgehogs use a single model to explain the world across a large range of different states in a deductive manner. By contrast, foxes are inductive decisionmakers who don’t believe in an all-encompassing model, use several different approaches to analyze the situation, and then triangulate between them to come up with a view. Tetlock focuses on political predictions such as the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of Apartheid, and documents that foxes generally outperform hedgehogs.

  We certainly have our share of strongly held views about how the economy works. We think that a financial deficit—an excess of total spending over total income—exposes the private sector to a greater risk of retrenchment in response to negative shocks. We think many financial market moves are driven by sentiment rather than economic fundamentals, which means that shocks to financial conditions are often exogenous drivers of growth and it makes sense to look at measures such as our FCI impulse. We adhere to the broadly Keynesian view that the ups and downs of the labor market often amplify business cycle impulses, reinforcing growth in a boom and constraining it in early recovery. And we think that fiscal tightening—especially in a zero-rate environment where it is harder for the Fed to react—often weighs heavily on growth in the short to medium term.

  But 2020 was not a time to dig into these views like a hedgehog. In March, we took little comfort from the private sector surplus or the initially solid labor market momentum, as these positive forces paled in importance relative to the dramatic escalation of the pandemic. In April and May, we didn’t build a negative FCI impulse or self-feeding labor market weakness into our forecasts, as this would have made them too extrapolative at a time when the progress in containing the pandemic clearly dominated any driver of growth. And in August, we kept our concern about the growth effects of the fiscal tightening in check, reasoning that the exceptionally high personal saving rate would cushion the impact on spending. These decisions all proved correct (although more recently we seem to have overestimated the short-term impact of the renewed rise in infections on the economy).

  3. Perhaps the funniest “lesson” according to Goldman is that what happened in 2020 was “another Keynesian triumph”; here Hatzius is either trolling his readers (again) or he is truly oblivious to the fact that the global economy is now constantly on the verge of collapse and needs constant central bank interventions precisely because of such “Keynesian triumphs” that will push global debt to surpass a third of a quadrillion dollars in the next few years, leaving central banks with hyperinflation as the only recourse to restore some normalcy to a world where money printing is now the norm.

  Some forecasters who view themselves as Keynesian overemphasized the multiplier effects from the labor market collapse in April, as well as the growth hit from the fiscal tightening in the fall. But these misses should not obscure the fact that the 2020 crisis was another triumph for Keynesian economic policy—a framework that prescribes aggressive monetary and fiscal support in response to negative shocks, especially those that look clearly temporary. The extent to which policymakers turned to Keynesian solutions is probably best illustrated by Exhibit 2. In Q2, the combination of expanded unemployment insurance, tax rebates, and small business support delivered the biggest increase in real disposable income on record, in a quarter that also saw the biggest decline in real GDP on record.

  

  Fears in some quarters that stimulus on such a scale would lead to a destabilizing increase in inflation expectations or a run on the currency proved unfounded; on the contrary, most commentators now think that these aggressive policies were essential for stabilizing both the financial markets and the real economy in a moment of extreme peril, and they prevented what otherwise would probably have been dramatically negative second-round effects. The 2020 crisis thus adds to the evidence from the 2008 crisis that monetary and fiscal policymakers should be very aggressive in delivering demand-side stimulus when faced with a major downturn.

  Right, and just in case central banks should also inject a few trillion for good measure, not allowing a crisis to go to waste, and making the 0.1% the richest they have ever been.

  Which brings us to Goldman’s fourth and final lesson, one which we actually agree with:

  4. People and market economies have a remarkable capacity to adapt.

  The other economic lesson of 2020 has a more classical flavor: market economies are highly adaptable. The abrupt shift from office-based work to at-home work proved much less disruptive than anticipated, at least from the employer’s perspective (though many employees might beg to differ). The move from in-store shopping to online shopping was similarly seamless; indeed, US retail sales had returned to the pre-pandemic level as early as June, when in-store shopping was still down 35% relative to normal. The supply side of the economy has proven remarkably resilient so far, with fewer bankruptcies than feared, greater new business formations than before the crisis, and a rapid decline in joblessness so far (though labor market slack remains sizable). And each successive virus wave (scaled by the increase in new infections) has had a smaller—and smaller than expected—impact on economic activity. This is partly because improved treatments have gradually made the virus itself less lethal and partly because both governments and private individuals have gradually learned to restrict those activities that pose the highest risk of infection relative to their economic value and adjust others in ways that reduce risk, e.g., through mask mandates and better ventilation.

