- Buchanan: Trump, Once & Future King?
Buchanan: Trump, Once & Future King?
Authored by Pat Buchanan via Buchanan.org,
“I don’t know if he’ll run in 2024 or not. But if he does, I’m pretty sure he will win the nomination.”
So says Mitt Romney, the sole Republican senator to have voted twice to convict President Donald J. Trump of impeachable acts.
But is it possible Trump could win the nomination in 2024?
What does history teach us about Republican presidents who, after losing the White House, come back to win it again?
Well, to be frank, there is no such history.
Consider. Four Republican presidents in the 20th century were defeated while seeking a second term. None was nominated again.
William Howard Taft lost the White House to Woodrow Wilson in 1912, and even ran behind the third-party “Bull Moose” candidate, ex-President Theodore Roosevelt. Taft never ran again but went on to serve as chief justice of the United States.
Ex-President Teddy Roosevelt was considering running again in 1920 but died at 60 in January of 1919 at Sagamore Hill.
After President Herbert Hoover lost to FDR in 1932, he never ran again.
Gerald Ford, serving out Nixon’s second term, lost to Jimmy Carter in 1976 and packed it in for good, as did President Carter after losing to Ronald Regan in 1980.
George H. W. Bush lost the White House in 1992 and retired from electoral politics, never to run again.
As for Trump running in 2024 and winning the GOP nomination, he does hold high cards no other ex-president held, except perhaps Roosevelt.
Trump has a vast and loyal following. Currently three-fourths of all Republicans see him as their leader. He won 74 million votes, the highest total ever for a sitting president or a losing presidential candidate.
Their loyalty is traceable to what Trump achieved, whom and how he fought, and the new issues he introduced and has become indelibly associated. Foremost among these is his struggle to secure the Southern border against endless illegal migrant crossings.
Unrestricted immigration from the South, the Third Worldization of America, is the true existential threat “climate change” purports to be.
Trump also succeeded in enacting the traditional GOP platform of low taxes and deregulation, producing record-low unemployment — before the pandemic hit in March 2020.
His record of elevating strict constructionists, constitutionalists and conservatives to the federal courts, and three Supreme Court seats, is unrivaled in the history of the modern Republican Party.
Trump also forged a bond with Middle America by taking on a media whose treatment of him was remorselessly hateful and hostile. “We love him for the enemies he has made,” it was said of Grover Cleveland.
He brought a new and unique agenda to the GOP.
He replaced a free trade globalist ideology with nationalism. He set out to rebuild America’s depleted manufacturing base and restore her economic independence. Under Trump, the slogan “America First” came to represent a new foreign policy where rich and prosperous allies carried more of the burden of their own and the common defense.
He wanted Americans to do their nation-building here in the USA.
While Beltway Russophobes prevented Trump from achieving the rapprochement he wanted, and he failed to extricate us from the forever wars of the Middle East, he did drawdown U.S. forces in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and keep us out of an all-out war with Iran.
There is thus a specific Trumpian agenda, with which he is alone associated, that is becoming the issues agenda of the conservative movement and the party base, if not the party elites.
Yet, the drawbacks to a Trump nomination remain major.
He did, after all, lose in 2020. And he has been damaged by the months-long battle since to prove that Biden was the beneficiary of a stolen election. The Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol by MAGA militants was blamed on Trump and became the article of his second impeachment where every Democratic senator and six Republicans voted to convict him. And even some of those who voted to acquit, like Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, declared him guilty of inciting the mob. Moreover, Trump faces a blizzard of legal challenges and charges that will damage his reputation, his businesses and him, personally.
In 2024, Trump will turn 78, the age Joe Biden is today. And between now and 2024, there is sure to be considerable attrition in support among the 74 million who voted for Trump.
But if Romney is right and Trump has the kind of strength that could make him the nominee in 2024, that strength will surely be sufficient to veto or sink any potential nominee who does not have the former president’s blessing.
And, from seeing both candidates of 2020 up close in recent weeks and months, does not Trump appear more likely to be the Republican leader of his party than does slow-moving “Sleepy Joe” look like the Democratic nominee 44 months from now?
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 23:40 - COVID Outbreak Hits Two Navy Warships Deployed In Middle East
COVID Outbreak Hits Two Navy Warships Deployed In Middle East
In what seems a repeat of the USS Theodore Roosevelt coronavirus outbreak saga of last Spring which led to the sacking of its commander who blew the whistle on Pentagon mishandling, and the resignation of no less than the Secretary of the Navy, there are now two US warships that have been struck with COVID-19 outbreaks while patrolling Middle East regional waters.
Both are now said to be returning to port in Bahrain to handle the emerging crisis, according to the Associated Press on Friday. “A dozen troops aboard the USS San Diego, an amphibious transport dock, tested positive for COVID-19, said Cmdr. Rebecca Rebarich, a spokeswoman for the Bahrain-based 5th Fleet,” AP reports.
Additionally, the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea which has also been deployed to the gulf and Indian Ocean regions has “confirmed several cases of COVID-19,” according to the 5th Fleet’s statement. This out of an estimated 380 sailors on board. The San Diego is the larger of the two, with almost 600 sailors and Marines.
USS Philippine Sea in the foreground, via US Navy/Wikimedia “All positive cases have been isolated on board, and the (ships) remains in a restricted COVID bubble,” Cmdr. Rebarich said. “The port visit and medical support have been coordinated with the host nation government and Bahrain Ministry of Health.”
Through much of the summer following the major USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier outbreak crisis which saw over 1,000 sailors test positive – including one death – a number of naval ships opted for extended stints at sea – avoiding port calls in order to maintain natural isolation from potential exposure on land.
However, there’s since been a sense of ‘normal’ deployment protocols resuming, though with heightened hygiene and distancing measures, and what the Navy has called “aggressive mitigation” efforts to combat the virus.
Meanwhile, earlier this month the Roosevelt itself was actually back in pandemic related news after at least three sailors tested positive for COVID-19. The small cluster of infections was uncovered during ‘random’ surveillance testing for the virus. It remains that the majority of cases in the Navy are asymptomatic, which why the military has been so regularly conducting large scale monitoring tests.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 23:20 - China Emits More Carbon In 2 Weeks Than Australia Does In One Year: Think Tank
China Emits More Carbon In 2 Weeks Than Australia Does In One Year: Think Tank
Authored by Henry Jom via The Epoch Times,
China emits more carbon dioxide in 16 days than Australia does in one year, according to new research published by a free-market think tank.
Australia’s net-zero emissions target would therefore be cancelled out by China in just two weeks, the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) said in a press release on Wednesday.
According to the report, China operates 57 times as many coal-fired power stations as Australia. This figure is set to increase with China currently constructing 92 coal-fired power stations.
The report also added that while Australia’s carbon emissions per capita have declined by 15.4 percent since 2004, China’s emissions per capita over the same period have increased by 83.5 percent.
Globally, the report identified that Australia’s share of global carbon emissions declined from 1.3 percent in 2009 to 1.1 percent in 2019.
“Despite Australia’s negligible share of global emissions, under the Paris Agreement, Australians are subject to the deepest per capita emissions cuts in the developed world,” the report added.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Scott Morrison is pursuing “low emissions technologies” instead of committing Australia to net-zero emissions, with New South Wales and Western Australia referring to net-zero it as an “aspirational” target, reported Herald Sun.
However, Federal Labor Opposition leader Anthony Albanese looks set to committing his party to achieve net-zero by 2050, while Independent Member for Warringah Zali Steggall plan to introduce a Climate Change Bill to parliament in March.
Cian Hussey, Research Fellow at the IPA, said calls for Australia to adopt a net-zero emissions target would “ignore the significant economic, social, and humanitarian costs which would inevitably be the result of such a target.”
“It is reckless and futile for the political class to impose on Australians further severe cuts to emissions which costs jobs and livelihoods, while China—the world’s largest emitter—continues to rapidly increase its emissions without consequence,” said Hussey.
Earlier research by the IPA found that up to 653,600 jobs would be at “direct risk” if a net-zero carbon emissions target were put in place—particularly in the agriculture, heavy manufacturing, and coal mining industries.
While some Nationals have called for exemptions for the agricultural sector, Independent Zail Steggall said keeping the sector out of the zero-emissions target would mean the sector risked being charged carbon tariffs from other countries.
Nationals backbencher Matt Canavan has warned the 2050 net-zero emissions target is the “wrong priority” for the Federal government, reported Sky News.
“There’s way too much focus on what might or might not happen in 30 years time rather than dealing with the challenges we face right now,” Canavan said.
“When I think about what the biggest challenge for my kids is going to be in their generation, I think it’s the rising aggression of the Chinese Communist Party in our region. Not carbon neutrality by 2050.”
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 23:00 - "Drunk" Roomba Robots Aimlessly Roam Homes Amid Major Software Glitch
“Drunk” Roomba Robots Aimlessly Roam Homes Amid Major Software Glitch
Here’s an instance where smart internet of things (IoT) automation devices are miserably failing. Users on Reddit and other forms of social media are reporting their iRobot Roomba vacuums are experiencing navigation issues, with some users comparing their expensive robo-vaccums’ behavior to that of a “drunk.”
“iRobot what’s up with the 3.12.8 release? My tickets were closed and I wasn’t rolled back. These robots looks drunk since the update. Mounting complaints in the forums continue. Some folks who were rolled back got rolled forward and the issues came back. HELP!,” tweeted Anthony Virtuoso.
YouTuber Garrett McGrath uploaded a video titled “Drunk roomba, useless firmware” that shows the robo-vacuum wandering around the room, performing useless tasks. At the end of the video, the robot fails to dock at its charging station.
