- Italian Car Sales Plunged 98% In April
Italian Car Sales Plunged 98% In April
You can’t get much more of a “worse case scenario” in auto sales than watching numbers plunge an astounding 98%. But that’s exactly what has happened with new car sales in Italy, which remains mostly on lockdown, for the first 24 days of April for this year.
Across all sales channels in Italy, there were only 2,182 registrations, down from 107,930 the year prior, according to Automotive News Europe.
The numbers out of Italy likely provide foreshadowing for what the rest of Europe’s numbers will look like for the month of April. In Italy, showrooms closed during the beginning of March and those who had automobiles on order already were unable to take delivery of their new vehicles. March sales had already fallen 85%.
Dealers in Italy are going to be able to start re-opening May 4, after being shut down alongside of dealers in the UK, France and Spain. Germany has already allowed some of its showrooms to re-open.
The body that represents foreign automakers in Italy, UNRAE, reported that it expected car registrations to fall by up to 98% for the month. The Italy foreign carmakers’ association is pleading with the government to approve measures to boost car demand as soon as activities reopen, according to Bloomberg.
Estimates are for Italy to finish the month with total sales of between 2,500 and 2,600 units, compared to 175,654 in 2019. The total would have been even lower had Renault not registered 317 EVs in one day for a rental car company.
Recall, we reported that U.S. auto sales plunged to their worst numbers in a decade for March, with April numbers expected in just days. “The whole world is turned upside down right now,” one U.S. auto market researcher said in late March.
“There are basically no U.S. auto sales right now,” analyst Adam Jonas had commented.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 04/29/2020 – 02:35 - EU Self-Censors As China's Global Intimidation Campaign Grows
EU Self-Censors As China’s Global Intimidation Campaign Grows
Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,
The European Union has caved in to pressure from China and has watered down a report on Chinese efforts to deflect blame for the coronavirus pandemic. Officials in Beijing reportedly threatened to block the export of medical supplies to Europe if the report was published in its original form.
The revelations come as Chinese diplomats around the world are waging an aggressive disinformation campaign — described as a “Wolf Warrior” style of diplomacy, named after a Chinese nationalist action film series — aimed at controlling the narrative about the origins of the coronavirus.
Chinese envoys have been especially aggressive on Twitter, which they are using to attack, intimidate and silence Western journalists, lawmakers and think tank scholars — essentially anyone who contradicts China’s official version of events.
Over the past year, more than 60 Chinese diplomats and diplomatic missions set up Twitter or Facebook accounts, according to the Reuters news agency, even though both platforms are banned in China, and have been using them to attack Beijing’s critics around the world.
On April 21, the Brussels-based news outlet Politico Europe reported that it had received an advance copy of an EU report about Chinese and Russian disinformation activities related to the coronavirus disease (Covid-19). The report, which the EU was planning to publish that same day, included the following paragraph:
“China has continued to run a global disinformation campaign to deflect blame for the outbreak of the pandemic and improve its international image. Both overt and covert tactics have been observed.”
Chinese officials quickly contacted the European Union’s representatives in Beijing to try to kill the report, according to the New York Times, which also received an original version of it.
The EU’s External Action Service eventually published the report — Covid-19 Disinformation — on April 24 but the language on China was heavily toned-down. The New York Times explained:
“The original report cited Beijing’s efforts to curtail mentions of the virus’s origins in China, in part by blaming the United States for spreading the disease internationally. It noted that Beijing had criticized France as slow to respond to the pandemic and had pushed false accusations that French politicians used racist slurs against the head of the World Health Organization….
“But China moved quickly to block the document’s release, and the European Union pulled back. The report had been on the verge of publication, until senior officials ordered revisions to soften the language….
“The sentence about China’s ‘global disinformation’ campaign was removed, as was any mention of the dispute between China and France. Other language was toned down….”
Under pressure from Chinese officials, Esther Osorio, a communications adviser to Josep Borrell, the head of the EU diplomatic service, personally intervened to delay the release of the initial report. The New York Times wrote:
“Ms. Osorio, the aide to Mr. Borrell, asked analysts to revise the document to focus less explicitly on China and Russia to avoid accusations of bias, according to an email and interviews. She asked analysts to differentiate between pushing disinformation and aggressively pushing a narrative, and to document each ‘as we already see heavy pushback from CN’ — an abbreviation for China.”
The EU was reportedly hoping to get better treatment for European companies in China. On April 25, however, the South China Morning Post, which also obtained a copy of the original report, revealed that Beijing had threatened to withhold medical supplies from Europe if the section on China was not removed.
The Indian geopolitical analyst Brahma Chellaney summed up the broader implications of the EU’s actions:
“EU self-censors its report after pressure from China. Diluting its report, EU removed references to China’s pandemic-related ‘disinformation campaign.’ EU remains a weak link in building a concert of democracies against China’s muscular authoritarianism.”
Meanwhile, Chinese diplomats around the world, led by Foreign Minister Wang Yi, have been lashing out at governments and individuals they feel have insulted China. Some analysts say this reflects China’s growing influence in international affairs. “China wants other countries to know who’s boss,” wrote China watcher Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian.
Other analysts argue that China’s intransigence reflects the fragility of the Chinese Communist Party and that Chinese President Xi Jinping is fueling nationalism to consolidate his control amid growing domestic anger over his mishandling of the coronavirus crisis. “All governments worry how they’ll survive this plague, but for a one-party authoritarian government, the fears are existential,” noted Kevin Libin, columnist and managing editor of Canada’s National Post.
In any event, Chinese pressure tactics have worked in some instances — including with the European Union and the Philippines. With others, China’s bullying has backfired spectacularly.
On April 15, Germany’s most popular newspaper, Bild, published an article titled, “What China Owes Us So Far,” which suggested that China should pay Germany €150 billion ($162 billion) in reparations for the coronavirus pandemic. The article included an itemized list of economic damage, including €50 billion for losses to small businesses and €24 billion for lost tourism.
The Chinese Embassy in Berlin responded by accusing Bild of racism. In a letter, embassy spokesperson Tao Lili wrote:
“Your report not only lacks essential facts and precise timelines, but also a minimum of journalistic due diligence and fairness. Those who do as you did with today’s newspaper article fuel nationalism, prejudice, xenophobia and animosity against China. It does not do justice to the traditional friendship between our two peoples or a serious understanding of journalism. Against this background, I ask myself, where in your editorial office does the dislike of our people and our state come from?”
Rather than being cowed into submission, Bild’s editor-in-chief, Julian Reichelt, countered with his own letter: “You Are Endangering the Entire World.” It was published in German and English and addressed directly to President Xi Jinping. Reichelt wrote:
“You rule by surveillance. You wouldn’t be president without surveillance. You monitor everything, every citizen, but you refuse to monitor the diseased wet markets in your country.
“You shut down every newspaper and website that is critical of your rule, but not the stalls where bat soup is sold. You are not only monitoring your people, you are endangering them — and with them, the rest of the world.
“Surveillance is a denial of freedom. And a nation that is not free, is not creative. A nation that is not innovative, does not invent anything. This is why you have made your country the world champion in intellectual property theft.
“China enriches itself with the inventions of others, instead of inventing on its own. The reason China does not innovate and invent is that you don’t let the young people in your country think freely. China’s greatest export hit (that nobody wanted to have, but which has nevertheless gone around the world) is Corona….
“You have created an inscrutable, non-transparent China. Before Corona, China was known as a surveillance state. Now, China is known as a surveillance state that infected the world with a deadly disease. That is your political legacy.
“Your embassy tells me that I am not living up to the ‘traditional friendship of our peoples.’ I suppose you consider it a great ‘friendship’ when you now generously send masks around the world. This isn’t friendship, I would call it imperialism hidden behind a smile — a Trojan Horse.
“You plan to strengthen China through a plague that you exported. You will not succeed. Corona will be your political end, sooner or later.”
Other recent examples of efforts by Chinese diplomats to intimidate and silence those abroad who challenge the Chinese government include:
Australia
On April 23, Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison called on all countries that are members of the World Health Organization (WHO) to support an independent inquiry into the coronavirus pandemic. He said that all members of the WHO should be obliged to participate in a review and added that Australia would push for the inquiry during the WHO Assembly on May 17.
China’s foreign ministry spokesman, Geng Shuang, replied: “The so-called independent inquiry proposed by Australia is in reality political manipulation. We advise Australia to give up its ideological prejudices.”
Brazil
China’s Ambassador to Brazil, Yang Wanming, shared a tweet, later deleted, calling the family of President Jair Bolsonaro a “huge poison” after his son Eduardo blamed the “Chinese dictatorship” for the coronavirus pandemic. The tweet drew a rebuke from Brazilian Foreign Minister Ernesto Araújo, who said the tweet was inappropriate behavior for an ambassador.
Canada
On April 19, the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa denounced the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI), a leading Canadian think tank, after it published an open letter accusing Chinese authorities of covering up the pandemic. The Chinese Embassy wrote:
“Recently, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute published the so-called open letter, falsely claimed that the roots of the pandemic are in a cover-up by China, carried out malicious slander and attacks on the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government, and grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs. The Chinese side expresses its firm opposition over such actions by the MLI…. We urge the MLI to abide by the professional ethics, focus on the work a think tank is supposed to do, refrain from politicizing the research work, and give up anti-China nonsense.”
A scholar at the MLI, Kaveh Shahrooz, tweeted:
“The Chinese embassy in Canada has issued a statement attacking the @MLInstitute, where I serve as a Senior Fellow. We are a thorn in the side of the governments like those of China, Iran, and Russia. I am immensely proud of this fact.”
Another MLI scholar, Shuvaloy Majumdar, tweeted:
“I would like to congratulate the PRC Embassy-Ottawa for helping draw more scrutiny to the Communist Party’s intimidation of its own people, and its continued abuse abroad.”
The Canadian government has remained silent on the issue. Charles Burton, a senior fellow and China expert at the MLI, said that Ottawa’s silence will only embolden Beijing to make further attempts to stifle free speech in Canada:
“One would expect that the government of Canada would engage with the Chinese embassy about such a statement. It’s clearly an attempt to interfere with freedom of expression by a Canadian think tank and make allegations against the think tank that are clearly without basis whatsoever.”
On April 19, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney tweeted:
“Shocked to learn that my longtime friend Martin Lee, founder of the Hong Kong Democratic Party, was arrested today together with many of #HongKong’s most prominent citizens. Martin is the elder statesman of Hong Kong democracy. I hope for his immediate release.”
The Chinese Consulate General in Calgary responded:
“The Premier of Alberta commented on Twitter on the lawful arrest of an anti-China rioter by the Hong Kong police. No one stays out of the law. Ignoring the facts and openly advocating for the rioters can only undermine the rule of law, which is not in Canada’s own interests. We urge local politicians to abide by the basic norms governing international relations, respect the Hong Kong SAR law enforcement, and immediately stop interfering in China’s internal affairs.”