  Such adaptation measures remain very important in the near term in view of the continued high level of infections. However, they will probably become less necessary next year as the population is successively vaccinated. If this process unfolds reasonably smoothly—obviously still a big if—the story of how the scientific and pharmaceutical community developed and distributed safe and effective vaccines so soon after the discovery of the virus will look like the biggest triumph of human adaptation and ingenuity in the entire story of the 2020 pandemic.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 18:30

• Man Behind Pfizer Vaxx Warns COVID-19 'Will Be With Us For The Next 10 Years'
  Man Behind Pfizer Vaxx Warns COVID-19 ‘Will Be With Us For The Next 10 Years’

  Ugur Sahin, CEO of Germany’s BioNTech – which partnered with Pfizer to develop a COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year – says the virus could still be causing outbreaks 10 years from now, according to Yahoo News.

  

  “The virus will stay with us for the next 10 years,” Sahin said during a Tuesday press conference, adding “We need to get used to the fact that there’ll be more outbreaks.”

  “We need a new definition of normal,” he continued, suggesting that this doesn’t necessarily mean countries will have to go into perpetual lockdown – something which could stop “by the end of the summer.” 

  “This winter, we will not have an impact on the infection numbers,” he said, “But we must have an impact so that next winter can be the new normal.”

  Sahin also urged caution on whether 60-70% of the world’s population being vaccinated would be enough to prevent further outbreaks.

  “If the virus becomes more efficient…we might need a higher uptake of the vaccine for life to return to normal.” –Yahoo News

  Sahin’s comments come as BioNTech and Moderna scramble to see if their vaccines work against the new “mutant” COVID-19 strain spreading throughout the UK. He added that it will take another two weeks to know if his vaccine works on it, but is hopeful that it will.

  “Scientifically it is highly likely that the immune response by this vaccine can also deal with this virus variant,” he continued. “The vaccine contains more than 1,270 amino acids, and only nine of them are changed (in the mutant virus). That means that 99% of the protein is still the same.”

  On Saturday, UK chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said that vaccines appear ‘adequate’ in generating an immune response to the new strain.

  The ‘new normal’ for Sahin, meanwhile, is being filthy rich(er).

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 18:00

• CNN: Amend Constitution To Prevent Trump Or Anyone Like Him Having Power Again
  CNN: Amend Constitution To Prevent Trump Or Anyone Like Him Having Power Again

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

  CNN’s Chris ‘Fredo’ Cuomo and guest Anthony Scaramucci suggested Wednesday that the US Constitution should be amended to ensure Donald Trump (or anyone else like him) can never become President and wield the power of the executive again.

  

  Assuming that Biden will be sworn in as the next President, Cuomo shit-chatted his way through an interview with former Trump insider turned hater Scaramucci.

  “We’re gonna need something to check his power or to check a president like him, god forbid we get another disaster like this,” Scaramucci declared at one point in the conversation.

  “Sometimes you need people like you and me to get in there and tell the truth and rough people up like this,” Scaramucci added, labelling Trump a “disaster” for not only the GOP, but the nation as a whole on the world stage.

  Cuomo also suggested that Joe Biden should point at Trump and publicly shame him throughout the inauguration In January.

  “If he goes to the inauguration, Biden should point at him and speak to Republicans and say, ‘You deserved better than this,’” Cuomo proclaimed.

  “He has left your party in shambles,” he continued, adding “I know the GOP. I know Republicans. I know what they’re about at their best, and I will be there for you restoring those virtues. I would point at his ass the whole time.”

  “I don’t think Biden will do that because he’s better than I am,” Cuomo continued, claiming “He’s going to try to move past that and the best way to do that is to ignore Trump.”

  Scaramucci claimed that Trump is “making a decision to go to the inaugural or not,” claiming he still has sources close to the President.

  “I predict he goes, Chris. I don’t see how he misses that. He’s an attention hog. He will try to make it about himself. And so my guess is he’ll end up at the inaugural and he’ll leave a lot of wreckage,” Scaramucci claimed.

  Referring to Trump’s decision to issue pardons to Roger Stone, Charles Kushner, and Paul Manafort, Cuomo declared that “He has proven himself in just the last 24 hours to be the worst.”