“irobot published a firmware recently that may as well have turned these things into paperweights. the ‘fix’ is to delete all your maps, reseat the robot a bunch of times, factory reset it after that, reboot it a few more times, and start over entirely with pairing it again. Just to the machine work for two weeks then return to this state, “McGratg explained in the video’s description.
The Verge reports that iRobot’s latest software updates for i7 and s9 Roomba models have faulty “firmware updates have been causing navigation issues.” According to that report, new software updates could be rolled out “over the next several weeks.”
One Reddit user records a timelapse video of their i7 failing to dock.
//embed.redditmedia.com/widgets/platform.js
These robots cost anywhere from $600 to $900 per unit – these domestic help robo-cleaners under the IoT umbrella are supposed to improve our lives though that doesn’t appear to be the case here.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 22:40 - Facebook Algorithm Accuses 81-Year-Old Grandmother Of "Hate Speech" Over Knitted-Pigs Comment
Facebook Algorithm Accuses 81-Year-Old Grandmother Of “Hate Speech” Over Knitted-Pigs Comment
Authored by Paul Jospeh Watson via Summit News,
Facebook’s algorithm flagged an 81-year-old grandmother’s comments about knitted pigs as an example of “hate speech” and threatened her with a permanent ban.
Yes, really.
After losing her husband last year, Rita Rich-Mulcahy, a retired teacher who lives in Australia, created the Facebook page to share with the world her love of knitting and raise money for The Smith Family charity, which helps disadvantaged children.
After posting a picture of her own knitted pigs, Rich-Mulcahy referred to them as “white pigs” and “high-viz pigs,” resulting in the threat to terminate her account over “hate speech.”
“It may seem a small thing to most people, but to someone who had never even had an overdue library book, being charged with using hate speech was frightening,” said Rich-Mulcahy.
Facebook issued a statement asserting that its automated system flagging the comments was a “mistake” that its AI “sometimes” makes.
The story once again illustrates how Facebook’s censorship algorithm, which gets stricter almost by the day as a result of relentless mainstream media hysteria, is completely broken.
* * *
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 22:20 - Huawei Plans New Electric Car As US Sanctions Crush Cellphone Business
Huawei Plans New Electric Car As US Sanctions Crush Cellphone Business
If you thought the hype surrounding electric vehicles and the hunt for a “Tesla killer” had ended with the exposure of the Nikola fraud by short-sellers last year, well, that couldn’t be further from the truth.
And not only because Saudi-backed Lucid motors is getting ready to go public via a deal with a SPAC put together by investment banker Michael Klein. As the CCP pushes for more electric vehicles to be sold in China, more domestic companies are entering the fray.
One example is Huawei, which – according to Reuters – is planning to make electric vehicles under its own brand and could launch some models this year as it pivots away from making smartphones after the Trump Administration cut off access to critical American components.
Since building cars from scratch is no easy task, Huawei is instead is in talks with state-owned Changan Automobile and other automakers to use their car plants to make its Huawei branded electric vehicles, according to Reuters.
Huawei is also in talks with another Chinese firm: BAIC Group’s BluePark New Energy Technology. Like Foxconn’s deal with Lucid, BluePark would be responsible for mass producing the cars presumably designed by Huawei.
According to Reuters, the plan heralds “a potentially major shift in direction for Huawei after nearly two-years of US sanctions that have cut its access to key supply chains, forcing it to sell a part of its smartphone business to keep the brand alive.
The Trump Administration targeted Huawei over concerns that western countries using its technology and products in their 5G networks would give the CCP unprecedented access to private and sensitive information belonging to foreign governments. A spokesman for Huawei warned that while the company doesn’t presently manufacture cars, it is aiming to provide “digital car-oriented and new-added components”.
“Huawei is not a car manufacturer. However through ICT (information and communications technology), we aim to be a digital car-oriented and new-added components provider, enabling car OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) to build better vehicles.”
The company’s EVs will reportedly target mass-market consumers, while “foreign” electric cars like those produced by Tesla and other foreign automakers (like Ford, which has partnered with a domestic Chinese firm to make electric cars for the Chinese market) presumably will target wealthier Chinese consumers. It’s a divide that reflects the Chinese smartphone market, where domestic phones from Huawei and Xiaomi are seen as more pedestrian than Apple products purchased in the country.
The prospects for growth in China’s EV market are high: Sales of new energy vehicles (NEVs), including pure battery electric vehicles as well as plug-in hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, are expected to make up 20% of China’s overall annual auto sales by 2025. And inndustry forecasts put China’s NEV sales at 1.8MM units this year, up from about 1.3 million in 2020.
And Huawei isn’t alone. Its ambitious plans to make its own cars are allowing it to join a raft of Asian tech companies that have made similar announcements in recent months, including Baidu Inc and Foxconn.
Huawei was awarded at least four patents related to EVs this week.
Of course, the Huawei electric car is only one of several new EV projects that are still in the early stages. For example, Fisker, the one-time Tesla rival, has reportedly partnered with Foxconn to build electric cars as it clearly sees better business prospects in China.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 22:00 - Biden Gun Control Plan Would "Criminalize" Up To 105 Million People: Gun-Rights Group
Biden Gun Control Plan Would “Criminalize” Up To 105 Million People: Gun-Rights Group
Authored by Jack Cardillo via The Epoch Times,
A gun-rights organization said that President Joe Biden’s gun control proposal would potentially make about 105 million law-abiding gun owners into criminals.
“While we can agree that there are several ‘common sense’ and long overdue changes needed to our nation’s gun laws, we firmly believe that the path forward should be focused on supporting and protecting responsible, law-abiding Americans – not criminalizing and punishing them,” the U.S. Concealed Carry Association said in a letter to Biden this week.
The group – which, according to the group’s website, has about 556,000 members – said the president’s push for gun control on the anniversary of the Parkland, Florida mass shooting was needless.
“The U.S. Concealed Carry Association exists to help responsible Americans avoid danger, save lives, and keep their families safe, and we believe that our elected leaders in Washington have an incredible obligation to pursue these same goals,” the group added.
The group noted that in 2020, a significant number of people purchased firearms in the midst of historic riots and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The FBI stated last month that it processed a record 39.7 million firearm background checks in 2020, which bested the previous high of 10 million. Reports said that as many as 8.5 million purchased their first firearm in 2020, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation. Meanwhile, a number of gun and ammunition manufacturers reported shortages amid the surge in demand.
Biden earlier this month said that he would push Congress to enact more gun control measures, including allowing gun manufacturers to face lawsuits, banning “assault weapons,” and placing bans on high-capacity magazines. His pick for Attorney General, Merrick Garland, told lawmakers on Monday that he would support the White House’s stance on gun control.
“This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call. We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer. Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” Biden said earlier this month.
Pro-Second Amendment groups have noted that the term “assault weapon” has a nebulous meaning, with some saying that it is a made-up term that was invented by the anti-gun lobby in the 1980s. “Assault rifle” is a term sometimes used by the military to define a rifle that has select-fire capabilities, or the ability to switch between semi-automatic or fully automatic. For example, the much-derided AR-15 doesn’t have select-fire capability and only operates as a semi-automatic rifle.
The U.S. Concealed Carry Association further added that “record numbers of Americans have been purchasing firearms to keep themselves and their loved ones safe,” adding that “women and minorities are now leading the way as the fastest-growing groups of concealed carry permit holders in the country.”
White House officials, furthermore, have said Biden would take on the largest gun-rights group, the National Rifle Association (NRA).
“But I will say that the president is somebody, throughout his career, who has advocated for smart gun, smart gun safety measures,” press secretary Jen Psaki said earlier this month. “He is not afraid of standing up to the NRA – he has done it multiple times.”
The letter was first obtained by the Washington Examiner. The Epoch Times has reached out to the White House for comment.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 21:40 - Artificial Intelligence Takes Over Drive-Thru Orders At This Fast-Food Restaurant
Artificial Intelligence Takes Over Drive-Thru Orders At This Fast-Food Restaurant
Today, the warning is that no low-skilled job is safe from being displaced by automation and artificial intelligence. For example, humans taking orders at drive-thru lines at fast-food restaurants are being replaced with an automated system.
Lee’s Famous Recipe Chicken in Englewood, Ohio, beginning this week, will be using “artificial intelligence to take orders of customers passing through the drive-thru,” according to local television station WHIO-TV.
The automated drive-thru ordering system developed by Hi Auto uses “artificial intelligence” to greet and take orders from customers.
Andrea Newport, the spokesperson for Lee’s Famous Recipe Chicken, said, “employees in the restaurant will be able to listen to every transaction through existing headsets and intervene in case an issue arises during the order process.”
Far Hills Development, LLC operates the Englewood location and 12 other locations around Ohio. The company believes artificial intelligence will alleviate staffing problems due to the virus pandemic.
… and this is creepy.
“The technology also can be scaled to include video and recognize license plates and greet regular customers by name and know their favorite menu items,” Newport said.
Technological unemployment is set to soar as robots and artificial intelligence are replacing jobs faster than ever due to the virus pandemic. The pandemic has created a strong incentive to automate the workplace. In pandemics, machines and computers don’t catch infections.
This all suggests that on top of the millions of jobs lost to the pandemic, there will be increasing jobs lost to robots, driving technological unemployment higher.
For governments – now question now remains: What to do with the millions of people without jobs? Retrain them of usher in universal basic income?
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 21:20 - The Coming Space-Race
The Coming Space-Race
Authored by Brian Berletic via 21stCenturyWire.com,
Introduction
The domain of space has become an increasingly important playing field economically and militarily amid the wider great power game here on Earth.