Kenney replied:
“I acknowledge that Alberta doesn’t have a foreign policy and I don’t freelance in foreign policy, but I’ll just say this — when a personal friend of mine is arrested as a political prisoner, I cannot in good conscience remain silent.”
When China regained sovereignty over Hong Kong from the British in 1997, Beijing agreed to allow Hong Kong to enjoy its freedoms until 2047, in an arrangement known as “one country, two systems.”
On April 14, The Globe and Mail, the most widely-read newspaper in Canada, published an opinion article titled, “The Chinese Communist Party’s Culture of Corruption and Repression has Cost Lives around the World.” The article accused the CCP of concealing, destroying, falsifying, fabricating, suppressing, misrepresenting information about the epidemic; of silencing and criminalizing dissent; and of disappearing whistleblowers, “all of which reflect the breadth of criminality and corruption in the party.” The article called on the international community to hold Chinese authorities accountable for their roles in creating “one of the greatest humanitarian crises in history.”
The Chinese Embassy in Ottawa replied that the article was “full of hatred and prejudice” against the Communist Party of China (CPC):
“How could anyone speak of such a thing as accountability? The ‘political virus’ of stigma is more dangerous than the disease itself. Those who try to ascribe so-called ‘criminality’ to the CPC are viewing China with ideological prejudice, and the ‘political motive’ behind that is doubtful.
“We advise those persons to focus on their domestic epidemic prevention and control efforts. To shift blames won’t help mitigate the epidemic at home, nor will it help the international cooperation in prevention and control of the pandemic.”
On April 1, The Globe and Mail published an opinion article, “Why Would We Trust China’s Official COVID-19 Numbers?” It asked:
“The Chinese government’s first instinct has always been to hide the facts, especially if they reveal its own failures, so why would anyone believe the data coming out of China now on COVID-19? …. The Communist government owes its very legitimacy to persuading Chinese citizens that it does a better job than democratically elected administrations in protecting their interests. To that end, it has long inflated the country’s economic growth statistics and underreported its greenhouse-gas emissions. Why would anyone expect it to be straight about its own COVID-19 epidemic?”
The Chinese Embassy in Ottawa replied:
“The article views that the United States is a democratic state and China is a country led by the Communist government, leading to a ridiculous conclusion that the data of the U.S. is more transparent than that of China…. This is a naked double standard. We urge The Globe and Mail to abandon prejudice, respect facts, and stop making irresponsible remarks against China’s efforts to fight against COVID-19.”
France
On April 14, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian summoned the Chinese Ambassador to France, Lu Shaye, to express his disagreement with certain recent remarks by Chinese representatives in France as part of the coronavirus pandemic. “Some recent public statements by representatives of the Chinese Embassy in France do not conform to the quality of the bilateral relationship between our two countries,” he said.
In a series of recent media statements, Lu accused “a certain French press” of besmirching China’s image by means of “lies” about its role in the current coronavirus pandemic. These media — which he never named but which seem, in his view, to represent the entire French press — have “mocked China” in violation of “all media ethics and the most elementary good faith” with an approach which, in Lu’s words, “borders on paranoia.”
Speaking on the cable TV channel Mandarin TV on March 15, Lu accused the media of using “propaganda” methods to “brainwash” the public. In statements posted on the embassy website on February 14 and 29, he condemned the “irresponsible” comments and “absurdities” being said in the French media about China.
The secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Christophe Deloire said:
“This ‘lesson in journalism’ for the French press is inappropriate coming from a representative of the People’s Republic of China, a country that is ranked 177th out of 180 countries in RSF’s World Press Freedom Index and is one of the world’s biggest jailers of journalists. Beijing’s censorship of the Chinese media had a very negative impact by delaying the regime’s response at the outset of the coronavirus epidemic.”
RSF added in a press release:
“The ambassador’s statements reflect a policy concerted at the highest level of the Chinese government that aims to control international media coverage, as RSF demonstrated in a report entitled ‘China’s Pursuit of a New World Media Order’ in 2019.”
Germany
On April 12, the newspaper Welt am Sonntag reported that it had received leaked documents from the German Foreign Ministry which revealed that Chinese officials had directly contacted officials and employees at several federal ministries and asked them to “express themselves positively” about China’s management of the coronavirus crisis. Chinese officials also “engaged decision-makers from the political environment including lobbyists” to use them “for Chinese interests in Germany to promote the political agenda of the Communist Party.” The Chinese Embassy in Berlin responded by accusing Welt am Sonntag of being “keen to slander and smear” China. “All kinds of stigmatization of China should be stopped.”
India
The Chinese Ambassador to India, Ji Rong, has repeatedly lashed out at Indian officials and media outlets. On April 8, he tweeted:
“So-called complaint by certain Indian organizations to UNHRC asking China compensate for losses caused by #COVID19 is ridiculous & eyeball-catching nonsense. At this difficult time, we need to work together instead of stigmatizing others & shifting blame.”
On April 10, Ji tweeted:
“It is regrettable some Indian media published articles referring #COVID19 again as ‘WuhanVirus’,’ChineseVirus’. It is clear consensus by international community that a virus should not be linked to any specific country, region or ethnic group. Such stigmatization is unacceptable.”
Philippines
On March 29, the Department of Health apologized for comments it made a day earlier that two batches of coronavirus test kits provided by China were substandard. Undersecretary for Health Maria Rosario Vergeire had said that kits made by Chinese manufacturers BGI Group and Sansure Biotech were only 40% accurate in diagnosing Covid-19 and that some of them would have to be discarded. The Chinese Embassy in Manila tweeted:
“The Chinese Embassy firmly rejects any irresponsible remarks and any attempts to undermine our cooperation in this regard.”
Sweden
On January 18, Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde summoned the Chinese Ambassador to Sweden, Gui Congyou, after compared Swedish media coverage of China to a lightweight boxer who “provokes a feud” with a heavyweight. Congyou, who has become well-known for his outspoken attacks, told the state broadcaster SVT that the “frequent vicious attacks on the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese government by some Swedish media” were comparable to a 48kg light featherweight boxer taking on a fighter almost twice his size:
“The 86kg boxer, out of good will to protect the lightweight boxer, advises him to leave and mind his own business, but the latter refuses to listen, and even breaks into the home of the heavyweight boxer. What choice do you expect the heavyweight boxer to have?”
Utgivarna, a group which represents Sweden’s private and public sector media, in a statement said:
“Time and again, China’s ambassador Gui Congyou has tried to undermine the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression under the Swedish constitution with false statements and threats. It is unacceptable that the world’s largest dictatorship is trying to prevent free and independent journalism in a democracy like Sweden. These repeated attacks must cease immediately.”
Venezuela
On March 18, the Chinese Embassy in Venezuela posted an angry “declaration” consisting of 17 tweets after unidentified Venezuelan lawmakers referred to the coronavirus as the “Chinese Coronavirus” or the “Wuhan Coronavirus.” The Chinese Embassy said the lawmakers were afflicted with a “political virus” and recommended they “seek treatment.” A first step, it tweeted, would be for them to “put on a mask and shut up.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 04/29/2020 – 02:00 - US Navy Takes Delivery Of Futuristic Stealth Destroyer (7 Years Late)
US Navy Takes Delivery Of Futuristic Stealth Destroyer (7 Years Late)
After years of delays, the US Navy has finally taken delivery of its next-generation guided-missile stealth destroyer on Friday (April 24) for the next phase of developmental and integrated at-sea testing, reports Naval Today.
For the USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000), a 16,000-ton stealth destroyer, the construction timetable in July 2008 was:
-
October 2008: DDG-1000 starts construction at Bath Iron Works
-
September 2009: DDG-1001 starts construction at Bath Iron Works.
-
April 2012: DDG-1002 starts construction at Bath Iron Works
-
April 2013: DDG-1000 initial delivery
And so, just seven years later… here it is…
The stealth destroyer has operational combat systems and will conduct sea trials, according to a statement from Naval Sea Systems Command. The ship was built at Bath Iron Works in Maine and commissioned in 2016. It transited through the Panama Canal shortly after, on its way to San Diego, when it experienced propulsion issues, had to be towed back to port.
To bring the vessel back to combat-ready, the Navy has had to pour an additional $4 billion into upgrades. We noted in March 2019, DDG 1000 departed San Diego on the first operational cruise.
“Delivery is an important milestone for the Navy, as DDG 1000 continues more advanced at-sea testing of the Zumwalt combat system,” said Capt. Kevin Smith, DDG 1000 program manager, Program Executive Office, Ships.
“The combat test team, consisting of the DDG 1000 sailors, Raytheon engineers, and Navy field activity teams, have worked diligently to get USS Zumwalt ready for more complex, multi-mission at-sea testing. I am excited to begin demonstrating the performance of this incredible ship.”
By late 2019, there was talk within the ranks of the Navy that DDG 1000 could be fitted with hypersonic missiles.
DDG 1000 is the first of the Zumwalt-class destroyers. The USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) is currently being outfitted with combat systems. The SS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002) is under construction at Bath Iron Works.
DDG 1000 is expected to join the US Pacific fleet, where it could be soon sent to the South China Sea in a show of force against the Chinese.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 04/29/2020 – 01:00 -
- China's Religious Persecution In The Age Of COVID-19
China’s Religious Persecution In The Age Of COVID-19
Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClearPolitics.com,
It’s a portrait of contrasts in the age of pandemic…
In the United States, small but passionate protests have broken out in recent weeks as some workers and worshipers chafe at being quarantined – even as most federal and state governments caution against full and abrupt re-openings.
Meanwhile, in the People’s Republic of China, where the coronavirus originated, citizens live in abject fear over voicing the mildest of criticism about their government’s response to the outbreak and aftermath, including government actions designed to place ethnic and religious minorities in harm’s way.
Among the abuses:
Chinese authorities are continuing to operate some factories by forcing Uyghurs, Muslims from a Central Asian ethnic group, to fill in for workers sidelined by COVID-19. To groups monitoring religious freedom, this was merely the latest example of official persecution of the Uyghurs, predominantly Turkic-speaking Sunni Muslims who number more than 10 million and live in the northwest area of the country known as Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous region. Uyghurs consider Beijing as a colonizing power and have pushed for a separate homeland or, at least, greater autonomy for their region. In recent years, China has tightened its grip on the region, forcing at least 1 million Uyghurs into 85 identified detention camps.
The pandemic has also increased levels of mistreatment against other groups. African residents of Guangzhou, a manufacturing hub, have been force-tested for the virus, evicted from their homes and hotels, and corralled into quarantined areas with few resources. Images on social media have showed groups of black residents sleeping on a sidewalk, visibly shaking from the cold and wearing surgical masks to protect themselves. Several African ambassadors wrote a letter to China’s foreign minister earlier this month complaining that these people were being mistreated and falsely blamed for the spread of the virus to China.