  Cuomo ranted for over ten minutes elsewhere during the broadcast about Trump being the worst President ever.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 17:30

• Outrage After Pakistani Court Releases Convicted Murderer Of Journalist Daniel Pearl
  Outrage After Pakistani Court Releases Convicted Murderer Of Journalist Daniel Pearl

  Among the earliest and most shocking jihadist propaganda trends during the US ‘war on terror’ years was to put out execution and beheading videos of kidnapped journalists and Westerners in particular.

  In 2002 38-year-old Wall Street Journal reporter and California native Daniel Pearl was abducted and the US embassy in Pakistan was subsequently mailed a gruesome beheading video.

  The main suspect in Pearl’s Murder, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, has been ordered released from prison by a top Pakistani court on Thursday after he was acquitted of the murder earlier this year. He had been held in custody pending an appeal by the family.

  

  “The detention order is struck down,” Pearl family lawyer Faisal Siddiqi announced Thursday. At this point the only way Sheikh will go back to prison is if the the family is able to overturn the acquittal.

  This despite what appears to be significant and damning evidence, as the AP noted:

  “In Sheikh’s original trial, emails between Sheikh and Pearl presented in court showed Sheikh gained Pearl’s confidence sharing their experiences as both waited for the birth of their first child. Pearl’s wife Marianne Pearl gave birth to a son, Adam, in May 2002.”

  Sheikh along with three alleged accomplices was acquitted last April in a ruling that shocked and angered US officials and Pearl’s family. The main suspect had initially been handed a death sentence while to others were given life in prison.

  The family along with multiple international press freedom monitoring groups believe the initial guilty verdict was just.

  

  Sheikh and his accomplices had earlier been found guilty of luring the journalist to a meeting in Karachi while he was investigating possible links between Richard C. Reid, known as the “Shoe Bomber”, and Pakistani jihadists.

  It was an early example of the gruesome lengths that al-Qaeda and later ISIS would go to in order to send a “message” to the West, with multiple such grisly murder videos coming out of Iraq and Syria.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 17:00

• Eight 'Screaming Red Flags' From The 2020 Election That Deserved Criminal Inquiry
  Eight ‘Screaming Red Flags’ From The 2020 Election That Deserved Criminal Inquiry

  Authored by Sharyl Attkisson, op-ed via The Epoch Times,

  The presidential election is no casual, unimportant event. Polling shows that, today, the public’s confidence in the 2020 elections, polling, law enforcement, media, and government are largely shaken.

  

  For that reason, the widespread claims of election irregularities and fraud should have been taken more seriously by government officials and law enforcement, and promptly and aggressively investigated. Today, there are hundreds of witnesses, declarations, sworn statements, and videos that continue to raise questions about the integrity of the results.

  It’s untrue that most of the claims have been dispelled by courts. By and large, there’s been no opportunity for witnesses to testify or present evidence to a judge or jury. More importantly, perhaps, there’s been no way to collect evidence of alleged fraud without the tools of a criminal inquiry, such as subpoenas, depositions, and the ability to compel forensic exams.

  If legitimate and transparent investigations were to find the witnesses who claim fraud or irregularities are mistaken or not telling the truth, the inquiries would serve the crucial purpose of assuring the public that the claims were thoroughly investigated but found to be unsupportable or false.

  The following are eight examples of screaming red flags that begged for a prompt, thorough criminal inquiry.

  1. Ballots Allegedly Trucked Across State Lines

  The FBI has a role in determining whether an interstate crime occurred, and who is responsible, if hundreds of thousands of ballots were trucked from New York to Pennsylvania, as a firsthand witness states.

  It should be simple for law enforcement to get to the bottom of it by finding out who hired the truck and moved the cargo, or showing that the story is made up or a misunderstanding.

  2. Subtracted Votes

  There are several reported accounts of vote switching in real time, as shown on television, supposedly an example of how mischief can occur.

  It would not be difficult for an investigative team to track down what happened in the specific instances and, if verified, it implicates more switching could have happened undetected.

  3. Vote Count Pauses

  Vote counting was oddly paused in several states. If, as some claim, it was done so that Joe Biden’s ballot deficit could be figured and erased, it would point to a coordinated effort.

  It would not be difficult for criminal investigators to question decision makers at each location and find out who they communicated with. This could prove or dispel the notion of a coordinated scheme.