While mostly out of sight, the satellites circling overhead provide us with precise positioning information for navigation, communication, weather data, intelligence, and imaging for maps so readily available online – we have begun to take this all for granted.
The impact of this technology in orbit on our ability to engage in commerce and maintain military preparedness has become so vital over the past several decades that nations have begun dedicating not only more resources into developing spaceborne capabilities, but also creating the ability to monitor threats in space and develop methods to defend against them.
This has led to several nations creating “space forces,” with the United States creating the US Space Force in 2019. Russia and China also have equivalent military forces dedicated solely to the domain of space – though how they will be used will most certainly differ from how the US will likely (and is already beginning to) use theirs.
What we see unfolding now is geopolitical cooperation and conflict here on Earth being extended into Earth orbit and beyond.
China has begun launching as many, if not more rockets per year than the United States. Its capabilities range from placing entire satellite constellations into orbit, to launching its own astronauts and even space station segments, as well as commercial missions for clients from around the globe.
Russia continues to develop its space launch capabilities and currently still has these most reliable manned space launch systems on Earth – the Soyuz. Their plans to develop reusable rockets to remain competitive with American aerospace company SpaceX means that Russia too remains a significant partner/competitor in the space domain.
And of course, private companies – from the US to China and everywhere in between – are creating capabilities and pursuing objectives beyond existing state-dominated space programs – with US-based SpaceX creating everything from reusable launch vehicles, to satellite internet, to a fleet of stainless steel starships designed to colonize Mars.
And just beyond reach of current technology are resources in space in the form of minerals and ore on the Moon and trapped in near-Earth objects like asteroids that could open the door to a multi-trillion dollar space economy that could sustain a population within our solar system many times larger than the 7.6 billion people on Earth today.
Through this now quickly shifting and rapidly developing space industry we can see the stage being set for a new, and much more wide-ranging “space race” for the 21st century.
While the first space race was bipolar – between the United States and the Soviet Union – today’s new space race includes old adversaries – the US and Russia – as well as China, India, and even Iran. There are also a growing number of private space companies from US-based firms like Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin, to Japan’s iSpace, and Galactic Energy in China.
The Space Economy
There is a very real space-based economy already.
It consists of constellations of satellites providing everything from communication to navigational services – services that are playing an increasingly important role in the global economy.
Industries like delivery services heavily depend on satellite navigation to connect drivers with their destinations, aiding them in navigating to customers and allowing customers to track their progress in real-time. Food delivery alone is an industry of over $100 billion worldwide.
There are also taxi services that increasingly rely on satellite navigation to find and deliver passengers.
The growing importance of satellite navigation for the economy is only set to grow as companies around the globe explore the possibility of drone delivery services and modes of land transportation that are increasingly autonomous.
Communication satellites have long served an important role in advancing and connecting modern information technology. Satellite phones and now satellite internet are services already available around the world. These services depend on satellites in higher orbits over the Earth meaning that latency is higher – and internet speeds slower.
Geostationary orbits, while higher and providing slower communication speeds, require fewer satellites to cover any particular area – with specific satellites assigned to and stationed permanently over a single region of the planet.
Communication satellites in low earth orbit cannot remain over a single region of the planet permanently. They are constantly moving, and thus to create worldwide coverage, shells of constantly moving satellites with protocols meant to relay signals not only from the ground to orbit, but between satellites in orbit are required – and in large numbers.
The lowering costs of both satellite manufacturing and space launches to place them into orbit makes this possible today.
With SpaceX’s Starlink service, consisting of thousands of satellites in low earth orbit (and eventually tens of thousands of satellites), low latency satellite internet will be available worldwide with a partial network already being tested.
Other companies are attempting to create their own low earth orbit constellations including OneWeb and Amazon’s Project Kuiper.
Russia’s Roscosmos is planning to create a similar constellation and China via its Hongyun project is already launching satellites in a bid to create its own low earth orbit broadband internet constellation.
These would constitute global internet service providers – though satellites would still depend on ground stations that connected to the physical backbone of the Internet in order to receive and transmit data – and companies involved in proposing and building these constellations are designing custom tailored solutions on a state-by-state basis to address security concerns in an age where information warfare is as serious a threat as actual warfare.
There are also clear military implications regarding satellite navigation and communication.
Its use on the battlefield includes collecting intelligence, coordinating the locations of and communication between troops in the field, guiding warships at sea as well as warplanes overhead, guiding munitions accurately to their targets and for managing the growing fleet of unmanned military vehicles on land, in the air, and both on and under the sea.
The obvious importance of satellite navigation and communication for both a nation’s economy and its defense is why nations like the United States, Russia, China, and the EU have developed their own networks that they control and that they cannot be excluded from. These are networks that they can offer access to for allies and customers, to enhance their alliances and to open up streams of revenue.
The United States maintains the Global Positioning System (GPS) with a constellation of 31 satellites. The maintenance and protection of America’s GPS satellites was transferred to its newly christened Space Force.
Russia maintains the Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) with 24 satellites in orbit. The EU’s Galileo network also consists of 24 satellites.
China recently completed its BeiDou network with 35 satellites in orbit – the largest network of its kind and one of several key indicators illustrating not only how serious China takes this new space race, but the competence it is able to bring to it.
The BeiDou network has already become a key component of China’s One Belt, One Road initiative. It is space infrastructure China is using to help stitch together the economies of Eurasia and to help augment the military capabilities of its allies – including nations like Pakistan who now have access to BeiDou’s higher military-grade positioning resolution.
Since China is building continent-spanning transportation infrastructure – creating and maintaining its own network of navigation satellites with global coverage prevents nations like the US from cutting it off from the GPS network at junctures of geopolitical tensions and potentially stranding logistical operations across entire continents.
CISLunar Economy
United Launch Alliance (ULA) – a space lift company created by Boeing and Lockheed – has proposed what it calls a “cislunar economy.” Cislunar describes the space between the Earth and the Moon.
ULA’s proposal imagines a cislunar economy reaching $3 trillion by 2050. According to SpaceNews in an article titled, “ULA’s Tory Bruno argues for U.S. investments in the production of fuel in space,” that economy would include mining, transportation, manufacturing and space tourism.
Space.com in an article titled, “Inside ULA’s Plan to Have 1,000 People Working in Space by 2045,” would note just how many people would make up that economy
CISLunar economy (Image Source: ULA/NASA)
Mining and in-situ manufacturing in space alone would be transformative for human civilization – akin to moving from the bronze age to the iron age. The resources trapped in near earth objects dwarf the total amount of resources here on Earth. It is just a matter of accessing it and possessing the tools to use it in manufacturing processes in space.
The science fiction future imagined in books and movies for decades could become a reality, complete with orbital habitats not unlike that featured in the 2013 film, “Elysium,” hopefully without the accompanying dystopian class divide.
While ULA’s own expendable launch vehicles are unlikely capable now or anytime in the near future of actually realizing their cislunar economy, other US-based companies and even those abroad might – and sooner than we imagine.
Jeff Bezos – Amazon founder and owner of US-based aerospace company Blue Origin – has proposed a roadmap (video) for the mining of resources and the construction of such habitats. Blue Origin is currently working on its New Glenn rocket – the closest launch vehicle in terms of capability and reusability to SpaceX’s Starship currently under testing. New Glenn, Starship, and similar launch vehicles would be needed to create the foundation of these proposed manned economies in space.
Getting to Space
Space was once the sole domain of a handful of government space programs.
Today, governments, corporations, and a mix of both are now widening the space launch capabilities of countries with space programs, as well as opening increasingly attractive options for nations without their own space launch capabilities.
To date, Russia, the US, Japan, China, the EU, India, Israel, Ukraine, Iran, and North Korea have all demonstrated the ability to launch payloads into orbit.
Currently, China, Russia, and the US lead the world in total launches per year – placing public, military, and commercial payloads into orbit not just for their respective countries but for a wide range of customers from around the world.
China currently leads, or closely follows the US in total launches per year – depending on the year – with US-based SpaceX accounting for America’s ability to continue competing.
The US currently holds the edge in overall competitiveness – again because of SpaceX – and owed in particular to SpaceX’s reusable Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Some of its Falcon 9 boosters have flown and landed up to 8 times (at the time of writing). The boosters are designed to fly up to 10 times before major overhauls.
The merit of reusability has not been lost on America’s main competitors. China has been nurturing its own private space industry and several companies are pursuing Falcon-style reusability including Galactic Energy with its planned Pallas 1 rocket targeting a 2021 test launch. Companies like iSpace are also pursuing similarly reusable launch vehicles. Both companies have already reached orbit with expendable rocket designs.
Russia’s Roscosmos is developing its Amur rocket, following SpaceX’s strategy for reusability using a first stage that launches and lands under the power of its own rocket engines.
SpaceX itself – while continuing to launch its Falcon 9 on a regular basis (26 launches in 2020 alone) – is working on the next generation of reusable launch vehicles – Starship.
It will be the largest, most powerful rocket ever built and feature fully reusable first and second stages. It is designed ultimately not only to send people to Mars, but to be able to lift enough material, equipment, and people into orbit frequently enough to build a city on the red planet.
While this goal remains on a more distant horizon, the cargo lift capabilities of Starship – lifting 150 tons into low earth orbit – and its rapid reusability will make access to space cheaper than ever before. It will open up a variety of possibilities both economically and militarily for the United States and its allies, as well as for commercial partners around the world – while leaving other nations playing catch-up.
Nothing like Starship is even under development elsewhere around the globe. While China and Russia are developing heavy-lift rockets nearing Starship’s lift capabilities, none of them will be even partially reusable.