“The Group of African Ambassadors in Beijing immediately demands the cessation of forceful testing, quarantine and other inhuman treatments meted out to Africans,” they wrote.
Beijing has also used the pandemic as an excuse to crack down on churches that aren’t officially sanctioned by the government. In some regions, officials have removed crosses from Christian church rooftops on the pretext that religious symbols cannot be “higher” than the national flag. In December, as China’s began dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, church leaders reported that government officials told them the crosses were “too eye-catching” and would attract groups of people to gather, undermining the strict lockdowns in place.
Pastor Jian Zhu, who was raised in China and now serves as the director of the China Institute at Lincoln Christian University in Illinois, said persecution against unsanctioned Christian churches in China is “now the worst” he has seen since the late 1970s. The systematic harassment, according to Zhu, has included asking neighbors to spy on one another as well as pressuring schoolteachers, professors and students to sign a statement denouncing their faith.
“They are trying to eliminate Christianity from public life,” he told The Christian Post in mid-April. “Cameras are all over to watch church and Christians go to Sunday services. Families are threatened not to go to church or they will be punished or their relatives could be in trouble.”
Since the reports about forcing Uyghurs into factories began leaking two months ago, China’s systematic efforts to cover up the origins of the coronavirus and sow disinformation about it have sparked international outrage. But neither that indignation, nor the stepped-up persecution of religious and ethnic minorities, stopped the United Nations’ Asia-Pacific group from selecting China to represent the region on the United Nations Human Rights Council Consultative Group. The consultative body consists of five member states tasked with screening applicants to become independent U.N. human rights experts.
China’s selection on April 1 drew immediate condemnation from U.S. human rights advocates.
“The Chinese government is one of the worst abusers of religious freedom and other human rights,” said Gary Bauer of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal government entity that monitors international threats to religious freedom. In its 2019 annual report, USCIRF called on the Trump administration to impose targeted sanctions on Chinese officials responsible for severe religious freedom violations, especially Chen Quanguo, the current Communist Party secretary of Xinjiang region.
Other Washington officials see the pandemic as a warning against the natural tendency by those with autocratic impulses to impose top-down, heavy-handed controls.
Police in places as disparate as Kenya and India have beaten citizens avoiding curfew; nations such as Iran and North Korea are believed by health experts to have followed China’s example in vastly underreporting COVID-19 cases; and Philippines strongman Rodrigo Duterte has used the crisis to threaten declaring martial law.
But the United States has not been immune from these impulses. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer was widely criticized for a sweeping stay-at-home order that precluded residents from driving from one house to another and for closing off entire sections of large stores that sell gardening supplies, include plant seeds. And when President Trump said he had “absolute power” over states to determine how and when to re-open their governments, the backslash from both conservatives and liberals was fast and furious. The president quickly backtracked and has allowed governors to make their own decisions, even as Trump has publicly second-guessed Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp’s statewide re-opening of salons, gyms, and bowling alleys.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in early April warned that autocracies will use the crisis “to become more aggressive, deny people their rights,” and “lie more.” He said that “in the end, they do enormous harm to the people of their nation and put the rest of the world at risk as well.”
In Washington, most of the fury at China so far has focused on the government’s delay and dissembling over the source and extent of the epidemic and its unseemly sway over the World Health Organization, which initially minimized the effects the outbreak. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, through her advocacy group Stand for America, last week launched a petition to Congress urging lawmakers to investigate Beijing for its role in the coronavirus crisis and pass measures to halt China’s influence in the U.S. and around the world.
But China’s religious persecution amid the pandemic is also spurring congressional scrutiny.
Sen. Ted Cruz, who has sought to shed a light on the China’s oppression of religious minorities and political dissidents throughout his career, said he planned to amplify the need for several bills he has written aimed at punishing China for the forced Uyghur labor, along with other measures addressing Beijing’s ongoing suppression of medical experts, journalists and political dissidents.
“Those atrocities must be confronted, not just for their own sake but because, as we have now seen through the global spread of COVID-19, they are a direct threat to America’s national security and global public health,” Cruz spokeswoman Jessica Skaggs told RealClearPolitics.
“Once we defeat this pandemic, Sen. Cruz will continue fighting to hold China accountable for its religious persecution of minorities and its broader repression on free expression and medical information.”
Rep. Michael McCaul, the ranking GOP member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said China’s and the WHO’s handling of the coronavirus crisis enabled a regional epidemic to become a global pandemic resulting in innumerous deaths in China and around the world. McCaul, along with 16 other House Republicans, sent a letter to the White House last week asking the president to condition future funding of the WHO on Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’ resignation.
“This malfeasance is another example of the CCP’s treatment of their own people and reminds us this is the same regime who puts millions of their own citizens in ‘concentration camps’ and uses them for forced labor,” he said.
“The international community cannot let these appalling abuses go unpunished,” he told RCP.
“We must work together to hold the CCP accountable for these egregious human rights violations, especially amid this public health emergency that they exacerbated.”
This is not solely a Republican concern. Rep. James McGovern, who chairs the bipartisan Congressional-Executive Commission on China, is calling on the international community to investigate Beijing’s efforts to repress religious and ethnic minorities in the midst of a pandemic. McGovern in March sponsored a bill that would bar the U.S. from importing any goods made in the Xinjiang factories and has urged all American companies, including Amazon, Nike, Apple and Calvin Klein, to investigate their supply chains in China and cease operation if they cannot definitively rule out the use of forced labor. Republican Sen. Marco Rubio wrote a similar Senate bill.
“Forcing Uyghurs and others to work in factories while the risk of infection is high, tearing down Christian symbols and crosses, or condoning discrimination against African migrants is completely unacceptable an should be roundly condemned by the administration and investigated by the international community,” the Massachusetts Democrat said in a statement to RCP.
“The virus exposed what we already knew: The Chinese government is all too willing to violate the human rights of the Chinese people, and its policies pose a real risk to the world’s health as well,” McGovern added.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 04/29/2020 – 00:05 - Visualizing How COVID-19 Consumer Spending Is Impacting Industries
Visualizing How COVID-19 Consumer Spending Is Impacting Industries
Consumer spending is one of the most important driving forces for global economic growth.
Beyond impacting some of the factors that determine consumer spend – such as consumer confidence, unemployment levels, or the cost of living – Visual Capitalist’s Katie Jones notes that the COVID-19 pandemic has also drastically altered how and where consumers choose to spend their hard-earned cash.
Today’s graphic pulls data from a global survey by McKinsey & Company that analyzes how consumers are reining in their spending, causing upheaval across every industry imaginable.
While some industries are in a better position to weather the impact of this storm, others could struggle to survive.
The Link Between Sentiment and Intent to Spend
As consumers grapple with uncertainty, their buying behavior becomes more erratic. What is clear however, is that they have reduced spending on all non-essential products and services.
But as each country moves along the COVID-19 curve, we can see a glimmer of increasing optimism levels, which in turn is linked to higher spending.
India’s consumers, for example, are displaying higher levels of optimism, with more households planning to increase spend—a trend that is also evident in China, Indonesia, and Nigeria.
Meanwhile, American consumers are still more optimistic about the future than Europeans. 37% of Americans believe the country will recover in 2 or 3 months—albeit with optimism levels at the highest for people who earn over $100K.
Strategic Consumer Spending
Globally, consumers continue to spend—and in some cases, spend more compared to pre-pandemic levels—on some necessities such as groceries and household supplies.
Due to changes in media consumption habits, consumers in almost all countries surveyed say they will increase their spend on at-home entertainment. This is especially true for Korea, a country that already boasts a massive gaming culture.
As restrictions in China lift, many categories such as gasoline, wellness, and pet-care services appear to be bouncing back, which could be a positive sign for other countries following a similar trajectory. But while consumers amp up their spending on the things they need, they also anticipate spending less in other categories.
The Industries in the Red
Categories showing an alarming decline include restaurants and out-of-home entertainment.
However, there are two particularly hard-hit industries worth noting that are showing declines across every category and country:
Travel and Transport
The inevitable decline in the travel and transportation industry is a reflection of mass social isolation levels and tightening travel restrictions.
In fact, the U.S. travel industry can expect to see an average decline in revenue of 81% for April and May. Throughout 2020, losses will equate to roughly $519 billion—translating to a broader $1.2 trillion contraction in total economic impact.
According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, a staggering 50 million jobs are at risk in the industry, with 30 million of those jobs belonging to employees in Asia.
Considering the travel and tourism industry accounts for 10.4% of global GDP, a slow recovery could have serious ramifications.
Apparel
Apparel is experiencing a similarly worrying slowdown, with consumption 40-50% lower in China compared to pre-pandemic levels. Both online and offline sales for businesses the world over are also taking a major hit.
As consumers hold back on their spending, clothing brands of all shapes and sizes are forced to scale back production, and reimagine how they position themselves.
“It’s an unprecedented interruption of an industry that has relied on speeding from one season’s sales to the next. And it is bringing with it a new sense of connectedness, responsibility and empathy.”
– Tamsin Blanchard, The Guardian
Towards an Uncertain Future
Clearly the force majeure that is COVID-19 has not impacted every industry equally.
For some, rebuilding their customer experience by appealing to changing values could result in a profitable, and perhaps much-needed revival. For other companies, there is no other choice but to play the waiting game.
Regardless, every industry faces one universal truth: life after the pandemic will look significantly different.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 23:45 - If This Is What "The New Normal" Is Going To Look Like, It's Going To Be Horrible
If This Is What “The New Normal” Is Going To Look Like, It’s Going To Be Horrible
Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,
Are we going to allow fear of COVID-19 to fundamentally reshape social behavior for many years to come?
It is hard to imagine a world where we are all afraid to shake hands with one another and where getting close enough to someone to actually have a conversation is deemed a “major risk”.
Yes, this virus spreads incredibly easily, but eventually this pandemic will fade and hopefully a lot of the measures that were instituted to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 will fade away too. For example, I really don’t want Walmart telling me which direction I have to go down the aisle. If I am in serious shopping mode, I want to be able to go up and down a particular aisle as much as I please.
If I get kicked out of a store someday for “going against the arrows” I am going to be really upset.
And I really, really don’t want to have my temperature checked when I go to eat at a restaurant, but that is apparently starting to happen all over the nation…
With staff wearing masks, checking customers’ temperatures and using disposable paper place mats, some of the nation’s restaurants reopened for dine-in service Monday as states loosened more coronavirus restrictions. But many eateries remained closed amid safety concerns and community backlash.
Checking temperatures is not going to stop the spread of this virus, because people can spread it long before they are showing any symptoms at all.
So that needs to stop right now. If you try to check my temperature when I enter your establishment, I will promptly turn around and go get a burger somewhere else.
And it isn’t just businesses that are giving in to the hysteria.
For example, a North Carolina woman named Erin Strine burst into tears when she realized that people would be sitting next to her on a flight that she was taking…
Strine said she was alarmed by how little social distancing was taking place on the packed flight. She expressed concern for her health when she realized she was placed in a middle seat.
‘I really felt like my life and the life of everyone around me was at risk,’ she said. ‘I just sat there silently crying into my mask because I was really overwhelmed by how unsafe I felt.’
I have a really easy solution for her.
If you feel your life is at risk, don’t get on the plane.
This isn’t rocket science.
Her story caused me to recall one particular horrid flight that I once had to endure. Like her, I was in the middle seat, and two extremely overweight individuals were stationed on either side of me. And just when I thought it couldn’t get any worse, the person directly in front of me decided to recline their seat all the way.
But instead of whining like a baby, I took my ordeal like a man.
Look, I am not trying to minimize the threat of COVID-19 one bit.
In fact, I was warning about the danger that this virus posed all the way back when the very first reports were coming out of China. Anyone that follows my work on a regular basis can easily verify this.
At this point, there are more than a million confirmed cases in the United States and more than 56,000 people have died.
That is serious.
And things have been particularly nightmarish in New York…
Nearly half of all New Yorkers say they know somebody who has died of coronavirus, a new poll finds, shedding a stunning light on just how deeply the pandemic has hit the Big Apple.
The state-wide survey, carried out by Siena College, discovered that 46 percent of New York City residents personally knew someone killed by COVID-19, as do 36 percent of respondents living in the suburbs, and 13 percent of those living upstate.
Other areas of the country have been hit very hard as well. In fact, the Boston Globe published 21 pages of obituaries on Sunday…
As the total confirmed COVID-19 cases approach one million this week, including over 55,000 deaths — the vast majority of these concentrated in American east coast cities, especially in the tri-state area — newspaper obituaries in the same cities are expanding to unheard of numbers of pages.
As a stunning case in point, The Boston Globe on Sunday included an unprecedented 21 total pages of death notices due to the coronavirus pandemic.
The newspaper said its archives showed on the same day last year, the obit section was at its usual seven pages.
This is the biggest public health crisis that our generation has experienced so far, and anyone that is not taking it seriously is just being stupid.
But it isn’t the end of the world. Much, much worse things are coming, and it is important to understand that.
If we are not able to handle this pandemic, how are we possibly going to deal with all of the stuff that we are going to have to face in the future?
On Monday, I was absolutely horrified to learn that a top emergency room doctor in New York City had committed suicide…
The head of the emergency department at a Manhattan hospital committed suicide after spending days on the front lines of the coronavirus battle, her family said Monday.
“She tried to do her job, and it killed her,’’ Dr. Philip Breen told the New York Times of his physician daughter, Dr. Lorna Breen, who had been medical director of the NewYork-Presbyterian Allen Hospital amid the pandemic.
I can’t even imagine the horrors that she witnessed on a daily basis, but suicide is never, ever, ever the answer to anything.
And nothing is ever so bad that it should make you want to kill yourself.
No matter how difficult it was to deal with dying patients, her story never should have ended this way…
In the days leading up to her death, the 48-year-old reportedly recounted to family members a series of traumatic scenes she’d witnessed working in the Manhattan hospital, including an onslaught of patients dying in front of her before they could even be removed from ambulances.
Breen had recently contracted COVID-19 but had returned to work at Allen after a week-and-a-half of rest. After the hospital sent her home, she re-located to Charlottesville to recuperate under the instructions of her father, Dr. Philip C. Breen.
There is always hope. And in her case, she could have certainly walked away from being a doctor and done something else.
Life is such a precious gift, and to see it thrown away so needlessly is absolutely heartbreaking.
Yes, this pandemic is going to be with us for a while.
And yes, a lot more Americans are going to get sick and a lot more Americans are going to die.
But at this point nothing that we can do will be able to prevent the virus from spreading, and an increasing number of Americans are simply not going to follow restrictions anyway…
Data shows that Americans are suffering from ‘quarantine fatigue’ and are venturing out of the house more often as the coronavirus pandemic continues – as researchers say that 44 states are actually going backwards when it comes to social distancing.
A COVID‑19 mobility trends tool created by Apple shows that an increasing number of people in various major cities are now leaving the house more compared to the beginning of the month.
If you are elderly, have a compromised immune system or are in some other high risk group, you will need to quarantine yourself for the foreseeable future. But the rest of us are going to have to try to start resuming normal activities.
Unfortunately, the “new normal” is likely to look a whole lot different from the “old normal”, and many people are not going to like that at all.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 23:25 - "Corona-Killing" UV Bots Could Be Deployed At Military Bases
“Corona-Killing” UV Bots Could Be Deployed At Military Bases
Last week President Trump suggested that injecting ultraviolet light into the body could be one method in killing COVID-19. Then, a biotech company, with unproven science, touted it could send a catheter into the throat of a patient, emitting UV rays into the body to defeat the virus.
The push for UV products in today’s public health crisis is expected to increase, thanks to President Trump’s comments. A search trend for “does UV light kill coronavirus” has recently soared:
Now a robotics company is retrofitting war robots with a UV disinfection system to kill the virus in enclosed spaces.
Ralph Petroff, president of the North America branch of Marathon Targets, spoke with Military.com about the four-wheeled autonomous robots that could soon be deployed at military bases for UV disinfecting operations.
“If you need them for target practice, you use them for target practice; if you need them for corona-killing, you use them for corona-killing,” Petroff said.
He said his company has been acquiring UV disinfecting panels. Retrofitting each robot takes a matter of hours, and he said military installations had expressed interest.
Marathon’s specifications of the robot show that it emits 110 watts via a vertical UV mount light fixture. The light takes about one minute to disinfect a surface one foot away and a little over six minutes to sterilize from five feet away.
The science behind UV lights killing COVID-19 is still questionable. Petroff said he has plans to double the wattage of the light fixture to ensure effectiveness.
The market for UV disinfection has been small over the years, but since President Trump touted UVs last week, the market could rapidly grow.
“The UV part is the easy part,” he said. “Trying to get an autonomous robot to walk around without bumping into things and knowing where it is at all times is the hard part. We mastered that a long time ago.”
We mentioned in March that “COVID-19 is very vulnerable to UV light and heat.” If UV light is proven effective against the virus, we suspect there will be a lot more interest in UV products.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 23:05 - Triumph Of The Woke Oligarchs
Triumph Of The Woke Oligarchs
Authored by Joel Kotkin via RealClearEnergy.org,
Like the rest of the country, although far less than New York, California is suffering through the Covid-19 crisis. But in California, the pandemic seems likely to give the state’s political and corporate elites a new license to increase their dominion while continuing to keep the middle and working classes down.
Perhaps nothing spells the triumph of California’s progressive oligarchy more than Governor Gavin Newsom’s decision to off-load the state’s recovery strategy to a task force co-chaired by hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer. A recently failed presidential candidate, Steyer stands as a progressive funder. He is as zealous as he is rich. Steyer sometimes even found the policies adopted by climate-obsessed former governor Jerry Brown not extreme enough for his tastes.
Some conservatives wistfully hope that the pandemic will push the climate crusaders to the side. In California, at least, the corporate aristocrats, the governmental apparat, and the progressive nonprofits have the momentum to impose their ultra-green vision on the state’s residents. Steyer may have made much of his fortune on fossil fuels, including coal, but now, approvingly described as “a reverent Christian,” the Bay Area mogul seems to be eager to repent, both through his political largesse and as operator of a fulsomely organic ranch down the coast from his San Francisco manse.
What Kind of Recovery Will the Oligarchy Allow?
Steyer’s failed, self-funded presidential run was full of extreme notions, such as imposing a “state of emergency” to address climate issues, essentially shutting down fossil fuels; and, as a kind of bonus for those who still can find work, promoting a $22 an hour minimum wage while offering alms for the soon-to-be-eliminated legions of miners and energy workers.
If this is what he wants for the recovery, Steyer will simply accelerate the state’s already poor performance in creating higher-wage middle- and working-class jobs outside those created or subsidized by government. Over the past decade, according to Chapman University’s Marshall Toplansky, the vast majority of jobs being produced in California pay under the median wage, and 40% pay under $40,000 a year. Since 2008, the state has created five times as many low-wage jobs as high-wage jobs.
California’s climate regulatory regime, notes relocation expert Joe Vranich, has been particularly hard on manufacturing. Over the past decade, according to BLS data, California has fallen into the bottom half of states in manufacturing-sector employment growth, ranking 44th last year; its industrial new job creation has been negative, compared with gains from competitors such as Nevada, Kentucky, Michigan, and Florida. Even without adjusting for costs, no California metro ranks in the US top ten in terms of well-paying blue-collar jobs; but four metro areas—Ventura, Los Angeles, San Jose, and San Diego—sit among the bottom ten.
Perhaps nowhere will the pain be worse than in Bakersfield, capital of California’s once-vibrant oil industry. That industry is now slated for extinction by policymakers, even as the state has emerged as the largest US importer of energy and oil, much of it from Saudi Arabia. This ultimate effort at “virtue signaling” will cost California as many as 300,000 generally high-paying jobs, roughly half held by minorities, and will particularly devastate the San Joaquin Valley, where 40,000 jobs depend on the industry.
“Imagine that the state dictated that the entertainment industry be eliminated from Los Angeles, or the tech industry be eliminated from Silicon Valley. That is what removing the oil and agriculture industries from Bakersfield is like. It is an existential threat to the entire area,” says Rob Ball of the Kern County Council of Governments.
Poverty and Denial
In California today, anyone who dissents—even a scientist or respected economist—with the green party line is dismissed as a heretic who is not worth listening to. This treatment is facilitated by a media that tends to embrace the most apocalyptic projections of, for example, coastal erosion, with little attempt to ascertain the facts or look at alternative analyses.
The predictably pious Steyer and his fellow commissioners will no doubt claim devotion to the interests of average citizen. But, as a new lawsuit filed by some 300 civil rights leaders asserts, the policies being backed by Steyer and his fellow commissioners have already had produced disastrous results for millions of Californians. The real collective badge of shame is not California’s GHG emissions but the prevalence of poverty amid enormous affluence.
Critically, economic growth, at least outside asset- and iPhone-price inflation, is itself considered a threat to the planet within the environmental community, which largely hails the Covid lockdowns as a “fire drill” for future actions to promote “de-growth.” The open hope, as a Psychology Today writer puts it, would be to tame “the human beast” by imposing low-consumption lifestyles on hoi polloi, including in developing countries. Such policies might not affect the prospects for social media, search, or import-dependent firms like Apple, but they have already been beastly for millions of Californians.
Even before the lockdowns, which could last until summer, California’s cost-adjusted poverty level was among the highest of any state and remained higher in 2019 than in 2007. Nearly one in five Californians—many who are working—lives in poverty (using a cost-of-living adjusted poverty rate), the highest rate of any state; the Public Policy Institute of California estimates that another 20% live in near-poverty—roughly 15 million people in total.
The lack of upwardly mobile jobs has created poverty rates for California’s Latinos and African Americans, most of them working, and has made them poorer than their counterparts elsewhere, including in Texas, California’s primary competitor for talent, jobs and company locations and a state with a similarly diverse population. More than half of all California Latino households, now a plurality in the state, can barely pay their bills, according to a United Way study. “For Latinos,” notes longtime political consultant Mike Madrid, “the California Dream is becoming an unattainable fantasy.”
The loss of jobs, particularly in hospitality and retail, from the coronavirus crisis could further exacerbate this situation further. The most extreme and, most obvious expression of pervasive inequality and economic dysfunction lies is evident on our streets. Indeed, even as homelessness has been reduced in much of the country, it has continued to swell in California. Roughly half the nation’s homeless population lives in the Golden State, many concentrated in disease- and crime-ridden tent cities in either its largest urban region, greater Los Angeles, (its largest urban region) or in iconic San Francisco.
And for Our Next Act: Making the State More Vulnerable to the Next Pandemic
When Steyer and other members of the task force—one can’t help but compare them to the crime commission run in New York City by Charles “Lucky” Luciano—decide to open the economy, they will no doubt claim, as with their climate pieties, that they are acting purely on the basis of “science”—as long as it agrees with their conclusions.
Logic is not a strong point here, since the green lobbies and their developer allies keep pushing density and getting people out of the relative safety of their cars and into mass transit, which, along with entrenched poverty, has done much to deepen the crisis in New York, as the Manhattan Institute’s Howard Husock observes.
As of April 26, Los Angeles County, with almost 2 million more residents than New York’s five boroughs, had suffered 913 Covid deaths, compared to 12,067 in New York City. The Big Apple accounts for over two-fifths of all US transit ridership, and its subways have repeatedly been singled out, including in a recent MIT report, as incubators of the pandemic.
The key here may be what demographer Wendell Cox has described as “exposure density.” Compared with Angelenos, Cox suggests, New Yorkers tend to work in large, crowded workplaces and are far more mass-transit-dependent. On an average workday, more than 5 million people jostle onto the city’s subway trains – nearly 40 times as many as ride LA’s subway lines and 15 times as many when the lower-capacity light rail lines are added in. The rates of infection and death are far lower in the surrounding areas – even in more dispersed, car-dependent Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.
Even San Francisco, the nation’s second-densest municipality, with more than 500,000 residents, has been far more successful in controlling the virus’s spread. The city is somewhat less car-centric than greater Los Angeles; and the Bay Area transit commuting rate is about 60 percent lower than that of New York (combined statistical areas, or CSA). San Francisco has a vehicle ownership rate at least 85% higher than in the four most dense New York boroughs (Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx, and Queens) and is a much smaller city; San Franciscans are far more able to cab, Uber, or drive their own vehicles, avoiding crowded public transit.
Clearly, some ways to reduce exposure, as well as GHG emissions, would embrace telecommuting, which had been expanding and seems certain to grow in the future. But California, unlike other states, has no interest in adopting telecommuting as a key strategy; instead, it seems eager to embrace the viral formula of New York, which is driving a new exodus from the country’s premier urban center.
They continue to push their transit and density strategy despite concerns about social distancing and a profound resistance from hoi polloi. As in many areas, the greens have no real interest in actual data: despite state climate policies designed to push people onto buses and trains, transit ridership has lagged—in Los Angeles, it is lower than in 1985—and virtually all population growth has taken place on the periphery of large metropolitan agglomerations.
California’s problems won’t end with this pandemic.
Under the leadership of politicians like Newsom and Steyer, however promising the future is for the tech oligarchs and green energy speculators, the Golden State seems determined to offer ever less opportunity for the state’s already struggling middle- and working-class families—except, perhaps, to get sicker when the next pandemic comes along.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 22:45 - Study Finds 'Historic' Drop In Math, Reading Scores Since Adoption Of Common Core
Study Finds ‘Historic’ Drop In Math, Reading Scores Since Adoption Of Common Core
Reading and math scores in the US have suffered ‘historic’ declines since most states implemented the Common Core curriculum standard six years ago, according to a new study from the Pioneer Institute.
While Common Core was promoted as improving the international competitiveness of U.S. students in math, our international standing has remained low while the skills of average and lower performing American students have dropped in both math and reading. –Pioneer Institute
The study notes that in the years leading up to common core, fourth and eight-grade reading and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) were rising gradually (2003-2013). After Common Core was implemented, scores for both grades have fallen – with eighth grade falling nearly as fast as it had been rising.
The declines were most severe among the lowest-achieving students, which the Pioneer Institute suggests increases inequality.
Scores for students at the 90th percentile have mostly continued their pre-Common Core trend of gradual improvement. But the farther behind students were, the more substantial the declines, with the biggest drops occurring for those at the 25th and 10th percentiles. –Pioneer Institute
So, Common Core requires more diligence and effort?
“The sustained decline we’re now seeing, especially among our most vulnerable students, simply cannot be allowed to continue,” said Theodor Rebarber, author of “The Common Core Debacle.”
According to the Pioneer Institute, Common Core is the product of ‘misguided progressive pedagogies and biases of the education establishment that developed it.’
“Several of us allied with Pioneer Institute have been pointing out, ever since it was introduced, the deeply flawed educational assumptions that permeate the Common Core and the many ways in which it is at odds with curriculum standards in top-achieving countries,” said the institute in a statement.
According to the report lower scores as a result of Common Core were predicted a decade ago.
“Nearly a decade after states adopted Common Core, the empirical evidence makes it clear that these national standards have yielded underwhelming results for students,” said Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios. “The proponents of this expensive, legally questionable policy initiative have much to answer for”
“It’s time for federal law to change to allow states as well as local school districts to try a broader range of approaches to reform,” Rebarber added. “With a more bottom-up approach, more school systems will have the opportunity to choose curricula consistent with our international competitors and many decades of research on effective classroom teaching”
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 22:25 - Good News America – Old (Spending) Habits Die Hard
Good News America – Old (Spending) Habits Die Hard
“Everything’s going to be different” is a pretty popular phrase these days. Implicit in that idea, at least in part, is the notion that our day-to-day habits are changing as we work from home, shop more online, Zoom call with colleagues and friends, and order delivery rather than going to restaurants. New normals with new habits have replaced our old routines.
But exactly how long does it actually take for freshly acquired behaviors to really settle in? With capital markets volatility on the wane and a healthy rally today we will spare a few moments to consider the science behind habitualization.
Our starting point: a plastic surgeon named Maxwell Maltz who trained in post-World War I Europe and had a successful practice in 1950s New York. In 1960 he published a book called “Psycho-Cybernetics: A New Way of Getting More Out of Life”. In that work he stated that, by his reckoning, it took about 21 days for most patients to get used to their new faces after surgery. And because the book was a best seller and inspired the likes of Tony Robbins and others, the idea that “21 days makes a new habit” is a popular one to this day.
Since most Americans/Europeans have been in some form of lockdown for 3-5 weeks (we’re on Week 6 here in NYC), the 21-day rule says we should be at least somewhat habitualized to a whole range of new behaviors. Yes, once things loosen up we’ll reassemble whatever parts of our old life that can be safely recovered. But we’ll have gotten used to many new activities as well.
Now, if you’re skeptical of the “21 days to a better life” rule, you actually have some good science on your side. The most widely cited academic paper on the topic (+1,200 citations) is titled “How are habits formed: modelling habit formation in the real world” (Lally, Jaarsveld, Potts and Wardle, 2009). Here’s the structure of the research and what it found:
- 96 students at University College London agreed to take part in a study which asked them to pick a new healthy habit to incorporate into their daily lives. Examples: eating a piece of fruit with lunch or exercising daily.
- Subjects kept a log for 84 days, measuring whether they had performed the new habit the prior day and how automatic it was to do so.
- Finding #1: progress towards making a new behavior a habit is not linear. At first, you really have to force yourself to do it. It is far from natural and requires real discipline to get past the initial inertia.
- Finding #2: it takes and average of 66 days to make a new habit essentially “automatic” and among the subjects of the study the range was anywhere from 18 to +84 days.
The bottom line is that new habits take more like 66 days rather than 21, which is basically the difference between consumer behaviors changing dramatically and durably post-COVID versus only when required for safety reasons. Expanding on this point:
- Emotion and fear can certainly alter behavior faster and more permanently. In New York City, I have personally witnessed loud arguments among my neighbors over mask wearing and social distancing. That’s because people have a wide array of risk tolerances and those dictate the speed/depth of new habit acquisition.
- As US states and countries around the world reopen, we may not see dramatically new consumer behaviors versus pre-COVID life. The study we cited above showed how long it takes to develop just ONE new habit; not a whole slew of them.
- The intersection of these 2 ideas: as long as businesses can assuage consumer fear with sensible precautions, they should be able to rely on the fact that consumers have not actually formed many new habits.
Final thought: all this is comforting but we’d be remiss if we did not consider the current economic reality of 15-20% unemployment. There will be many people who want to return to their January 2020 habits but are unable to do so. The good news is that consumers with discretionary spending power should return to their old habits as much as they can. As they do, the US economy should be able to find its footing and rehire many of those recently furloughed, laid off or separated.
In short, it is a very good thing indeed that old habits die hard and new ones are so difficult to develop.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 22:05 - Meet 'Salus' – The Pentagon's New COVID-Hotspot, Panic-Buying Predicting AI
Meet ‘Salus’ – The Pentagon’s New COVID-Hotspot, Panic-Buying Predicting AI
A new predictive technology developed by the Pentagon can anticipate product shortages could help military personnel move supplies to retailers or hospitals with geographical precision before a shortage develops during a public health crisis.
The Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) developed the new prototype artificial intelligence tool that predicts and addresses shortages of food, water, medicine, and other essential goods in a geographical region during crisis times. “You have to be looking a little in the future,” said Nand Mulchandani, chief technical officer at the JAIC, who recently spoke with Defense One.
Called Salus, the new tool combines data from the Census Bureau, Medicare, hospitals, and can forecast community spreading of a virus in a geographical region, as well as pulling data from retailers and warehouses of product inventories, and develop a predictive model of where shortages could potentially be seen, right down to specific zip codes or even stores.
The military is working toward a “common view and a predictive capability to truly understand where the next problem sets are going to be and bringing to bear all of the logistical capability,” said Mulchandani, who spoke with Roll Call in early April.
The new tool has already been field test with communication systems of Northern Command and National Guard, which are both supporting FEMA’s efforts in combating the coronavirus spread.
Mulchandani told Defense One that the AI tool is flexible in determining different types of problems that could occur by altering the data that is piped in.
He said Salus was first tested by determining and developing a model of where shortages of ventilators, masks, and other medical supplies could be seen.
“The next question really was resource allocation like food,” he said
It’s a given that JAIC is working on a predictive model to determine where food shortages could develop because our reporting over the last month suggests shortages could start in May.
The tool gives the Pentagon and the government the ease of mind that during a public health emergency, supply disruptions could be addressed quickly and even preemptively. All in the effort to contain or completely mitigate the consequences of what disruptions can trigger, such as social unrest.
Is this the rise of Skynet?
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 21:45 - Watch: Pentagon Releases US Navy Footage Of UFOs, Confirms The Videos Are "Real"
Watch: Pentagon Releases US Navy Footage Of UFOs, Confirms The Videos Are “Real”
The Department of Defense released Monday three unclassified videos showing the U.S. Navy’s encounters with “unidentified aerial phenomena” in an attempt to “clear up any misconceptions” regarding whether the videos – which have been circulating for years – are real.
As AP reports, the three videos, the first of which was leaked in 2007 and discovered by the U.S. Navy in 2009, show small, flying objects.
Two of the videos were recorded in January 2015, according to the Department of Defense. The other was taken in November 2004.
In a statement, the Defense Department said the Navy “previously acknowledged” the videos were Navy videos.
“The U.S. Navy previously acknowledged that these videos circulating in the public domain were indeed Navy videos. After a thorough review, the department has determined that the authorized release of these unclassified videos does not reveal any sensitive capabilities or systems, and does not impinge on any subsequent investigations of military air space incursions by unidentified aerial phenomena,” DOD said in a statement.
In one of the videos, a person exclaims, “What the (expletive) is that?!”
“The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterized as ‘unidentified,'” the DOD said in Monday’s statement..
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 21:25 - Mnuchin Says Dead People Aren't Eligible For Stimulus Checks
Mnuchin Says Dead People Aren’t Eligible For Stimulus Checks
Two weeks ago we reported that in the rush to flood the population with plastic trinkets (i.e., $1,200 checks) just so the natives don’t get restless and realize that while they are getting scraps corporations, hedge funds, banks and PE firms are again getting billions, the Treasury has mistakenly mailed checks to deceased people.
As Republican Congressman from Kentucky Thomas Massie — who one recalls was a ‘lone voice in the wilderness’ seeking to torpedo the multi-trillion bailout bill as it added to the national debt and increased Federal Reserve secrecy and power, among other things — ranted on Twitter two weeks ago just as some 80 million Americans received their direct deposits: “Ok this is insane, but just the tip of the iceberg.”
Ok this is insane, but just the tip of the iceberg. This is a direct text to me from a friend. I called to confirm this actually just happened. pic.twitter.com/GBRPcmYMXW
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 15, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
It now appears the Treasury Secretary agrees: on Wednesday Steven Mnuchin confirmed – just in case there is any confusion – that dead people aren’t eligible for the $1,200 stimulus payments some of them have been getting, and that their relatives and estates should pay the money back to the government.
“You’re not supposed to keep that payment,” Mnuchin told the WSJ in an interview. “We’re checking the databases, but there could be a scenario where we missed something, and yes, the heirs should be returning that money.”
Yes, you certainly missed something: since the payment is based on those past tax returns, some people who died in 2018 or 2019 have received money, either by direct deposit or by mail (their survivors haven’t been sure about what to do with it). The CDC estimated that just over 2.8 million Americans died in 2017 (the last year data is currently available) – which suggests the possibility that all totaled almost $3.4 billion in stimulus money could have gone to dead people (assuming each got a check for $1,200 and that their family estates filed taxes).
Technically, the payment is a new tax credit for tax year 2020 of $1,200 per adult and $500 per child, and the payments now are based on 2018 or 2019 tax filings. That said, it isn’t clear how many payments the Treasury Department has sent to dead people or what efforts the IRS will take to claw back any payments it deems erroneous.
The economic-relief law passed by Congress – the first of many as the US transitions to a Universal Basic Income society, i.e., free money for everyone – created a $292 billion program of payments to Americans to cushion the economic blow from the coronavirus outbreak. Already, the government has made more than 89 million payments totaling over $160 billion, with another wave hitting bank accounts and mailboxes this week. Tax experts have been puzzling over the payments to dead people since they started appearing in bank accounts earlier this month.
“My [dead] husband was a wonderful money manager, and I think he would be happy to know he was still getting a stimulus payment,” said Heather Frazier of Wilmington, N.C., who received a $1,200 direct-deposit payment for her husband, Rob, who died in June 2018. “If they want the money back or whatever, I’ll pay it back.”
As the Journal explains, other parts of the law contemplate a situation in which someone gets a payment now that’s larger than what they would ultimately be able to claim on their 2020 tax return. That can happen if the person’s income goes up into the range where the benefit is reduced. In those cases, the government won’t reclaim any of the money. But the dead are different because they would have been ineligible for any money to start with.
Mnuchin didn’t differentiate between people who died in 2018 and 2019 and those who passed away or will die in 2020. People who die this year still may have a tax-filing obligation for 2020, so a case could be made that they are eligible even if those who died before this year weren’t. One hopes that doesn’t also mean that one has to file their taxes even if one is dead.
The IRS has yet to offer written guidance to taxpayers on this issue. In practice it may prove difficult for the government to get the money back. It may be easier for some paper checks; the envelope for some payments includes a box to check and return if the recipient is deceased.
On April president Trump said that the U.S. would get the money back: “Everything we’re going to get back. But it’s a tiny amount.”
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 21:05 - Trump Invokes Defense Production Act: Who Will Be Forced To Work At Meat Plants?
Trump Invokes Defense Production Act: Who Will Be Forced To Work At Meat Plants?
Submitted by Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper
Over the past few weeks, nearly a dozen large meat processing plants have closed their doors due to widespread coronavirus among employees. Thousands of workers have become infected and at the time of publication, at least 20 have died. As a result, President Trump has invoked the Defense Production Act and just signed an executive order keeping meat processing plants open during the coronavirus outbreak.
What is the Defense Production Act?
The act, which was officially passed in the 1950s, give the government power over private industries.
The Act gives the federal government broad authority to direct private companies to meet the needs of the national defense.
Over the decades, the law’s powers have been understood to encompass not only times of war but also domestic emergency preparedness and recovery from terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
The act authorizes the president to require companies to prioritize government contracts and orders seen as necessary for the national defense, with the goal of ensuring that the private sector is producing enough goods needed to meet a war effort or other national emergency.
It also authorizes the president to use loans, direct purchases and other incentives to boost the production of critical goods and essential materials.
Other provisions authorize the federal government to establish voluntary agreements with private industry and to block foreign mergers and acquisitions seen as harmful to national security. (source)
Reports say that President Trump, who refers to himself as a wartime president, is invoking the act over deep concerns about our supply chain.
What does this mean?
According to Bloomberg, the President will order the facilities will remain open due to a quickly evolving breakdown of our food supply chain.
President Donald Trump plans to order meat-processing plants to remain open as the nation confronts growing food-supply disruptions from the coronavirus outbreak, a person familiar with the matter said.
Trump plans to use the Defense Production Act to order the companies to stay open as critical infrastructure, and the government will provide additional protective gear for employees as well as guidance, according to the person. (source)
This is the spirit of how the Act was designed to be used. President Truman signed it into law over concerns about supplies and equipment during the Korean war and it has subsequently been used during disasters like hurricanes and other wars. Presidents Clinton and Bush both used it to supply California utilities during an energy crisis there. It was also used in early April to compel 3M to make N95 respirators. So its use is not unprecedented.
Unions are not pleased about this order.
Trump’s order sets the stage for a showdown between industry giants and labor unions.
Trump signaled the executive action at the White House on Tuesday, saying he planned to sign an order aimed at Tyson Foods Inc.’s liability, which had become “a road block” for the company. He didn’t elaborate.
The order, though, will not be limited to Tyson, the person said. It will affect many processing plants supplying beef, chicken, eggs and pork…
…The White House decided to make the move amid estimates that as much as 80% of U.S. meat production capacity could shut down. (source)
Union representatives are concerned about the lack “meaningful safety requirements” for workers who will be compelled to return to plants that have been shut down due to the spread of COVID-19.
“We only wish that this administration cared as much about the lives of working people as it does about meat, pork and poultry products,” said Stuart Appelbaum, President of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union. (source)
The White House source said that safety measures were being considered.
The White House has been discussing the order with meatpacking executives to determine what they need to operate safely and stay open, in order to prevent shortages, the person said.
White House General Counsel Pat Cipollone worked with private companies to design a federal mandate to keep the plants open and to provide them additional virus testing capacity as well as protective gear. (source)
Who will be manning the factories?
So, the question is, will workers return voluntarily to a job that Union representatives tell them is unsafe? Will these workers be mandated to return under the Defense Production Act even though many have become ill working during the pandemic?
The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, which represents 1.3 million food and retail workers, said Tuesday that 20 U.S. food-processing and meatpacking union workers in the U.S. have died and that an estimated 6,500 are sick or have been exposed to the virus while working near someone who tested positive.
COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus, has infected hundreds of workers at meat-processing plants and forced some of the largest to close and others to slow production. While the output at beef and poultry plants has diminished, pork plants in the Midwest have been hit especially hard. The viral outbreaks have persisted despite efforts by the meat companies to keep workers at home with pay if they become sick. (source)
Obviously, people have to be present to keep the plants running. What happens if current employees and union members refuse to return to the plants? Will people who have been cleared as immune by the much-touted but elusive antibody tests be pressed to work there?
It’s clear we’re currently living through a time during which unusual things are happening and our constitutional rights no longer seem as solid as they once did. So, if the plants are mandated to be open, this leaves some pretty big questions.
Will people return to work voluntarily? Or will we see civilians facing forced labor right here on American soil?
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 20:45 - 'Infodemic': Seoul Takes Aim At CNN "Fake News" Report About Kim Jong Un's Failed Heart Surgery
‘Infodemic’: Seoul Takes Aim At CNN “Fake News” Report About Kim Jong Un’s Failed Heart Surgery
Last week’s avalanche of headlines regarding Kim Jong Un’s ‘disappearance’ and possible death triggered initially by a report in Seoul-based outlet Daily NK, but then amplified by a CNN suggesting the North Korean leader is in “grave danger” following heart surgery, has been addressed in candid terms with fresh statements of South Korea’s Unification Minister Kim Yeon-chul.
He rejected the unconfirmed reports as “fake news” and an “infodemic,” insisting that South Korean intelligence is “confident” that there are no unusual signs regarding Kim Jong Un’s health, according to the South’s state-run Yonhap news agency.
“It is true that he had never missed the anniversary for Kim Il Sung’s birthday since he took power, but many anniversary events including celebrations and a banquet had been canceled because of coronavirus concerns,” Kim Yeon-chul said during a parliament session.
AP photo He described that Pyongyang appears to be exercising extreme caution related to the coronavirus pandemic, canceling Kim’s appearance at all public commemorations; however, North Korean media continues to report on near daily official messages sent from the leader to workers, the military, and other sectors.
“It can be seen as a phenomenon of infodemic,” Minister Kim added in reference to the deluge of rumors surrounding the NK leader’s health. “We have intelligence capacity that allows us to say confidently that there are no unusual signs.”
In a rare moment, the top South Korean minister took direct aim at CNN, saying, “I know that the CNN report is based on the Daily NK report, which said that (Kim) received surgery at the Hyangsan Medical Center.”
ROK Unification Minister Kim Yeon-chul, via AFP. “That cannot make sense logically. … The Hyangsan Medical Center is like a clinic, a facility incapable of performing surgery or medical procedures,” he explained.
Speaking during the same parliamentary assembly, Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha also sought to quash the pervasive reports: “Despite a series of recent media reports, no unusual signs have been detected inside North Korea,” she asserted.
As we described in our own initial reporting on the matter last week: First, it should be noted that the Western mainstream press often gets North Korea completely wrong — and in the case of the latest speculation a high degree of critical skepticism is warranted further given the initial source for the heart surgery claims was a US state-funded media outlet based in South Korea, the Daily NK website.
This is appearing to be the case once again.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 20:25 - Chinagate Is The New Russiagate… And Is Far More Dangerous
Chinagate Is The New Russiagate… And Is Far More Dangerous
Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
I’ve become convinced the next major event that’ll be used to further centralize power and escalate domestic authoritarianism will center around U.S.-China tensions. We haven’t witnessed this “event” yet, but there’s a good chance it’ll occur within the next year or two. Currently, the front runner appears to be a major aggressive move by China into Hong Kong, but it could be anything really. Taiwan, the South China Sea, currency, economic or cyber warfare; the flash points are numerous and growing by the day. Something is going to snap and when it does we better be prepared to not act like mindless imbeciles for the fourth time this century.
When that day arrives, and it’s likely not too far off, certain factions will try to sell you on the monstrous idea that we must become more like China to defeat China. We’ll be told we need more centralization, more authoritarianism, and less freedom and civil liberties or China will win. Such talk is nonsense and the wise way to respond is to reject the worst aspects of the Chinese system and head the other way.
– From my 2019 piece: Two Paths Forward with China – The Good and The Bad
As the clownish farce that is Russiagate slinks back into the psyop dumpster from which it emerged, an even more destructive narrative has metastasized following the U.S. government’s incompetent response to covid-19.
It was clear to me from the start that Russiagate was a nonsensical narrative wildly embraced by a variety of powerful people in the wake of Trump’s election merely to serve their own ends. For establishment Democrats, it was a way to pretend Hillary Clinton didn’t actually lose because she was a wretched status quo candidate with a destructive track record, but she lost due to “foreign meddling.” This allowed those involved in her campaign to deflect blame, but it also short-circuited any discussion of the merits of populism and widespread voter dissatisfaction (within both parties) percolating throughout the land. It was a fairytale invented by people intentionally putting their heads in the sand in order to avoid confrontation with political reality and to keep their cushy gravy-train of entrenched corruption going.
Russiagate was likewise embraced by the national security state (imperial apparatus) for similar reasons. Like establishment Democrats, the national security state also wanted to prevent the narrative that the status quo was rejected in the 2016 election from spreading. It was incentivized to pretend Hillary’s loss was the result of gullible Americans being duped by crafty Russians in order to manufacture the idea that U.S. society was healthy and normal if not for some external enemy.
Another primary driver for the national security state was to punish Russia for acting like a sovereign state as opposed to a colony of U.S. empire in recent years. Russia has been an increasingly serious thorn in the side of unipolarism advocates over the past decade by performing acts such as buying gold, providing safe harbor for Edward Snowden, and thwarting the dreams of regime change in Syria. Such acts could not go unpunished.
So Russiagate served its purpose. It wasted our time for much of Trump’s first term and it helped prevent Bernie Sanders from winning the Democratic nomination. Now we get Chinagate.
When the premier empire on the planet starts blaming external enemies for its internal problems, you know it’s almost always an excuse to let your own elites off the hook and further erode civil liberties. While it appears the novel coronavirus covid-19 did in fact come from China, and China tried to discourage other countries from taking decisive action in the early days, our internal political actors blaming China for their own lack of preparation and timely reaction is patently ridiculous.
The entire world saw China shutdown the entire city of Wuhan shuttering factories and the economy. Anyone with two eyes and half a brain could see they were ACTING as if this were very serious. I bought masks, hand sanitizer, lysol wipes at the end of January. Why didn’t State? https://t.co/oECvvxbV0K
— Stacy Herbrrrt (@stacyherbert) April 23, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
If Stacy and myself were able to see the situation clearly and respond early, why couldn’t our government? This isn’t rocket science. The Chinese were acting as if the world had ended in cities across the country and we’re supposed to believe U.S. leaders simply listened to what the CCP was saying as opposed to what they were doing? How does that make any sense?
It makes even less sense considering the Trump administration has been in an explicit cold war with China for almost two years. This concept that the American national security state just took China’s word for what was going on in the early days is preposterous. So what’s going on here? Similar to Russiagate, the increased focus on directing our ten minutes of hate at the Chinese provides cover for the elites, but Chinagate is far more dangerous because the narrative will prove far more convincing for many Americans.
Although Russiagate was rapidly embraced by people with severe Trump Derangement Syndrome, most people just didn’t buy into it or care. Only the most dimwitted amongst us actually believed the Russians were responsible for our major problems at home, but when it comes to China the argument can be far more persuasive because many aspects of the economic relationship between the U.S. and China are in fact problematic. Specifically, the U.S. transformed itself from a nation of producers and builders into a nation of debt-driven consumption slaves over the past five decades. While China played a key role in this process, it wasn’t the driver.
Did China force the U.S. to abandon gold convertibility in 1971, thus beginning the transition from an industrial empire into a financial one? Did China convince us to repeal Glass-Steagall, or lie about WMD in Iraq? Did China put a gun to our manufacturing executives’ heads and force them to offshore manufacturing, or did the executives do that with greed filled eyes while earning billions upon billions from labor arbitrage? China may have directly benefited from five decades of avarice-driven policy crimes committed by American “elites,” but they didn’t cause them. They are entirely homegrown.
Yep, the only people who benefit from the external enemy obsession are the people who actually wrecked this country.
Our own “elites.” https://t.co/bYZDH3cflW
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) April 18, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Chinagate is far more dangerous than Russiagate because very serious fundamental problems within the U.S.-China economic relationship do exist. I don’t deny this, and I’m in favor of actual policies that would incentivize the American people to become producers and builders as opposed to castrated debt zombies. The problem is many of the people ratcheting up the volume on the evils of China (I don’t deny the abundance of evil) aren’t interested in bringing liberty and production back to America. Rather, they’re trying to take away more of your freedoms, economically and politically.
Wall Street and the national security state (empire) ransacked and hollowed out this country. It wasn’t your neighbor, it wasn’t immigrants and it wasn’t an external enemy.
Know who did this and never forget it.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) April 22, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The same people who’ve been in charge of the country for the entire 21st century remain in charge. Presidential politics is pure theater in an empire. Think about it, the same people who brought you endless war, the surveillance panopticon and perpetual Wall Street crime and bailouts are supposed to take on China? The same China that made so many of them fabulously wealthy? Give me a fucking break.
The elitist agenda isn’t to use anger at China to bring freedom and production to our shores, but to use heightened emotional fear to tighten their domestic power grip. The idea is to use Chinese authoritarianism as a model for the U.S.
The post covid-19 elitist wet dream here is pretty transparent. Convince everyone to be a compliant farm animal on an imperial plantation.
To defeat China and all.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) April 27, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Unsurprisingly, the usual suspects are already coming out of their snake holes to advocate for exactly that. We saw this a few days ago when Harvard Law Professor and former George W. Bush administration lawyer, Jack Goldsmith, explicitly called for Chinese-like censorship of speech on the internet.
In the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong. Significant monitoring and speech control are inevitable components of a mature and flourishing internet, and governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with a society’s norms and values.
By all means advocate for a reshuffling of the relationship between the U.S. and China that will lead to more freedom, resilience and economic vitality at home and I’ll support it, but don’t tell me we need to become China in order to defeat China. If we’re dumb enough to fall for that, we’ll get exactly what we deserve. Good and hard.
* * *
Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general, visit the Support Page where you can donate and contribute to my efforts.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 20:05 - Survey Finds 50 Million Americans Have Lost Their Job In Past 6 Weeks
Survey Finds 50 Million Americans Have Lost Their Job In Past 6 Weeks
When Thursday’s initial claims report is published at 830am on Thursday, the Dept of Labor will confirm that the current depression is unlike any seen before, with approximately 30 million Americans losing their jobs in the past 6 weeks alone. That, however, may be underestimating the full number of Americans who have lost their jobs by as much as 50%.
According to an online poll by the left-wing Economic Policy Institute, millions of Americans who have been thrown out of work during the coronavirus pandemic have been unable to register for unemployment benefits. The poll found that for every 10 people who have successfully filed unemployment claims, three or four people have been unable to register and another two people have not tried to apply at a time of acute economic crisis.
Official statistics show that 26.5 million people have applied for unemployment benefits since mid-March, wiping out all of the jobs gained during the longest employment boom in U.S. history, and another 3.5 million initial claims are expected to be filed this week.
However, EPI’s survey indicates that an additional 8.9 million to 13.9 million people have been shut out of the system, said Ben Zipperer, the study’s lead author, which means that as of this week, just shy of 50 million American have lost their job since the start of March. “This study validates the anecdotes and news reports we’re seeing about people having trouble filing for benefits they need and deserve,” Zipperer said.
Among the reasons why idled workers have been unable to get in the “pipeline”, they claim they have encountered downed websites and clogged phone lines, as the state governments that administer the program have been overwhelmed by applicants.
“It’s a shame how you work for so many years and then when you need it, you can’t get it,” said Jim Hewes, 48, who said he was unable to file a claim online for more than two weeks after he was furloughed from his job at an Orlando, Florida, second-hand store in March. Hewes said he mailed off a paper application on April 9 but had not heard back from the state.
“It’s almost set up to fail. It was made complicated so people would get discouraged and give up.”
EPI surveyed 24,607 adult internet users using Google Surveys between April 13 and April 24. The poll has a confidence interval, an indicator of accuracy, of plus or minus 1%. 9.4% of poll respondents said they had successfully applied for unemployment benefits, while 3.4% said they tried but could not get through. A further 1.9% said they did not apply because the process was too difficult.
* * *
Among the reasons for the continuing technical challenges listed by Reuters, is that states like New Jersey and Georgia have struggled to find staffers who know how to update computer systems that run on decades-old technology. Others that have moved to newer technology have also encountered technical woes. States have also had to incorporate enhanced federal benefits that provide an extra $600 per week and extend coverage to Uber drivers and other independent contractors.
On top of that, many states entered the crisis with fewer workers to handle unemployment claims as an improving economy had allowed them to cut staff.
States had the equivalent of 26,360 full-time workers in their unemployment offices in the 2018 fiscal year, according to the U.S. Labor Department, down 30% from staffing levels during the peak of the Great Recession in 2009 and 2010. Many Americans who managed to file claims have yet to receive payments weeks after they lost their jobs.
Labor Department statistics show that 71% who apply are getting payments, although that figure varies significantly by state. Florida, for example, said on Saturday it had sent payments to roughly one in five of those who had successfully submitted claims. Among those waiting are Rachel Alvarez, 44, who says she now hides snacks in her bedroom so her three children cannot eat them too quickly. The former restaurant server in Naples, Florida, says she has run through her savings since she was laid off on March 25.
“I have nothing,” she said. “As much as I don’t want my kids to see me stress out, each one has seen me cry.”
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 19:45 - Trump Could Use "Nuclear Option" To Make Saudi Arabia Pay For Oil War
Trump Could Use “Nuclear Option” To Make Saudi Arabia Pay For Oil War
Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,
President Donald Trump is considering all options available to him to make the Saudis pay for the oil price war as the crash that followed has done significant damage to the U.S. oil industry.
With last month having seen the indignity of the principal U.S. oil benchmark, West Texas Intermediate (WTI), having fallen into negative pricing territory, U.S. President Donald Trump is considering all options available to him to make the Saudis pay for the oil price war that it started, according to senior figures close to the Presidential Administration spoken to by OilPrice.com last week. It is not just the likelihood that exactly the same price action will occur to each front-month WTI futures contract just before expiry until major new oil production cuts come from OPEC+ that incenses the U.S. nor the economic damage that is being done to its shale oil sector but also it is the fact that Saudi is widely seen in Washington as having betrayed the long-standing relationship between the two countries. Right now, many senior members on Trump’s closest advisory circle want the Saudis to pay for its actions, in every way, OilPrice.com understands.
This relationship was established in 1945 between the U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Saudi King at the time, Abdulaziz, on board the U.S. Navy cruiser Quincy in the Great Bitter Lake segment of the Suez Canal and has defined the relationship between the two countries ever since. As analysed in depth in my new book on the global oil markets, the deal that was struck between the two men at that time was that the U.S. would receive all of the oil supplies it needed for as long as Saudi Arabia had oil in place, in return for which the U.S. would guarantee the security of the ruling House of Saud. The deal has altered slightly since the rise of the U.S. shale oil industry and Saudi Arabia’s attempt to destroy it from 2014 to 2016 in that the U.S. also expects the House of Saud to ensure that Saudi Arabia not only supplies the U.S. with whatever oil it needs for as long as it can but also that it also allows the U.S. shale industry to continue to function and to grow.
For the U.S., if this means that Saudi Arabia loses out to U.S. shale producers by keeping oil prices up but losing out on export opportunities to U.S. firms then that is just the price that the House of Saud must pay for the continued protection of the U.S. – politically, economically, and militarily. As U.S. President Donald Trump has made clear whenever he has sensed a lack of understanding on the part of Saudi Arabia for the huge benefit that the U.S. is doing the ruling family:
“He [Saudi King Salman] would not last in power for two weeks without the backing of the U.S. military.”
Trump has a very good point, as it is fair to say that without U.S. protection, either Israel or Iran and its proxy operatives and supporters would very soon indeed end the rule of the House of Saud.
Aside from just withdrawing all such support from the Saud family right now, there are other options available to the U.S. as interim measures, although some are more practical than others. Early in the oil price war, Trump stated that “I will do whatever I have to do… to protect… tens of thousands of energy workers and our great companies,” and added that plans to impose tariffs on Saudi Arabia’s oil exports into the U.S. were “certainly a tool in the toolbox.”
From a practical volumes perspective, putting tariffs on Saudi oil rather than Russian oil would make sense from three key perspectives.
First, the U.S. imports around 95 per cent more oil from Saudi than it does from Russia, so sanctioning Russian oil would have little effect on the U.S.’s supply glut that is overhanging its already-stretched domestic storage facilities.
Second, Russia is in much better economic shape than Saudi to handle any shocks to its oil-related streams of revenue, with a budget breakeven oil price of US$40 per barrel of Brent rather than Saudi’s US$84 per barrel point.
Third, there is also the fact that Saudi currently provides one of the few large-scale sources of sour crude (including the benchmark Arab Heavy) that is available to the U.S., which is essential to its production of diesel, and to which purpose WTI is less suited. Certainly much of the U.S.’s Gulf Coast refinery system is geared towards using sourer crude, having invested heavily in coking systems and other infrastructure to better handle heavier crudes from the Middle East in recent decades. The other major historical sources of this for the U.S. are not in a position to fill the gap, with U.S. sanctions still imposed on oil imports from Venezuela, Mexican flows unreliable, and Canada’s pipeline capacity to the U.S. not able to handle any more more exports south until the long-delayed Keystone pipeline is up and running at some point in 2023.
In a U.S. presidential election year, the last thing that a U.S. president wants is increasing diesel prices or shortages making a coronavirus-hit economy even worse. It is a fact that since the end of the First World War, the sitting U.S. president has won re-election 11 times out of 11 if the U.S. economy was not in recession within two calendar years ahead of an election whilst presidents who went into a re-election campaign with the economy in recession over the same time-frame won only once out of seven.
This said, it may be that Trump will use the threat of such tariffs on Saudi Arabia, as his mercurial reputation may work to convince the Saudis that he is unpredictable enough to impose such taxes, regardless of the short-term economic consequences. Even as it stands, he needs to do something as around 44 million barrels of Saudi crude are expected to reach the U.S. over the next four weeks, according to oil industry and shipping data. This is around four times the most recent four-week average, according to EIA records, and it is mostly due to be delivered to the already overwhelmed Cushing delivery point. Republican Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, who has advised Trump on energy issues, has been calling on the White House to take action to stop the very large crude carriers from unloading, and several senators and congressmen have threatened to vote to withhold military aid to Saudi Arabia. Trump, for his part, has so far only said that he will “look at it,” referring to stopping these new imports.
Given the burgeoning ill-feeling towards the Saudis amongst the U.S.’s two legislative houses – from an already high base – sources in the Presidential Administration say that a forceful, but private, reiteration of the threat of the ‘No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act’ (NOPEC) Bill direct to King Salman, circumventing his son Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, might do the trick in convincing the Saudis to dramatically increase the contextually paltry output cut last agreed with the Russians. As highlighted by OilPrice.com, the pressure for Trump to finally sign off the NOPEC Bill has been growing from the second that the Saudis began the latest oil price war.
Specifically, the NOPEC Bill would make it illegal to artificially cap oil (and gas) production or to set prices, as OPEC, OPEC+, and Saudi Arabia do. The Bill would also immediately remove the sovereign immunity that presently exists in U.S. courts for OPEC as a group and for each and every one of its individual member states. This would leave Saudi Arabia open to being sued under existing U.S. anti-trust legislation, with its total liability being its estimated US$1 trillion of investments in the U.S. alone. The U.S. would then be legally entitled to freeze all Saudi bank accounts in the U.S., seize its assets in the country, and halt all use of U.S. dollars by the Saudis anywhere in the world (oil, of course, to begin with, is denominated in U.S. dollars). It would also allow the U.S. to go after Saudi Aramco and its assets and funds, as it is still a majority state-owned production and trading vehicle, and would mean that Aramco could be ordered to break itself up into smaller, constituent companies that are not deemed to break competition rules in the oil, gas, and petrochemicals sectors or to influence the oil price.
The Bill came very close indeed to being passed into law when in February of last year, the House Judiciary Committee passed the NOPEC Act, which cleared the way for a vote on the Bill before the full House of Representatives. On the same day, Democrats Patrick Leahy and Amy Klobuchar and – most remarkably – two Republicans, Chuck Grassley and Mike Lee, introduced the NOPEC Bill to the Senate. Its progress was only halted after President Trump stepped in and vetoed it when the Saudis did what he told them to do (at that point, to produce more to keep oil prices under US$70 per barrel of Brent), but the option is still available for a relatively quick turnaround on turning it into law.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 19:25 - Has The Recovery Started Already? What Real-TIme Coronavirus Activity Trackers Are Showing
Has The Recovery Started Already? What Real-TIme Coronavirus Activity Trackers Are Showing
There was some good news in the latest coronavirus activity tracker from Goldman: signs of life amid an unprecedented collapse in aggregate demand.
As the following chart tracking daily consumer prices shows, after cratering by as much as 50% into the middle of April, consumer prices have rebounded in the past week to -31%, which while still clearly ugly, indicates that some demand is coming back (in this case rising airfare prices).
That said, other real-time activity trackers are showing the opposite, namely a downward inflection point such as for example the recent decline in China Industrial Activity which has backtracked in the past two weeks, while the US Industrial Activity Tracker clearly hovered at post crisis lows of -19%. This suggests that after a forced rebound in the past month, China may be again relapsing to the global industrial malaise, even as the US has still to find the lows.
At the same time, a more optimistic picture for China emerges when tracking consumer activity, which tracks spending in categories of consumption that are likely to be disproportionately affected by the virus, which continued to rise in China, even as it remains unchanged at -73% yoy in the US.
Real-time indicators across other sectors and countries show conflicting trends, with China clearly rebounding in real estate transactions and stabilizing for electricity consumption, while continuing to contract for weekend box office movie revenue, arguably the clearest indicator in the broader population’s confidence that the pandemic has been contained.
Sentiment remained dismal when viewed through the perspective of social networks, in this case economic sentiment as expressed on twitter.
There was more bad news when one looked at the US economy regionally, with the Seattle area showing little sign of recovery…
… while “unemployment” searches remain at all time highs, indicating we have yet to hit a peak in the deterioration in the labor market.
The silver lining: for now, at least, bankruptcies remain subdued in both the US and China, suggesting this could be the next big show to drop.
Tyler Durden
Tue, 04/28/2020 – 19:05
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/kimhealth.jpg?ssl=1){kind=link}
![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/rokunificationmin.jpg?ssl=1){kind=link}