  4. Fulton County, Georgia’s Mysterious Water Pipe Break

  Fulton County is a special case since the reason given for a major vote pause, and the reason uncritically accepted and reported by many in the press, was that a water pipe burst and interrupted the count. However, the story morphed over weeks, and a state investigator ultimately concluded there was no pipe burst that would have interrupted any counting. No good public explanation for this discrepancy has been provided by a credible authority.

  It would not be difficult for criminal investigators to identify and question whoever called the vote count suspension, and then moved forward with counting after some observers were dismissed.

  5. Blocked Observation

  There are widespread accounts from Republican election observers, and some Democrats, about being allegedly blocked from seeing what was going on. It would make sense for a law enforcement authority to question who was at the top of the organizational chain at each location where this is credibly claimed by a witness in a declaration or sworn statement, and find out how the official decided to determine and deploy the rules for observation.

  It would not be difficult to learn whether there was a coordinated effort or, in the alternative, to hold accountable anyone at the local level who improperly shielded ballot counting from observers.

  6. Voting Machines

  In recent testimony to the Michigan state legislature, Dominion Voting Systems’ CEO stated he saw no credible claims of fraud. But when asked how it can be proved that bad actors didn’t impact and infiltrate voting systems, he advocated the idea of audits and even machine examinations to answer those outstanding questions. He even said this is the common way such questions are answered.

  For the sake of public confidence, it would be prudent to have a credible law enforcement body conduct forensic exams and audits of the machines and software to rule out interference by third parties, or any other illegalities or mischief.

  7. Mail-in Ballots

  Numerous witnesses from the postal service as well as at polling precincts have provided specific information about allegedly being instructed to falsely date, add birth dates, or otherwise improperly alter mail-in ballots, or have testified about hearing plans to do so. This is an important and easy issue for criminal investigative authorities to nail down one way or the other.

  8. Backdoor Ballots

  The midnight dumps of tens of thousands of ballots in key swing states overturning the Trump lead could be perfectly legitimate. However, it’s unusual to say the least. And so, in this environment, it’s important that a criminal investigative body conduct at least a preliminary inquiry in places where witnesses observed what they considered to be suspicious behavior or ballots.

  It should not be difficult to track the chain of custody and show they’re legitimate or, if not, find out who transported them.

  Finding evidence that dispels mischief is as equally important as an investigation that finds wrongdoing. The simple declaration that there’s nothing to investigate, or having people who have no way to know the truth call the claims “conspiracy theories,” is unlikely to dismiss widespread concerns and may, in fact, heighten mistrust.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 16:30

• New York Closing 3 Upstate Prisons Due To Budget Constraints, 1,000 Jobs Affected
  New York Closing 3 Upstate Prisons Due To Budget Constraints, 1,000 Jobs Affected

  In this day and age of printing “infinite” cash, as Neel Kashkari so wonderfully put it on national television, it’s a wonder any state is actually making cuts to save money instead of just lobbying the Federal Government for a bailout. 

  But that is the case in New York, where the state has decided it is going to close 3 upstate prisons in early 2021 due to budget constraints. The New York Department of Corrections and Community Supervision confirmed that “the Gowanda and Watertown correctional facilities, both medium-security prisons, and the Clinton Annex, which is part of the maximum-security Clinton Correctional Facility in Dannemora” will all close down in early 2021, according to Syracuse.com.

  1,000 jobs are expected to be affected due to the shutdowns. 

  The move is expected to save the state about $89 million per year, but will reduce its statewide prison capacity by about 2,750 beds.

  A spokesman for the New York Department of Corrections and Community Supervision said: “While conducting the review, DOCCS based the decision on a variety of factors, including but not limited to physical infrastructure, program offerings, facility security level, specialized medical and mental health services.”

  

  While no layoffs are expected, there will be about 975 jobs that need to be relocated. The state says it will work with unions on transfers. 

  Members of both political parties lashed out at the closures. 

  Democrat Assemblyman Billy Jones commented: “Couldn’t come at a worse time. What a way to end the year and go into the Christmas season. I’m just very disgusted by this and extremely upset.”

  Republican State Sen. Patty Ritchie added: “I find it unacceptable & utterly despicable the Gov. would announce 4 days before Christmas that Watertown Correctional will close. Simply put, this is a slap in the face to the people who work in this facility, as well as their families.”