There is also the ability to reach other places in the solar system – other than Earth orbit. The US, China, Russia, and Japan all possess the capability to reach the Moon, Mars, and even near earth objects like asteroids.
In 2020 when the most recent launch window opened to send missions to Mars, the US and China both sent major missions.
NASA’s Perseverance rover successfully touched down on Mars’ surface earlier this month. The rover contains experiments to retrieve and eventually send back samples of the Martian surface to Earth as part of future missions to Mars, as well as an experiment for in-situ oxygen production which will be vital for human habitation and the production of fuel on Mars in the future.
China’s mission – Tianwen-1 – has also reached the red planet, featuring an orbiter, a lander, and a rover.
If China successfully lands on the surface of Mars it will signify a major milestone for the nation and its spaceborne capabilities. Having already reached Mars orbit and having sent back incredible pictures of the Martian surface – Tianwen-1 has already made a major geopolitical statement.
While critics say China has not done the many things the US has done in space and has a long way to go to catch up – China does not need to replicate America’s past achievements – it merely needs to match or surpass America’s current achievements and is working to do exactly this.
Mission accomplished: Japanese Hayabusa2 carrying asteroid samples in December 2020 (Image: JAXA)
NASA and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) have both sent missions to asteroids – a major first step toward eventually exploiting the vast amount of resources trapped in them.
JAXA’s Hayabusa missions both retrieved samples from targeted asteroids and returned them to Earth. NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission has successfully collected a sample from asteroid Bennu and is slated to return it to Earth by 2023.
Getting into space and being able to reach a wide variety of destinations there – and being able to carry out a wide variety of activities will be key to expanding Earth’s economy into space. Government agencies and private companies are developing these capabilities at an increasingly faster pace each year with large implications regarding cooperation and conflict in space in the near future.
Conflict in Space
The networks being placed into orbit will enhance the economic and military capabilities of the respective nations on the ground launching them. The importance of creating and defending these networks is obvious.
Satellite navigation’s use in conducting warfare and in particularly accurately guiding unmanned aircraft and even munitions across the battlefield makes it an obvious target for electronic jamming.
F-35 Fighter (Image Source: Darin Russell/Lockheed Martin)
Here we can see the clearest example of how geopolitical competition on Earth is extending into the domain of space.
The National Interest in a 2019 article titled, “GPS Jammed: Russia Is Messing with America’s F-35s,” would claim:
Russian forces have been jamming GPS systems in the Middle East. The electronic-warfare campaign could affect U.S. forces gathering in the region in advance of potential strikes on Iran.
“Since last spring, pilots flying through the Middle East, specifically around Syria, have noted that their GPS systems have displayed the wrong location or stopped working entirely,” The Times of Israel reported in late June 2019.
GPS is essential for US military operations – and for pilots of warplanes like the F-35 in particular – both regarding navigation and guiding munitions to target. Jamming GPS signals in theater means partially blinding US warplanes and severely inhibiting their ability to carry out military operations.
While the US has claimed this jamming is a serious provocation, Syria is a nation the US has illegally occupied for years. This is in addition to its military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and, as the article points out, its planned military aggression against Iran, all nations thousands of miles from America’s shores, and all nations that pose no direct threat to the US itself.
The use of America’s GPS in the Middle East is explicitly for enabling military aggression abroad – not the defense of the United States itself.
With the founding of the US Space Force in late 2019, and with the new armed forces branch overseeing America’s GPS capabilities, it is certain that stopping Russia or any other nation from disrupting these capabilities overseas will become part of its mission.
It is clear that the US Space Force will be used – not to defend the United States itself – but to prevent others from defending themselves from US aggression and its spaceborne capabilities used to enable it.
Russia’s use of electronic jamming has complicated American aggression in the Middle East. But there are other threats to America’s spaceborne capabilities – and theoretically, to those of all other nations as well.
This includes anti-satellite missiles.
In 2007, when China tested an anti-satellite (ASAT) missile which destroyed one of its aging Fengyun series weather satellites, the West vocally protested – so much so – that many might believe China was the first ever to carry out such a test.
In reality, the US conducted a very similar test as early as 1985 using an ASM-135 ASAT missile mounted on an F-15 Eagle fighter aircraft. The missile was used to destroy the Solwind P78-1 satellite – a scientific platform nearing the end of its lifespan.
The early US test – like the Chinese one in 2007 – created debris that posed a hazard to other satellites and spacecraft in orbit. The US test even delayed the construction of what is now the International Space Station (ISS).
After the Chinese test in 2007 – and despite the US already demonstrating its ability to destroy satellites in orbit – the US carried out an additional ASAT mission a year later using a modified SM-3 missile to destroy the USA-193 reconnaissance satellite operated by the US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).
While the mission was justified by claiming there were fears that the malfunctioning satellite could enter the atmosphere and cause contamination with its highly toxic fuel – the timing following the Chinese missile test made it clear this story was just cover for what was a tit-for-tat demonstration vis-a-vis China and a test of US missile defense systems as provocative as the US claimed China’s test was.
Russia began testing modern ASAT missiles in 2015, conducting several tests but none of them directed at actually destroying a satellite in orbit.
India – a nation with an increasingly capable space program – tested an ASAT missile in 2019 successfully destroying a test satellite in low earth orbit (LEO).
In other words, several nations now possess the ability to not only jam satellites but also destroy them.
For nations like the US who depend heavily on its GPS network when fighting wars of aggression abroad – the destruction of even parts of its GPS network would immediately impact its fighting capacity and require a time consuming and expensive process to replace lost satellites.
The advent of ASAT systems has increased the cost of US military aggression abroad should red lines be crossed and either Russia or China decide to begin targeting this crucial component of American military might.
On the other hand, US-based SpaceX – should its Starship launch vehicle begin placing payloads into orbit, it would be capable of replacing entire constellations faster than they could be shot down.
Here, we can see the potential ingredients for a space-based arms race.
Should ULA’s cislunar economy – or a version of it – begin to take shape, it will be difficult to imagine how economics in orbit and on Earth, as well as the conflict that will inevitably arise will take full shape.
It may resemble in many ways the process of exploring for and exploiting hydrocarbons here on Earth with a process of staking and exploiting claims clearly defined and competitors moving on to other objects in search for resources.
If current studies of near earth objects are accurate, there would be more resources in space than human civilization has the ability to fully exploit – although real estate on the Moon or Mars, or specific asteroids in closer proximity to Earth would be likely candidates for races, competition, and possible conflict.
Conflict might be fought out on Earth between respective nations over what is happening in space or a new class of weapons and tactics might be developed for use in space-to-space combat.
Here on Earth we can already see attempts by the US to pressure nations like Iran and hinder the development of Iran’s space program – which has already successfully placed payloads into orbit and is developing more capable launch vehicles as well as its own satellites to place in orbit.
Denial to space, and denial to regions in space may become common themes in near-future warfare.
Cooperation in space or exclusion of certain nations from specific projects has already become a geopolitical tool. Russia’s monopoly over manned space launches – only recently broken by SpaceX’s crewed Dragon 2 spacecraft – was a useful tool for Moscow to remind America of the limits of its omnipotence.
America’s plans for a Lunar Gateway station now exclude Russia – a politically-motivated decision that will cost America in terms of technical expertise can capabilities Russia could offer the project.
America’s exclusion of China from virtually all cooperation with NASA including on the International Space Station would at first serve to hinder China’s space program – but now appears to be spurring it.
China now plans to launch its own space station and will use it to cooperate with any and all nations in space – including those thus far excluded by US-dominated projects.
These are possibilities that are no longer the domain of science fiction writers but the serious topics of policymakers and the aerospace branches of national armed forces around the globe.
Satellite-killing missiles, moon bases, Mars rovers, space stations, rockets taking off and landing under the power of their own engines – are fast becoming a reality or in some cases, are already here.
The new space race has begun and it is a race a growing number of nations and companies are joining on a nearly monthly basis.
Rockets are taking off from traditional launch sites in Florida and Kazakhstan – but also now from places like New Zealand and Amur Oblast in eastern Russia. SpaceX is building a spaceport in Boca Chica, Texas, near America’s border with Mexico. And China is constructing new launch facilities on land and at sea.
The scale and importance of activity in space is expanding rapidly, with ever-expanding rewards of the wealth, power and influence for its participants. Wherever there are people and resources – there will be competition, and in this new space race we will likely see this competition move beyond flag-planting and toward something that resembles actual conflict.
***
VIDEO: Amazon founder Jeff Bezos presents his and others’ plans for the future of outer space. Watch:Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 21:00 - New CDC Director Raises Alarm On "New Variants"… Despite Finding Virtually No Household Asymptomatic Spread
New CDC Director Raises Alarm On “New Variants”… Despite Finding Virtually No Household Asymptomatic Spread
On Friday, Biden’s new CDC Director, Rochelle Walensky, issued a ‘sobering warning’ over new COVID-19 variants – in particular the B.1.1.7 strain first found int he UK, and which now accounts for an estimated 10% of current US cases. Additionally, variants in California and New York also appear to spread more easily, according to Bloomberg.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky “Things are tenuous — now is not the time to relax restrictions,” said Walensky, adding “The latest data suggest that these declines may be stalling, potentially leveling off at still a very high number. We at the CDC consider this a very concerning shift in the trajectory.”
Walensky’s warning was simultaneously parroted by Anthony Fauci – head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – saying that people shouldn’t become complacent, and that we may be wearing masks into 2022.
“We really have to be careful and take a look at that curve,” he said, adding “If we plateau at 70,000, we are at that very precarious position that we were right before the fall surge, where anything that could perturb that could give us another surge.”
“We may be done with the virus but clearly the virus is not done with us.”
The renewed ‘concern’ comes as both COVID cases and deaths are falling precipitously.
According to BofA, “The seven-day average of new cases in the US is down up 5% from the prior week to 68,000,” which they attribute in part to the impact of last week’s winter storms driving down testing – but noting that “the true trend in infections is still likely modestly lower.”
And now for the chaser; The CDC just admitted in its own report that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission within households – a key justification for lockdowns – turns out to be virtually nonexistent. Household transmission is the primary mode of infection for COVID-19.
As The Federalist‘s Georgi Boorman writes:
The Jan. 29 report’s conclusion seems to fit the pro-mask narrative, of course: “Schools might be able to safely open with appropriate mitigation efforts [such as masking and not allowing student cohorts to mix] in place.” In the 17 rural Wisconsin schools surveyed, only seven cases were linked to in-school transmission out of 4,876 pupils, and no staff members were infected at school during the study period.
While the report spends ample time explaining the mitigation strategies employed in the schools and the high reported mask compliance (92%) among students, the authors later discuss something you probably have not seen in any of the mainstream media’s coverage of this report:
“Children might be more likely to be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 than are adults…This apparent lack of transmission [in schools] is consistent with recent research (5), which found an asymptomatic attack rate of only 0.7% within households and a lower rate of transmission from children than from adults. However, this study was unable to rule out asymptomatic transmission within the school setting because surveillance testing was not conducted” (emphasis added).
The study, a meta-analysis of 54 studies into household transmission of COVID-19, was posted as a pre-print over the summer and published in December.
The most significant portion of the analysis finds that while asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases account for just 0.7% of transmission, symptomatic cases had an 18% attack rate within the household. In other words, most people who contract COVID-19 at home were infected by someone who was visibly ill.
“Estimated mean household secondary attack rate from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) was significantly higher than from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%; P < .001), although there were few studies in the latter group. These findings are consistent with other household studies28,70 reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission," reads the study.
As Boorman continues: “The key, if not central, rationale for non-pharmaceutical interventions such as masking, distancing, and staying at home is allegedly significant transmission from people who don’t show symptoms. If the contagiousness of people without symptoms is not what drives the spread of SARS-COV-2, then no COVID restriction on public life besides staying home when you are clearly sick could be justified, considering the obvious negative consequences of these restrictions.”
Read the rest of the report here.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 20:40 - Socialism-In-Practice Was A Nightmare, Not Utopia
Socialism-In-Practice Was A Nightmare, Not Utopia
Authored by Richard Ebeling via The American Institute for Economic Research,
It is amazing sometimes how really short humanity’s historical memory can be. Listening to some in American academia and on social media, you would think that socialism was a bright, new, and shiny idea never tried before that promises a beautiful future of peace, love, and bountifulness for all. It is as if a hundred years of socialism-in-practice in a large number of countries around the world had never happened.
If the reality of actual socialism in the 20th century is brought up, many “progressives” and “democratic” socialists respond by insisting that none of these historical episodes were instances of “real” socialism. It was just that the wrong people had been in charge, or it had not been implemented in the right way, or political circumstances had prevented it from getting a “fair chance” of successfully working, or it is all lies or exaggerations about the supposed “bad” or harsh” experiences under these socialist regimes. You cannot blame socialism for there having been a Lenin, or a Stalin, or a Chairman Mao, or a Fidel Castro, or a Kim Il-Sung, or a Pol Pot, or a Hugo Chavez, or . . .
Tyranny, terror, mass murder, and economic stagnation, along with political plunder and privilege for the few at the top of socialist government hierarchies were not indicative of what socialism could be. Just give it one more chance. And, then, another chance, and another.
Soviet Statistical Lies Too Often Taken at Face Value in the West
These attitudes are really nothing new. Throughout the 20th century there were apologists aplenty making excuses, and accepting at face value whatever propaganda was spewed out by the mouthpieces for the socialist regime in Soviet Russia. They closed their eyes to any facts or evidence about what was going there. Those who found ways to escape from the prison camp known as the U.S.S.R. and who told about what life was actually like in the workers’ paradise were ignored or ridiculed as people with anti-Soviet axes to grind. Why else would they have left their wonderful Soviet motherland?
Another version of this blindness was the acceptance of Soviet economic statistics at face value by many reputed Soviet experts in the West, including the “professional” analysts inside the intelligence services of countries like the United States. Both before and after the Second World War, a majority of these scholars and analysts took for granted the official statistics and related data released by the Soviet government about how wonderful and successful the Soviet centrally planned economy was. Soviet propaganda heralded the planning successes of the Soviet Union becoming an industrial country in the 1930s with the introduction of five-year central plans, including the forced collectivization of farming. Then in the years following the Second World War, Soviet state planning agencies produced massive amounts of statistical data showing that in the postwar period all was well and vibrant on the road to socialist prosperity.
Communist Party leader Nikita Khrushchev proudly announced in 1961 that in twenty years; that is, by the 1980s, the Soviet people would be living in the long-promised and awaited future of a post-scarcity communism. The noted American economist and later Nobel Laureate, Paul Samuelson (1915-2009), had even suggested in his widely used economics textbook, in the editions published in 1960s and 1970s and even into the 1980s, that it was very possible that by the early 21st century, Soviet Gross Domestic Product would overtake American GDP. Soviet socialism will have shown its economic superiority over American capitalism.
Soviet Socialism Realistically Shown by Western Correspondents in Moscow
There were notorious apologists and propagandists for the Soviet Union during the period between the two World Wars among the Western press corps stationed in Moscow. The most scandalous of them was The New York Times correspondent, Walter Duranty (1884-1957), who even received a Pulitzer Prize for his coverup reporting of the famine in the early 1930s during Stalin’s forced collectivization of the land that caused the deaths of upwards of 12 million men, women and children.
But there were solid Western truth tellers who did their reporting stints in the Soviet Union during this time; once they were home from their tour in Moscow and were free of the Soviet censors who restricted what they could send out of the country to their newspaper editors in the West, they told the reality of things in great detail. Two of the best of them, in my opinion, were William Henry Chamberlin (1897-1969) in his books, Soviet Russia: A Living Record and a History (1931), Russia’s Iron Age (1934) and Collectivism: A False Utopia (1937), and Eugene Lyons (1898-1985), in his writings, Moscow Carousel (1935) and Assignment in Utopia (1937).
It particularly became the case of revealing uncensored accounts of real life under Soviet socialism in the 1970s and 1980s. No candy-coated dry statistical data here. In the standard reporting style, the correspondents explained the logic of the planned society by telling unending tales about the absurdities of how central direction of an economy actually worked from the perspective of ordinary people going through their everyday lives. As well as about the oppressions, arrests, and torture of any and all suspected of “anti-Soviet” thoughts and actions.
Again, in my view, among the most informative accounts may be found in Hedrick Smith, The Russians (1976), Robert G. Kaiser, Russia: The People and the Power (1976), David K. Shipler, Russia: Broken Idols, Solemn Dreams (1983), Michael Binyon, Life in Russia (1983), Kevin Klose, Russia and the Russians: Inside the Closed Society (1984), David Willis, Klass: How Russians Really Live (1985), David Remnick, Lenin’s Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire (1993), and Scott Shane, Dismantling Utopia: How Information Ended the Soviet Union (1994).
The Absurdities and Corruptions of Socialist Central Planning
In state enterprises, there was the meeting of manufacturing goals by producing components parts or finished products that met quantity and tonnage quotas under “the plan” that were unusable in size, shape or functionality, but which fulfilled the targets of output insisted upon by the central planners in Moscow. There were the consumer goods that were shoddy in quality, badly worked, and mismatched in quantities with those actually wanted by Soviet consumers in terms of styles, features, or dimensions. As long as production and output targets were met, at least on paper, it did not matter how stagnant, poor and frustrated were the lives of ordinary Soviet citizens, just so the middle level Communist Party authorities throughout the country and the central planning officials in Moscow could assure those above them in the higher echelons of Soviet power that all was going according to plan.
It did not matter how economically inefficient, wasteful, and misallocated material, machinery and men may have been from a hypothetical centrally planned coordination perspective. If the quantities and types of inputs that were assigned to each production plant and factory by the planning agencies were found too little or too much to fulfill the output planning quotas, the plant production managers always had at their disposal a fix-it man on staff who bartered or bribed for needed inputs at other factories to meet the monthly production targets with surplus inputs at their disposal as means of paying for them. Not that this informal and illegal factor and resource market had anything to do with real cost-efficiencies or productivities. It all was just a matter of having what you minimally needed to make sure you met the plan target for that month.
If that did not always work out, well, fudging the figures passed on to central planning bean counters higher up just needed to be done in the right way so that nobody noticed; and if it was caught by someone further up the Party and planning hierarchy, gifts and favors could be supplied to just the right person to assure that “juggling the books” remained safe “between friends.” Prices assigned to goods were meaningless, having been fixed by the planning agencies years, if not decades before, with no relevance or reality to actual supplies and demands. Endless lines for needed goods solved the rationing problems of Soviet society. For worthless goods, well, they could just sit on the shelves of unvisited government retail stores manned by government employees who could care less, as long as they got their pay and could “disappear” from work for hours to go about doing their own shopping for what they needed to get; hence, the popular Soviet phrase, “They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work.”
Witnessing Soviet Consumer Life in the Soviet Socialist Utopia
I was traveling frequently to the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s doing consulting work on market reforms and privatization, some of it with the Moscow city government and the Russian Parliament, but mostly with anti-Soviet members of the government in Soviet Lithuania, who were determined to reclaim their country’s national independence and reestablish a market-based economy. (See my article, “Witnessing Lithuania’s 1991 Fight for Freedom from Soviet Power”.)
Several times when in Moscow, I went to the GUM department store complex, facing the Kremlin across Red Square. Today, in post-Soviet Russia, it has been modernized with stores and boutiques not much different than any such shopping areas in Paris, London or New York. But back then, it was all owned and managed by the Soviet state and supplied by the production and quotas of the central planning agency, GOSPLAN.
The building had a U-shaped inside with three levels, on each level of which there were a variety of “people’s” retail stores. The building was old and dilapidated, with peeling paint and chips and cracks on the walls, walkways, and handrails. The place was dingy and dirty. It was an outstanding example of the achievements of Soviet socialism in service to the toiling masses in the bright and beautiful socialist paradise.
Sullen and tired-looking people walked around the three levels, passing by and giving generally empty looks as they passed one store after another with their mostly empty shelves attached to depressingly gray and bare walls. Sales personnel stood behind counters with no or few goods, glumly interrupted in their empty stares into nowhere whenever a few customers asked a question or wanted to buy something. Clearly, the Soviet socialist retail mottos were “Service with a rude frown and a harsh word,” and “The Soviet consumer is never right nor ever wanted.”
In the wisdom of Soviet central planning, there were no Western-style supermarkets. Instead, there were separate retail stores for individual or particular types of goods. I stood on a line in a “people’s” bread store, waiting and waiting to get to the counter at which I told a store employee which of the limited types of bread I wanted. I was given a ticket with the amounts desired and directed to stand and wait on a second line, at the end of which I paid for the loaves of bread I wished to buy. I was then given a receipt and instructed to join a third line from which, again after a long wait, I could pick up the bread I had paid for.
But, as the phrase goes, man does not live by bread alone. So, I went in search of the dairy and meat retail stores, which were not necessarily near where I had obtained the bread. And at each of these I repeated the pattern of line one, line two, and line three. Now, with bags containing whatever I was fortunate enough to actually find in supply at these stores, I finally found a store where bottled water and the Soviet version of soda drinks might be purchased. I got on a line that stretched well out into the street, and when, after a long, long wait, I had almost reached the counter inside the store, it was announced that they had exhausted their day’s supply and told everyone to come back tomorrow. But even in the socialist paradise, there were possibilities for a happy ending. From a corner inside the store a black marketeer shouted out that she had plenty of everything; of course, at a Soviet version of a “market” price. I had earlier noticed that this same woman now offering a plentitude of what people wanted had been standing in a doorway inside the store leading to the backroom where the bottled water and soda inventories were kept. What a coincidence!
Under the Watchful Eyes of Servants of the Soviet State
I often stayed in Moscow at the Cosmos Hotel, which was reserved for foreigners and into which Soviet citizens were barred, unless, of course, they were among the Party-approved prostitutes sharing their profits with their Party pimps and/or spying on selected foreign visitors about whom the Soviet authorities were especially interested. I once went out and did not return to the hotel that evening. When I came back the following morning, I took the elevator up to my floor, and when the doors opened I was greeted by one of the Soviet matrons assigned to each floor and grilled as to where I had been all night, since “It had been noticed” that my bed had not been slept in, and my movements needed to be accounted for. As the old song says, “Someone to Watch Over Me.”
I rented a car at this Moscow hotel so my future wife and I could drive to Leningrad for a long weekend, and she would show me the city where some of her friends lived. I was warned by everyone that whenever I parked I needed to remove the windshield wipers and lock them in the car if I did not want them to be stolen. I was told by several people that I better make sure that I had filled up the gas tank and had borrowed several portable gasoline canisters to refill the tank along the way, since there were almost no gasoline stations along the 500 miles of road between the two cities. In the socialist wonderland there were also few gasoline stations even in Moscow. After locating one, I had a two-hour wait on a line to finally get the car up to the gas pump. In addition, my fiancé made a point of packing plenty of food and drinks for the trip because there were neither restaurants nor rest areas (other than just pulling off the road into the forest) along the road. And this, on the main thoroughfare between the two showcase cities of the Soviet Union!
I also experienced the delight of being stopped by a militiaman (policeman) for a traffic violation near the Lubyanka, the headquarters of the KGB, and I practiced the art of cash bribe-giving, even though I had done nothing wrong in my driving. I had the pleasure of attempting to get needed medicines in the socialist society of “free” health care when it was difficult to find the right person at a “people’s” clinic and for the right price; and even if you found such a person and you have the money to pay the bribe, the chances were that the needed antibiotic was simply unavailable. I also had the chance of trying to go out for dinner at a restaurant, and finding that socialist Moscow had very few open for the general public, and the few that there were required you to bribe the doorman to gain entrance to then find out that 90 percent of anything on the printed menu was actually not available.
In the lobby of the old Russiya Hotel not far from the Kremlin I was having coffee with my future wife, when I noticed a hotel matron sitting on a bench along the wall pull out a small camera from under the coat on her lap and quickly take a picture of us before hiding the camera back under her coat. Somewhere in the archives of the secret police is the first-ever photo of the two of us together; if only I could get an 8×10 glossy! When we decided to get married, an official at the one marriage license office in Moscow that married Soviet citizens to foreigners told me that I would need a notarized document from the attorney general’s office in each of the 50 United States that certified that I was not married in their jurisdiction; in other words, I needed to prove a negative 50 times, and before any of the documents had expired. We were finally married in the U.S.
What a world was that of socialism-in-practice! A world of what the Austrian economist, Ludwig von Mises, titled one of his shorter books, Planned Chaos (1947). But even more, Soviet socialism was an upside-down Alice-in-Wonderland Through the Looking-Glass world of literal planned madness.
When the French sociologist, Gustave Le Bon published The Psychology of Socialism in 1899, he feared that, “One nation, at least, will have to suffer it [the establishment of a socialist system] for the instruction of the world. It will be one of those practical lessons which alone can enlighten the nations that are bemused with the dreams of happiness displayed before our eyes by the priests of the new [socialist] faith.” Is it really necessary to go through it all again? Let us hope not.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 20:20 - Biden To Let Trump-Era Rule Severely Regulating China Tech "Threats" Take Effect
Biden To Let Trump-Era Rule Severely Regulating China Tech “Threats” Take Effect
In a move that China state media has ironically enough said is part of broader White House policy that “smacks of Trumpism” – and which is also unpopular with American businesses, Biden will move forward with a rule that will allow the Commerce Department to ban tech-related business on US soil deemed to “pose a national security threat”.
It appears yet more confirmation that Trump’s prior efforts to “box-in” Biden on China are proving effective. The rule proposed under the Trump White House as late as January, and based on a prior Trump-issued executive order from 2019, might not be enforced as “aggressively” – officials quoted in The Wall Street Journal seek to assure, however, it’s also said that Biden doesn’t want to appear “soft” on China in nixing it.
Specifically, “Administration officials are concerned that blocking or diluting the rule would send the wrong message about the new administration’s approach to China, potentially fueling criticism that it is taking a weaker approach, according to the people,” WSJ writes.
Via Bloomberg It comes after a series of Biden national security cabinet picks have in recent weeks been pressed in confirmation hearings over whether they’d be “tough” on China. Despite this, it remains hugely controversial and deeply undesired among US businesses and industries, given at the very least the confusion and lack of compliance guidance that can be expected out of Washington.
Addressing the feared deep and lasting negative impact on the US economy itself, WSJ explains:
The rule could affect millions of American businesses, according to a Commerce Department estimate, potentially requiring them to get government clearance for purchases and deals involving sophisticated technology with what the regulation calls a “foreign adversary,” or face potential unwinding of the deals or other enforcement.
Everything from sophisticated electronics, most especially computer components and iPhones, to camera equipment to vehicles, could potentially be impacted by a web of confusing regulations that could ensue.
Leading the charge against implementing the rule includes IBM, which was quoted in Bloomberg as saying, “By the Commerce Department’s own estimate, this rule would impose many billions of dollars in new compliance costs on millions of U.S. firms, including countless small businesses.”
As indicated in the quote by IBM Regulatory Affairs Vice President Christopher Padilla, it’s simply Biden carrying a Trump policy on “autopilot”: “Such a massive, overbroad, and economically damaging Trump-administration rule should not be on autopilot,” he said. It goes without saying that small businesses are still being battered by the COVID-impacted economy, which means Biden’s move will further be seen as hitting them while they’re still down – perhaps all in the name of not being “soft” on China.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 20:00 - Judge Rules Arizona's Maricopa County Must Turn Over 2.1 Million November Election Ballots To Senate
Judge Rules Arizona’s Maricopa County Must Turn Over 2.1 Million November Election Ballots To Senate
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
A judge on Friday ruled that Maricopa County must provide some 2.1 million ballots from the Nov. 3 election to the Arizona state Senate and allow access to its election equipment to conduct an audit.
Poll workers count ballots inside the Maricopa County Election Department in Phoenix, Ariz., on Nov. 5, 2020. (Olivier Touron/AFP via Getty Images) Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Timothy Thomason ruled that subpoenas issued by Arizona’s state Senate are valid and should be enforced, and he disputed arguments from Maricopa County officials saying the subpoenas are unlawful. The county previously stated that multiple audits have been sufficient and said ballots should be sealed.
“The Court finds that the subpoenas are legal and enforceable,” Thomason wrote (pdf) in his ruling. “There is no question that the Senators have the power to issue legislative subpoenas. The subpoenas comply with the statutory requirements for legislative subpoenas. The Senate also has broad constitutional power to oversee elections.”
He argued that the “Arizona legislature clearly has the power to investigate and examine election reform matters,” adding that senators can “subpoena material as part of an inquiry into election reform measures.”
The move was hailed by Republican legislators in Arizona.
Arizona Senate President Karen Fann, a Republican, told news outlets after the judge’s ruling that their move was “never about overturning the election, it was about the integrity of the Arizona election system.”
“This was always about voter integrity and the integrity of the voting system itself,” Fann added.
State Sen. Warren Petersen, a Republican, confirmed that the Senate will go through with a “forensic audit” of Maricopa’s Nov. 3 election results. Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, saw more than 2.1 million people vote during the last election.
But Bill Gates, the vice-chairman of the Maricopa Board of Supervisors, wrote Friday that the county has “nothing to hide,” adding that officials have “conducted three fully transparent audits, including two forensic audits by independent, qualified and outside Vote System Testing Laboratories.”
“I trust the Senate will be completely transparent with the public as Maricopa County has been,” he added. “From the beginning, the County sought clarification from the court. The court has ruled. I look forward to working with the Senate to provide them the information they are requesting.”
The subpoenas were issued following allegations of voter fraud and irregularities made by former President Donald Trump and surrogates including Rudy Giuliani.
A dispute over the election began when former Senate Judiciary Chairman Eddie Farnsworth held a hearing to question county officials about the election. Farnsworth and Fann then issued several subpoenas, which prompted Maricopa County to issue a lawsuit. The subpoenas were re-issued in January.
It’s not clear if the Maricopa Board of Supervisors will appeal Thomason’s decision. The Epoch Times has reached out to the county for comment.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 19:40 - 'Brace For Rampant Inflation': Hedge Fund Billionaire Stunned At "Market Craziness", Sees "Trouble Ahead"
‘Brace For Rampant Inflation’: Hedge Fund Billionaire Stunned At “Market Craziness”, Sees “Trouble Ahead”
In 2012 Elliott Management’s Paul Singer correctly warned that financial system leverage and technology would “serve as an accelerant in the next crisis”:
“The major message that I want to give you (and I’ve invited challenge on both parts of my thesis here and I’ve never had anybody challenge it): The major financial institutions in the US and around the globe are utterly opaque; and The next financial crisis will happen faster, more suddenly.“
Risk did indeed happen fast, numerous times since.
In 2014, Singer went more aggressively after the central banks and their arrogant largesse:
“There is no reason to suppose that they [central bankers] understand the modern financial system and economy to any greater extent than they did in 2007 (that is to say, not at all). Nevertheless, they plow ahead, expressing total confidence that what they are saying and doing is wise and not dangerous drivel.”
…
“It is unlikely that these unprecedented and experimental government policies of such gargantuan scope will actually create the desired result and allow themselves to be able to be unwound without great shock and disruption to the global financial system.”
His solution at the time:
“Although the levitation of financial assets has yet to levitate gold, we will grit our collective teeth on that score and await either ‘asset price justice’ or the ‘end times,’ whichever comes first.”
Justice was to come a couple of times since.
Interestingly, 2014 was when Singer began to warn about inflation and the potential for social unrest:
“…inflation is spreading in both scope and intensity. If and when it breaks out in an inescapably broad way, there will be a crowd of seriously confused policymakers making excuses and claiming that inflation does not in fact exist; it is not their fault; it was completely unpredictable; and/or it will actually be good for people.
“We believe that if and when inflation goes from being something that affects only a particular list of assets (a growing list, presently a combination of things owned by the well-off plus a number of things that are basic necessities) to a widespread “in-your-face” phenomenon affecting the cost of living of almost the entire population, then the normal yardsticks of risk, return and profit may be thrown into the garbage can. These measures may be replaced by a scramble by citizens and investors to preserve value on a foundation of shifting sand, together with societal unrest that may make the current politically-useful “inequality” riffs, blaming the “1%” and attacking those “millionaires and billionaires” who refuse to “pay their fair share,” look like mere warm-ups for real class warfare.”
He hasn’t always been right, obviously, as he claimed in 2016 that Donald Trump (if elected) would “cause a widespread global depression.” Quite the opposite happened, and the depression, it turns out did not happen until China (allegedly) unleashed COVID on the world.
Which brings us to Singer’s prophetic 2019 warning that a 40% crash was coming for the stock market.
“global debt is at an all-time high. Derivatives are at an all-time high and it took all of this monetary easing to get to where we are today and I don’t think central bankers, or policymakers or academics are in any better shape to predict the next downturn and I think we are the high end of the risk spectrum.”
He then ominously added that “I’m expecting the possibility of a significant market downturn.”
“December [2018] supported the notion that they’re trapped,” he said.
“What they should have done, and what they should do now, is try to restore the soundness of money. They should not be cutting rates right now. They should be calling on the congresses and parliaments around the developed world to take steps to deal with the economic slowdown in growth.”
He was right again in 2020 as all hell broke loose everywhere and prompted more of the policies he has been warning of since at least 2012.
And now – after 10 years – Singer is readying himself for the final victory lap, as he tells investors in his latest letter that he can’t wait to say “I told you so” having long-warned of an ugly end to the Fed’s extreme (and getting extreme-er) easy-money policies.
“We believe that hindsight will show the champion of head-smacking craziness in the American stock market to be the period playing out right now,” the 76-year-old exclaimed, adding that a “flamboyant line-up” of excesses will come back to haunt investors.
The (very visible) invisible hand behind all this excess is, in Singer’s (correct) opinion, The Fed (and the rest of the world’s central banking copycats) as he echoes Michael ‘Big Short’ Burry’s recent warnings of out of control “rampant inflation” that will shock policy makers, stock pickers and bond investors, alike.
“‘Trouble ahead’ is signaled by a rare combination of low-quality securities, staggering valuation metrics, overleveraged capital structures, a scarcity of honest profits, a desperate dearth of understanding evinced by the most active traders, and economic macro prospects that are not as thrilling as the mobs braying ‘Buy! Buy!’ seem to think,” he wrote.
Having registered annualized gains of about 13%, Elliott’s performance over 44 years suggest Singer is worth listening to as Bloomberg reports he clearly exuded frustration at what he sees as the hysteria driving everything from Bitcoin to government debt – a “return-free risk,” as his letter put it.
Specifically, Singer is not a big fan (to understate it extremely) of Bitcoin:
“Pulling out your hair is an option, though only if you have hair to spare,” the mostly bald Singer wrote.
“Hiding under the bed to avoid people who gloat about being long Bitcoin can get…tiring. Deep breathing exercises can work, but only for short periods. We continue to press on for the day when we can say, ‘We told you so.’”
In conclusion we go back to Singer’s 2012 warning.
“Nobody in America has actually seen, or most people probably can’t even contemplate, what an actual loss of confidence may look like.
If you think about some of these elements and how they might interact, you might come up with other paths of transmission or risk and pain. But I wouldn’t go about your business thinking it’s business as usual in a typical post-crisis, post bear market recovery.”
Given the chaos in Treasury markets this week, it seemed apropos.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 19:20 - Global Military Spending Hit Record High In 2020 With US In The Lead
Global Military Spending Hit Record High In 2020 With US In The Lead
Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,
Despite the damage coronavirus lockdowns did to the world’s economy, 2020 marked a record high in global military spending, according to a new report. As always, the US was in the lead, accounting for 40.3 percent of the world’s military expenditures at $738 billion.
The report, released by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), says total military expenditures added up to $1.83 trillion in 2020, a 3.9 percent increase from 2019. “This came despite the coronavirus pandemic and the subsequent contraction in global economic output,” the IISS said.
Via War on the Rocks Second behind the US was China, which accounted for 10.6 percent, or $193.3 billion. After the US and China, the top spenders were India, the UK, and Russia.
The report said military spending increased in the US by 6.3 percent in 2020. In China, it grew by 5.3 percent, slightly lower than the 5.9 percent growth seen in 2019.
Based on the research, Stars & Stripes had some interesting observations on China:
However, IISS and other research groups have questioned China’s budget transparency in recent years. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute pegged Chinese defense spending at $261 billion in 2019.
China’s maritime paramilitary forces are using facilities in the South China Sea as forward operating bases, the report noted. China has also built artificial islands in the sea over the last decade and constructed bases on natural features claimed by other nations in the region.
“Beijing seems intent on achieving primacy in its littoral areas,” IISS said.
Meanwhile, China’s navy has maintained an “over-the-horizon” presence focused on extending its reach.
The top 15 military budgets in fiscal year 2020, via IISS
European NATO countries have increased military spending by 20 percent since 2014, according to the report. Although in 2020, Europe’s military spending only grew by 2 percent, compared with 4.1 the year prior.
But overall, IISS believes Europe could be where the most growth in defense spending is seen in the coming years.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 19:00 - The Ten "Peaks" Behind BofA's Call For A Second Half Crash
The Ten “Peaks” Behind BofA’s Call For A Second Half Crash
Having been bearish for much of the past 3 months, BofA’s Chief Investment Officer looks at the chaos unleashed by surging bond yields in the past week, and extrapolates a period of much greater pain across all markets, driven by a flood of what he calls the “contrarian Ps” which include:
- pandemic (vaccine winning),
- prices (bond crash),
- positioning (bullish),
- policy (excessive & impotent),
- profits (peaking Q2)
… which leads Hartnett to an “absolute” call that the first half od 2021 will mark the top in stocks & credit, leading to a substantial market correction, while relative value call is inflation hedges, with Hartnett calling “energy the new BTD trade” (something we have been saying since last fall), while growth defensives such as staples the barbell partner to this core trade.
And just to round off the increasingly dismal picture, Hartnett then lays out ten “peaks” that underscore his pre-crash outlook:
Peak pandemic: global vaccines (219mn) outpacing global virus (113mn – Chart 3); anticipation of vaccine > virus has already been Q4/Q1 catalyst for reopening>lockdown, cyclicals>defensives, small>large, value>growth…sell-the-vaccine = risk>return.
Peak prices I: bond sell-off hitting speculative froth, ghosts of 1999, ARKK look ominously like Invesco (Chart 5).
Peak prices II: bond sell-off eroding bull leadership of i) Housing (past three months US house prices annualizing 19% gain, lumber prices have doubled – Chart 4), ii) Credit (LQD <$133, EMB <110 & HYG rolling), iii) Tech (Amazon down since Aug, NDX & KOSDAQ down YTD).
Peak prices III: bond sell-off…next risk big levels fail, e.g. Dow Jones 30k, Nikkei 30k, SOX 3k, KOSPI 3k, ChiNext 3k. bond sell-off has been wonderful for high yield, small cap, banks, energy, EM…when these reverse as bond yield rise = rate rise flips from good to bad (Chart 6); most imp triggers for bonds = cyclicals selloff…HYG 6.55 (China no longer tolerating FX appreciation).
Peak positioning: only reason to be bearish is there is no reason to be bearish…record, stunning $414bn inflow to stocks past 16 weeks (Chart 7), and yet stocks struggling; unlike ‘13 & ’18 bond losses in ’21 yet to incite bond fund outflows.
Peak policy I: rate cuts in 2020 = 191; rate cuts in 2021 = 3; no Fed YCC before >2% GT10 yields or <3400 SPX.
Peak policy II: monetary impotence or fiscal impotence inducing bond sell-off that exceeds on annualized basis 1994, 1999, but not quite taper tantrum of 2013 (Chart 8); bond busts (don’t forget 2018) lead to contagion, illiquidity, busts, bankruptcies…volatility & hedges against inflation & currency debasement set to outperform in 2021.
Peak policy III: 3Rs of Rates, Regulation, Redistribution historic catalysts end bull markets & bubbles…we say all ’21 events, not ’22, all spell lower/volatile coming quarters; 2020 = secular low for rates/inflation = “buy humiliation, sell hubris” = inflation assets to beat deflation in coming years.
Peak profits I: BofA Global EPS model says peak profits 20-25% YoY in Q2; could be >10% nominal GDP growth, surge in labor participation rates quashing wage growth, inflation peaks Q2 not EPS, productivity on up as COVID-19 inspires tech innovation means we wrong, but….
Peak profits II: a. even during stagflationary ‘70s, equities obeyed PMIs and today’s PMI levels rarely get higher;
… b. past 9 months…Asian exports…”V”, global PMIs…”V”, US housing…”V”, US retail sales…”V”, global capital goods orders “V”… yet no one believes global inflation will “V” despite epic stock market & housing inflation, US politicians about to spend another $2tn, TIPS breakevens highest since ’11…
… maybe a straw that will break the camel’s back…watch March 30th Alabama vote on unionization at Amazon; trough labor unionization & peak corporate equity valuation not a good combo.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 18:40 - Trump Is "Still The Future Of The Republican Party" Says Don Jr.
Trump Is “Still The Future Of The Republican Party” Says Don Jr.
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Donald Trump Jr. asserted that his father, former President Donald Trump, is still the future of the GOP ahead of his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) this weekend.
“If you’re reading the room and you’re intelligent, you realize that Donald Trump is still the future of the Republican Party,” Trump Jr. said on Fox News. “Those people who are being displaced by illegals, those people who are being swept aside by the Democrat Party, who has just flagrantly ignored them for decades, Donald Trump is all over that,” he added.
Trump Jr. is scheduled to speak at CPAC on Friday, while the former president will give a speech on Sunday.
The former commander-in-chief has not yet indicated whether he would run for president in 2024. Trump was impeached and later acquitted by the Senate earlier this month, triggering a schism between Republicans who either voted to impeach or convict and those who did not.
Since the Jan. 6 Capitol breach, a number of corporations severed ties with Republicans. The younger Trump argued that it may ultimately be a positive development because it shows the GOP represents working-class Americans, rather than Democrats—who have for decades attempted to cast themselves as the party representing the working class and unions.
“The Republican Party isn’t going to be bound to those corporate interests anymore,” he argued in the Fox interview. “So I love that they are making that link and breaking it, because we need more of that and we need candidates and people who will go to bat, who will go to war and fight for the American working class and make sure we put them first.
Trump added that it’s unprecedented in history for it to be considered “controversial” for “leaders of a nation to put their people first.” He added: “Why is it now, and how do the Democrats get away with making America last as opposed to first?”
A number of opinion polls in recent weeks suggest that Trump is still viewed highly by Republican voters, with one survey showing that up to 70 percent of Republicans would consider joining a Trump-backed political party.
Since the Jan. 6 incident, Trump was de-platformed by Big Tech firms, including Twitter—his once-favored social media platform—and has delivered messages to supporters and the media mainly via email. Should he run again for president, it’s not clear if he would attempt to join an alternative social media website and app like Parler or start his own.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 18:20 - US & Israel Convene Top Secret "Strategic Forum" On Iran
US & Israel Convene Top Secret “Strategic Forum” On Iran
With expected EU-sponsored US and Iranian talks toward restoring the nuclear deal (JCPOA) still at an impasse before they’ve even begun, Israel is on a full diplomatic blitz of Capitol Hill to prevent what’s it’s long claimed to be merely Tehran’s “cover” for secretly developing a nuke, even with inspectors on the ground.
As Washington and Tehran continue their blame game and tit-for-tat on who will “comply first”, the Biden administration will sit down with Israeli security officials for a “strategic forum” on Iran. Axios first learned this week that the close allies have “elected to reconvene a strategic working group on Iran, with the first round of talks on intelligence surrounding the Iranian nuclear program expected in the coming days.”
Via AP This will present Tel Aviv with an official forum with which to make Netanyahu’s case for permanently shooting down the 2015 nuclear deal, or at least to impose higher and more stringent requirements on Iran if it hopes to keep its nuclear energy program. Alternately, the White House is likely to use the opportunity to ensure a political fight will be avoided with America’s closest Mideast ally.
The “working group” on Iran was first established under the Obama administration, giving opportunity for intelligence sharing at the highest levels – even at a policy level – which has made it a ‘top secret’ initiative from the beginning. The need for the group became somewhat moot given Trump later ramped up ‘maximum pressure’ and turned toward regime change strategizing.
Axios reviews some of the details of the reestablished US-Israeli forum as follows:
- It was the main venue for strategizing over how to apply pressure to Iran during Obama’s first term, and it became the primary setting to air disagreements about the nuclear deal during Obama’s second term.
- During Donald Trump’s tenure, the forum convened to discuss the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal and to coordinate the “maximum pressure” campaign.
- The forum is headed by the U.S. and Israeli national security advisers — currently Jake Sullivan and Meir Ben-Shabbat — and includes top officials from across the various national security, foreign policy and intelligence agencies in both countries.
Meanwhile, the Netanyahu government has considered US re-entry into the JCPOA as nothing less than an “emergency” and national security crisis.
Further complicating matters was the fact that it took Biden a full month to actually return the Israeli Prime Minister’s phone call. The new forum will likely be Israel’s only shot at engaging the White House on the Islamic Republic.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 18:00 - For Bonds, This Is Now The Second Worst Bear Market In 40 Years
For Bonds, This Is Now The Second Worst Bear Market In 40 Years
Last December, we predicted that the US was heading for a “titanic taper tantrum” in 2021, to an extent as a result of a sharp drop in bond demand as a result of reduced bond purchases by the Fed but also due to a spike in inflation which would lead to a sharp drop in demand for duration.
So fast forward to this week when the crash in US Treasurys, and especially the belly of the curve led by a plunge in 5Y prices…
… led to a historic vol shock as the real 10Y yield soared and which crushed both bond and equity bulls, but especially risk parity and balanced funds, who suffered tremendous losses as the conventional hedging role that bonds play was reversed as the bond stock correlation reversed from deeply negative to positive…
… resulting in a crushing blow to risk parity returns.
What is more remarkable is that while this week was terrible for bond bulls, the past year has been just as painful. As Bank of America’s Michael Hartnett writes today, the past 12 months have been great for equity investors with the GOAT rally since March, coupled with a GOAT V-shape macro recovery… yet on the other side we have had a bond bear market which is now also one of greatest-of-all-time. Consider that since Aug 4th annualized price return from +10-year US govt bonds = -29%, Australia -19% (they do YCC!), UK -16%, Canada -10%. Hartnett’s advice is to watch bank stocks for the “tell” on how badly the bond rout is hurting liquidity & growth expectations.
But going back to our original warning from December about a “titanic taper tantrum”, what we find stunning is that while Thursday may well have been the culmination of growing concerns about runaway inflation (and, to Michael Burry, hyperinflation), even if more pain is certainly coming if the US is set to suffer through a period of 4%, 5%, 6% or more inflation, the pain for bonds over the past year is absolutely staggering, and as Michael Hartnett notes, the “Vaccine Bear Market” in bonds is now the second worst bear market in history…
… and warns that the monetary impotence or fiscal impotence inducing bond sell-off that exceeds on annualized basis 1994, 1999, but not quite taper tantrum of 2013, may “lead to contagion, illiquidity, busts, and bankruptcies” … which is why volatility & hedges against inflation & currency debasement set to outperform in 2021.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/26/2021 – 17:40
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