  Dannemora Town Supervisor Bill Chase commented: “The Lyon Mountain Correctional Facility was closed in 2011 and it still sits there empty. There has been no reuse put to it.”

  The state has closed more than 17 state prisons over the last decade. Prisoners in New York have decreased by 39% since Gov. Andrew Cuomo took office.  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 16:05

• Israel Using Gen. Milley To Pass Messages To Biden On Iran
  Israel Using Gen. Milley To Pass Messages To Biden On Iran

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  According to a report from Axios, Israel used a recent visit from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley to pass messages about Iran to the incoming Biden administration.

  Israel opposes Joe Biden’s plan to work with Iran to return to the 2015 nuclear deal but has yet to open formal contacts with Biden’s team. Milley could stay in his position beyond the transition period, so the Israelis see him as a potential conduit.

  

  An unnamed Israeli official told Axios that Israel expressed its opposition to Biden rejoining the nuclear deal to Milley while the general visited the country last week. “We stressed that the starting point of any talks with Iran is much better for the US today than it was in 2013. What is needed now is to be tough in order to get a better deal,” the Israeli official said.

  “We wanted to make our case to the new administration on Iran through someone who is still going to be in the room when Biden assumes office and is going to play a substantive role in any policy review that will take place,” the official added.

  Israel’s stance on the nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA, is a non-starter for negotiations with Iran. Tehran has made it clear that they have no interest in talks before the US provides sanctions relief. Iranian officials have repeatedly said that Iran will quickly come into compliance with the JCPOA if the US lifts sanctions.

  The Israelis also told Milley that Biden should be more open to relationships with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, despite human rights concerns. The Israelis hope Biden continues the normalization deals started by the Trump administration.

  Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other Gulf states are also opposed to Biden’s plan to revive the JCPOA. The Gulf states are hoping to be involved in future negotiations between Iran and the US. Iran is in favor of dialogue with its neighbors but believe the US should stay out of regional talks.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 15:40

• Did Fauci Just Admit He Lied About Herd Immunity To Trick Americans Into Vaccine?
  Did Fauci Just Admit He Lied About Herd Immunity To Trick Americans Into Vaccine?

  Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Democrat-approved ‘science’ in ‘trust the science,’ appears to have just admitted to lying about COVID-19 herd immunity in order to goad more people into taking the vaccine, according to a new report in the New York Times.

  At issue is the percentage of the population which must require resistance to the coronavirus – through infection or vaccination – in order for the disease to disappear.

  Early into the pandemic, Fauci repeatedly claimed ‘60-70%‘ herd immunity was required to achieve herd immunity. Beginning around a month ago, however, Fauci’s estimate drifted higher – to “70, 75 percent,” and more recently telling CNBC “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent.”

  

  When asked about it, Fauci essentially said he lied for political purposes due to vaccine skeptics.

  In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.

  Hard as it may be to hear, he said, he believes that it may take close to 90 percent immunity to bring the virus to a halt — almost as much as is needed to stop a measles outbreak.

  Asked about Dr. Fauci’s conclusions, prominent epidemiologists said that he might be proven right. The early range of 60 to 70 percent was almost undoubtedly too low, they said, and the virus is becoming more transmissible, so it will take greater herd immunity to stop it.

  Dr. Fauci said that weeks ago, he had hesitated to publicly raise his estimate because many Americans seemed hesitant about vaccines, which they would need to accept almost universally in order for the country to achieve herd immunity.

  And with polls now suggesting more Americans are willing to take the vaccines, Fauci (who said in November COVID-19 ‘won’t be a pandemic for much longer‘) says he’s ready to come clean.

  “When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent,” he said, adding “Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”

  “We need to have some humility here,” Fauci then said. “We really don’t know what the real number is. I think the real range is somewhere between 70 to 90 percent. But, I’m not going to say 90 percent,” because doing so might discourage Americans.

  The Times’ Ross Douthat called Fauci out for shifting the goalposts.

  When you can’t just “trust the science” because the scientists keep lying to you and then saying, “oh, that was just a noble lie, sorry about that.”https://t.co/2SKAiGiBto pic.twitter.com/hl06rjM7tA

  — Ross Douthat (@DouthatNYT) December 24, 2020

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

  Will Democrats give Fauci equal treatment to Trump, who was viciously attacked by the left for downplaying the virus during its early days in order to prevent a panic?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 15:15

• Peter Schiff: Government Sedating The Economy With Stimulus
  Peter Schiff: Government Sedating The Economy With Stimulus

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  President Trump threw a wrench into coronavirus stimulus relief, calling the massive spending bill “a disgrace” and threatening to veto the legislation if Congress doesn’t go back and up the individual checks from $600 to $2,000.

  

  It remains unclear how the politics will play out. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tweeted “Let’s do it!” putting pressure on Sen. President Mitch McConnel to go along with the increased stimulus. What is pretty certain is stimulus is coming down the pike – whether sooner or later. Before Trump made his surprise remarks, Peter Schiff talked about the stimulus bill on his podcast.

  Peter put the size of this bill into perspective, noting that it would fill up a set of encyclopedias through volume “I.”

  How long would it take you to read every single word on every page in the encyclopedia all the way through the volume ‘I?’ Clearly, nobody in Congress made any effort to read this bill.”

  And yet it passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress.

  Peter noted that the national debt has already increased by $4.8 trillion in this calendar year.

  Obviously, if this bill is signed and those stimulus checks … get mailed out before the end of the year – of course, they want to hurry up and get those checks out there for Christmas presents – the national debt will explode and more than $5 trillion of debt will have been added in this one year, in 2020 all by itself.”

  The entire national debt didn’t reach $5 trillion until about 1999. In other words, the US government added as much debt in a single year as it did in more than the first 200 years of its existence.

  Rick Santelli was on CNBC saying 2020 wasn’t really such a bad year. Although GDP collapsed in the second quarter, there was a big rebound in Q3 and it looks like it will only be down slightly on the year. But Peter said people like Santelli are only looking at one side of the equation.

  The problem with focusing on just one side of the national balance sheet is that you get a distorted picture of reality. Because if we had to add $5 trillion to the national debt to prevent the GDP from collapsing, are we really better off? We’re not. You have to look at all the debt that we incurred. This is a horrible year if you look at how much more indebted we are at the end of the year than we were when the year began.”

  Peter reminded us that every American is on the hook for their share of all of the money that was borrowed in their name.

  As far as the stimulus/spending bill, Peter said he has no idea what all is in it. Nobody does. But it is certainly loaded up with pork.

  Everything but the kitchen sink must be in there, because Congress knew that nobody would vote against it, at least not enough people to stop it, so, this was your chance – anything you wanted, shove it in here and it’s going to get passed.

  As far as the coronavirus stimulus goes, the headline items were the $600 checks (maybe $2,000) for individuals, enhanced unemployment benefits of $300 per week and the expansion of PPP loans for small businesses.

  Peter noted that the enhanced unemployment will continue to incentivize people not to work.

  Clearly, there are still going to be people who are going to be getting more money to not work than they earn if they go back to their jobs. So, you’re still going to have this incentive.”

  Peter said the real fraud is going to come with the payment protection loans for small businesses. In reality, they are more like grants because as long as the business doesn’t fire its workers, the loans will be forgiven. The program was intended to help businesses that were shut down by state and local government due to COVID-19, but the program wasn’t limited to those businesses. Even businesses that were making more money due to the pandemic could get these “loans.” Congress tried to fix that in this bill by limiting the loans to businesses that had a 25% year-on-year revenue drop during any quarter in 2020. And that creates a perfect opportunity for fraud. Businesses simply have to work some accounting magic and defer revenue in Q4 2020 to Q1 2021 and viola, they qualify for a “loan.”

  Remember, there are a lot of businesses that are COVID winners – businesses that actually did better in this environment than they did pre-COVID. There is nothing in this bill that limits those businesses from getting the free money.  And in fact, all you have to do is certify that your revenue in one of the quarters was down by 25%, which is easy to do anyway with creative accounting.”

  And of course, all of this will be paid for by the Federal Reserve.

  All of it is paid for by the printing press, by inflation, and that means the dollar is going to collapse.”

  The dollar hasn’t collapsed yet, but it has weakened significantly over the last few months. Gold has gone up, but it hasn’t gone through the roof. But it is coming.

  People really need to recognize what is going on, what the government is doing, how the stimulus is being financed, and do what you can to avoid being on the hook for paying for it. And the way you’re on the hook for paying for it is by holding US dollars or any debt instruments denominated in US dollars.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/24/2020 – 14:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest