Today’s News 30th August 2018

• Where People Are Most And Least Proud To Be European

  Late last year, Pew Research polled people in 15 countries across Europe about how proud they were to identify as European.

  As Statista’s Niall McCarthy shows in the following infographic, respondents in Finland had the highest level of pride with 87 percent saying they were very or somewhat proud to identify as European.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Unsurprisingly given Brexit, people in the UK had the lowest level of pride in their European identity.

  

• Nazis Were Not Marxists, But They Were Socialists

  Authored by Jörg Guido Hülsmann via The Mises Institute,

  The abject practical failure of the Marxist revolutionaries in the post-WWI period had done much harm to their image as the vanguard of social progress.

  

  The explanation for this failure in the writings of Mises, Max Weber, and Boris Brutzkus had led many economists to revise their views about the suitable scope of government within society. But others remained unrepentant advocates of the total state. They merely rejected the specifically egalitarian agenda of the socialists.

  The uncontested leader of this group was Werner Sombart, the greatest star among the interwar economists in Germany. Sombart had started his career popularizing Marxism in academic circles with his 1896 book Sozialismus und soziale Bewegung im 19. Jahrhundert (Socialism and Social Action in the Nineteenth Century). Later editions testified to Sombart’s increasing estrangement with his initial Marxist ideals. The tenth edition, which appeared under a new title in 1924, featured an outright demolition of Marxist socialism. Sombart had turned back to the mainstream Schmollerite socialism, which advocated the total state without an egalitarian agenda.

  Sombart’s intellectual qualities had gained him a place of preeminence. Where most Marxist intellectuals held dogmatically to the tenets of Marx and Engels, Sombart sought to analyze and develop their doctrines with a critical mind in quest of objectivity. This made his work the perfect target for a thorough criticism of the intellectual current of anti-Marxist socialism, and Mises provided such a criticism in an article with the title “Antimarxismus” (Anti-Marxism).

  Already in his article on price controls, Mises had pointed out that the shortcomings of interventionism did not result from the egalitarian agenda that some governments pursued, but from the very nature of government intervention itself, namely, the infringement of private property rights. Socialism and interventionism were destructive economic systems whether explicitly egalitarian or not. They would be unsuitable forms of social organization even if they pursued some other ideal of distribution—even meritocracy. There might be certain superficial similarities between a free society and a non-egalitarian one controlled by a total state, but these two would still be essentially different:

  On the surface the social ideal of etatism does not differ from the social order of capitalism. Etatism does not seek to overthrow the traditional legal order and formally convert all private property in production to public property… But in substance all enterprises are to become government operations. Under this practice, the owners will keep their names and trademarks on the property and the right to an “appropriate” income or one “befitting their ranks.” Every business becomes an office and every occupation a civil service. … Prices are set by government, and government determines what is to be produced, how it is to be produced, and in what quantities. There is no speculation, no “extraordinary” profits, no losses. There is no innovation, except for that ordered by government. Government guides and supervises everything.

  Mises showed that the error in the idea of the omnipotent state has nothing to do with the state’s particular agenda. The government is not omnipotent if its goal is to improve “collective life” (as opposed to that of mere aggregates of individuals). But neither is it omnipotent if it seeks to enhance the welfare of the totality of individual citizens. In both cases, government intervention is counterproductive. It follows that the time-honored and seemingly significant distinction between individualism and collectivism is of only secondary importance. The primary distinction is between policies that work and policies that do not work, which leads in turn to the distinction between a social order based on private property (which works) and those social orders that depend on infringements of private property rights (and do not work). It is therefore beside the point whether individuals or collectives run the economy—provided only that the property rights of all individual members of the collectives are preserved. It also follows that the size of the firm is of no importance. As long as private property is respected, the buying decisions of the consumers reward only those companies that offer the best products. If these companies are larger than others, so be it.

  Mises emphasized this fact against the doctrines of Dietzel, Karl Pribram, and Spann, which had a great influence on interwar political thought in Germany and, after World War II, in the wider western world. Dietzel and Pribram sided with individualism, whereas Spann championed collectivism, but they all agreed that these were the ultimate categories and that all political points of view derived from them. Mises disagreed.

  He argued that there was a point of view that was derived from neither individualism nor collectivism, namely, the utilitarian method of social analysis. He had already proved how successful this method was in analyzing the static and dynamic problems of social “wholes” such as language communities, and he emphasized that the analysis of such wholes is the very point of theoretical social science. It was fallacious to believe that individual action could be understood out of its wider social context, just as it was false that the proper understanding of social wholes required that the social analysis itself be holistic.

  The utilitarian method alone was a truly scientific one because it traced all social phenomena back to facts of experience:

  The utilitarian social doctrine does not engage in metaphysics, but takes as its point of departure the established fact that all living beings affirm their will to live and grow. The higher productivity of labor performed in division of labor, when compared with isolated action, is ever more uniting individuals to association. Society is division and association of labor.

  Each person seeks to enhance his welfare, and cooperative labor is more productive than isolated labor. Therefore, insofar as the growth of a person’s welfare presupposes greater quantities of material goods, the person can best attain his ends by engaging in a division of labor. This is how society comes into being.

  All elements in this economic explanation of society are ascertainable facts. In contrast, the doctrines of individualism and collectivism do not lend themselves to any such causal explanation of the origin of society because they are based on postulates rather than on analysis of fact. And Mises proceeded to show that the same criticism also applied to the Marxist theory of proletarian class struggle. He did not deny that human history featured many group conflicts and that they often had great importance for the course of events. Rather, he argued that the fashionable struggle theories—of which the Marxist theory of class struggle was but one particular instance—purported to be much more than they really were. Group conflicts were not, and could not possibly be, the basic elements of human life. The real question was how any group could come into existence in the first place. One first had to explain the formation of groups before one could explain the struggle between them. But all struggle theorists, Marx included, failed on this front.

  The reason for this negligence is not difficult to detect. It is impossible to demonstrate a principle of association that exists within a collective group only, and that is inoperative beyond it. If war and strife are the driving forces of all social development, why should this be true for classes, races, and nations only, and not for war among all individuals? If we take this warfare sociology to its logical conclusion we arrive at no social doctrine at all, but at “a theory of unsociability.”

  Mises pointed out that Marx’s theory of class struggle even failed to give an empirical account of its most basic concept. What is a “class” in the Marxist sense? Marx had never defined it. “And it is significant that the posthumous manuscript of the third volume of Das Kapital halts abruptly at the very place that was to deal with classes.” Mises went on:

  Since his death more than forty years have passed, and the class struggle has become the cornerstone of modern German sociology. And yet we continue to await its scientific definition and delineation. No less vague are the concepts of class interests, class condition, and class war, and the ideas on the relationship between conditions, class interests, and class ideology.

  Werner Sombart, along with the great majority of German sociologists of whom he was the undisputed leader, had adopted the Marxist view that proletarian class struggle was the ultimate driving force in modern societies. He was now an opponent of Marxist ideology, but his analyses still remained Marxian. He merely refrained from drawing all the practical conclusions, which Marx and the Marxists had consistently deduced, from the theory of class struggle. He did not and could not provide an alternative to the Marxist scenario of social evolution. His only objection came in the form of a postulate: things should not happen as they would happen according to the theory of class struggle, therefore government should resist such developments. Yet with this admission, Sombart and the bulk of the German sociologists had again left the realm of science and entered that of religion and ethics. Sombart in fact championed a return to medieval forms of social organization—the guilds—just as Keynes in England proposed “a return, it may be said, towards medieval conceptions of separate autonomies.” Similarly, the few theorists who had thoroughly criticized Marx’s concept of class struggle, like Othmar Spann, marveled at the alleged blessings of national socialism in the middle ages.

  Mises concluded:

  for every scientific thinker the objectionable point of Marxism is its theory, which seems to cause no offence to the Anti-Marxist… The Anti-Marxist merely objects to the political symptoms of the Marxian system, not to its scientific content. He regrets the harm done by Marxian policies to the German people, but is blind to the harm done to German intellectual life by the platitudes and deficiencies of Marxian problems and solutions. Above all, he fails to perceive that political and economic troubles are consequences of this intellectual calamity. He does not appreciate the importance of science for everyday living, and, under the influence of Marxism, believes that “real” power instead of ideas is shaping history.

  “Anti-Marxism” caused outrage among the Marxists. What was Mises’s sin? First, he had dared criticize the great master with a penetrating analysis of the incurable shortcomings of Marx’s theory of class struggle. Second, he had again contended that from an economic point of view Marxist socialism was not essentially different from the various new brands of national socialism that had begun to spring up in the 1920s, mostly in reaction against Marxist movements. Thus a fraction of Italian socialists, who rejected the teachings of Marx and called themselves “Fascists,” rose to power under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. There was also a movement of non-Marxist “National Socialists” in Germany. The father of this movement was Friedrich Naumann who, by a strange coincidence, later came to be regarded as the godfather of twentieth-century German liberalism. The leader of the National Socialists from the 1920s until their bitter end was, of course, Adolf Hitler.

  Marxist socialists vociferously object to being classified under the same heading that includes Fascist Socialists and National Socialists. But as Mises showed, all distinctions between these groups are on the surface. Economically, they are united.

  *  *  *

  Excerpted with minor revision from Mises: Last Knight of Liberalism 

  

• Mapping The Countries Shutting Down The Internet The Most

  With President Trump raising the threat rhetoric over conservative bias among the giant US megatech firms, it is worth remembering that when it comes to curbing dissent and freedom of expression, some governments take the drastic step of shutting down the internet.

  Across the world, as Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes, internet shutdowns and deliberate slowdowns are becoming more common and they generally occur when someone (usually a government) intentionally disrupts the internet or mobile apps to control what people do or say.

  According to Access Now data reported by Vice News, India has the most shutdowns of any country by a huge distance – 154 between January 2016 and May 2018. By comparison, second-placed Pakistan only had 19 shutdowns during the same period.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In many countries, flicking the off switch on the internet is a preemptive or reactive measure in response to mass or potential unrest.

  Egypt’s 2011 revolution and the failed Turkish military coup of 2016 are prime examples.

  This is also true in India to a certain extent where internet access is cut off due to political turmoil, protests and military operations.

  Shutdowns are even known to occur in certain regions to prevent cheating during examinations. Recent cases include a 45-day internet shutdown in Darjeeling in West Bengal due to political demonstrations and protests from activists seeking a separate state while Nawada in Bihar experienced a 40-day shutdown due to communal clashes.

  Given how important the internet has become, limiting access to it can have financial consequences. In India, the huge number of shutdowns and their length, are getting very expensive. A report by The Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), found that 16,315 hours of intentional internet downtime between 2012 and 2017 has cost the Indian economy $3.04 billion.

  

• Iran Sanctions, Emerging Markets, And The End Of Dollar Dominance

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

  The trade war is a rather strange and bewildering affair if you do not understand the underlying goal behind it. If you think that the goal is to balance the trade deficit and provide a more amicable deal for U.S. producers on the global market, then you are probably finding yourself either confused, or operating on blind faith that the details will work themselves out.

  

  Case in point, the latest reports that the U.S. trade deficit is now on track to hit 10-year highs, after a 7% increase in June. This is the exact opposite of what was supposed to happen when tariffs were initiated. In fact, I recall much talk in alternative media circles claiming that the mere threat of tariffs would frighten foreign exporters into balancing trade on their own. Obviously this has not been the case.

  Rumors of China committing to trade talks or “folding” under the pressure have been repeatedly proven false. Though stock markets seem to enjoy such headlines, tangible positive results are non-existent. While the world is mostly focused on China’s reactions, sanctions against other nations are continuing for reasons that are difficult to comprehend.

  Sanctions against Russia have been tightened in the wake of the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the UK, even though we still have yet to see any concrete evidence that Russia had anything to do with the attack.

  Sanctions against Iran have been reintroduced on the accusation that the Iranian government is engaged in secret nuclear weapons development. And again, we still haven’t seen any hard evidence that this is true.

  Such sanctions, based on hearsay, rumor and “classified” data that the public is never allowed to review, present what amounts to an economic fog of war. What appears to be a chaotic mess, however, could actually be a distraction from a greater scheme.

  I’m talking about what the IMF commonly refers to as the “global economic reset”. They tend to discuss it in vague fashion, but from what I have gathered from the IMF’s own documentation as well as what other major economic powers are calling for, this reset includes a path to de-dollarization. This means the end of the dollar as the world reserve currency, to be replaced with the SDR, a basket currency system controlled by the IMF.

  The Iran sanctions, in and of themselves, do not represent a trigger for a global dollar dump. Though, globalists within the IMF might prefer that the average person or economic analyst believe this possible. In this way, they avoid blame for the potential fiscal suffering that would result when the dollar is displaced and stagflationary consequences strike.

  A lot of dominoes have to be carefully and deliberately placed and knocked down in order for the dollar to lose its reserve status, but the process is well underway.

  The effects of sanctions on Iranian oil are a perfect example.

  Rather than creating a “multipolar world” as mainstream propaganda suggests, we are seeing even more global centralization in the face of the trade war. In recent news, five nations including Russia and Iran have signed an agreement on the Caspian Sea. The longtime dispute over the resource rich region has suddenly ended as tariffs disputed with the U.S. accelerate.

  Iran was initially reluctant to sign the deal, but its success now marks a milestone in Russia/Iran relations. To reiterate, two nations that have been sanctioned by the U.S. are now moving closer together for strategic and economic gain. But it doesn’t stop there.

  Europe has expressed a distaste for Iran sanctions and is slow to reduce its purchases of Iranian crude and natural gas. In the process, EU nations would lose one of their largest suppliers of energy.  Both France and Germany are considering the use of alternative payment systems in order to sidestep the US and continue trade with Iran.  This move falls in line with reports that Germany is moving away from the US dominated SWIFT payment network to the Chinese based CIPS.

  Natural gas is vital to Europe’s economy, including heating during winter months. Initially, before Iran’s export markets opened back up, the EU was heavily dependent on Russian natural gas and oil to meet its demand. With the threat of Iran sanctions set to return this November, guess which supplier is back in town.  Russia and Germany are set to sign an agreement on an oil pipeline called Nord Stream 2, which will increase Russian energy exports substantially. Donald Trump has attacked the proposal, claiming it makes Germany “a captive of the Russians”. This rhetoric, though, only seems to be hastening the process.

  I would note that sanctions against Iran are the likely cause of elevated support in Europe for closer economic ties to Russia. Once again, we see the world moving closer together in centralization while the U.S. is being systematically cut out.

  Iran has stated openly that it plans to defy U.S. sanctions and this defiance has been met with support not only from Russia, but also China. The Asian export and import powerhouse, already embroiled in a trade war with the U.S., has stated it will not cut Iranian crude imports, and has even suggested removing the dollar as the trade mechanism for oil purchases.

  The Iran issue is igniting at an interesting time.

  Emerging market economies are facing considerable pressure as the Federal Reserve continues its interest rate hikes and balance sheet cuts in the name of fiscal tightening to combat “inflation”. As I have mentioned in past articles, U.S. banks and corporations were not the only recipients of Fed bailouts, QE and overnight loans. According to the initial TARP bailout audit, which only gives us a small glimpse into the amount of fiat pumped into the global system by the Fed, trillions of dollars were injected into foreign banks and companies.

  Emerging market countries became addicted to Fed liquidity over the past decade, using no-cost loans and the weakened dollar to prop up stock markets, bonds and their own currencies. They were the first to see a stock market rebound after bailouts were launched, and now they are the first to see their stock markets plunge as the Fed removes the punch bowl. Emerging market equities have recently suffered an approximate 15% drop as dollar liquidity dries up.

  The trade wars have provided perfect cover, distracting the public from the fact that without constant and expanding money creation by the Federal Reserve, assets around the world are plunging in value.

  This imbalance in market declines has fooled mainstream analysts, who are claiming it as evidence that Trump’s trade war is “working” and that trade opponents will soon capitulate. In reality, the reverse is more likely true.

  As we have seen with Iranian oil, emerging economies are not rushing to placate the U.S. And even European nations like Germany are seeking alternatives that are out of line with U.S. wishes. India has complained openly that the Fed’s balance sheet cuts and interest rate hikes will cause severe economic instability. Though foreign banks still hold trillions in dollars overseas, dollar liquidity has become a major psychological factor.  Beyond this, it is the higher COST of dollar based loans due to rising interest rates which mainstream analysts seem to be ignoring.  Debt already accumulated by emerging market banks is set to become much more expensive, and this is likely the trigger behind stock volatility in much of the developing world at this time.  The more expensive debt is, the less international banks and foreign central banks will be borrowing in order to prop up stocks in those regions.

  When an addict is unable to get the drug he desires from his traditional source, he will look for alternative sources. Meaning, emerging markets are going to seek out other options to replace the dollar by necessity.

  One might wonder if the Fed is aware that they are creating the very conditions that will cause the demise of the dollar. And the answer is yes – they are perfectly aware. Jerome Powell admitted in October 2012 that tightening of QE and higher interest rates could cause severe fiscal crisis. Today, Powell is the Fed chairman, and he is pursuing the very actions he warned about in 2012. If this does not tell you that the Fed is a deliberate saboteur of our system, then I don’t know what does.

  We commonly focus on the consequences of Fed policies within America, but rarely consider how the Fed’s actions might hit foreign markets, and then circle around like a boomerang to hit the U.S.

  We know that higher interest rates will eventually crush corporate stock buybacks, which have kept U.S. stock markets in an artificial bull market for years.  August is known as the most aggressive month for stock buybacks and this is reflected so far in the recent market rally. But, corporations are already weighted with historic levels of debt not seen since the Lehman crisis, and higher rates will drag them down into even deeper waters. Though, with emerging markets, we see the threat of something far more damaging – the end of the dollar as world reserve.

  The consequences? It is possible, though perhaps unprecedented, that the dollar index will decline even while dollar liquidity is being cut. Meaning, severe price inflation as foreign holders of dollars dump them back into U.S. markets as they turn to a basket-based monetary system.

  This would likely lead to an explosion in gold prices, but beyond that, an explosion in most commodity prices for Americans. Global banks are more than happy to initiate their “reset” in this manner, as Trump’s trade wars can be used as the perfect cover for any pain that is felt during the transition.

  If prices do indeed spike and stocks plummet, tariffs will be blamed instead of the central bankers. When enough fear has been induced in the populace, the IMF and its banker patrons can “ride to the rescue” with the same SDR-based basket system that China and Russia have been calling for as a replacement for dollar hegemony.

  In this scenario, America is painted as the bumbling villain that gets what he deserves, while the world is saved from the edge of destruction by the very banking elites that created the catastrophe in the first place.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here.  We greatly appreciate your patronage.

  

• Sex Doll Brothel Craze Hits Toronto At $80 A Whack

  Canadian men who would prefer the non-alcoholic beer of whore houses will be able to dip their wicks at North America’s first sex-doll brothel in North America, so they claim. 

  Aura Dolls will open in a Toronto strip mall next month, advertising the “world’s most beautiful silicone ladies” which can help you explore “any fantasy or fetish you desire without judgement or shame bringing the ultimate sexual experience*.” 

  Will you choose Anna – their “Busty, Romantic and Spontaneous” doll, Erika – who’s “Young, Gorgeous and Sweet,” or Scarlett – the “Absolute American Dream”? And don’t worry, it’s not cheating if it’s an inanimate polymer-wrapped metal frame that’ll let you do “that thing” you’ve always wanted to try.  

  

  And for those concerned about sharing dick-space with thousands of other doll-johns, fear not – these girls are sanitized (though condoms are still recommended, possibly at the request of “housekeeping”). 

  Our dolls are thoroughly sanitized to meet our high expectations. We take our clients health and safety extremely serious and each sanitation staff has been trained excessively through our industry developed routine to ensure the maximum wellbeing of our clients. The use of condoms are still highly recommend.

  A 30-minute romp with the “girl” of your choice will set you back $80 Canadian, or $62 USD. Aura Dolls even offers two dolls for up to four hours for the low cost of  $960.00 ($742 USD). Imagine that. 

  

  Despite Aura’s claim to be the first sex-doll brothel in North America, Toronto’s “Kinky Dolls” says they’re actually the first – offering synthetic companions which are “ready for you in every position you would choose, They Lubed warm [sic] and ready to play.” For those seeking a bargain, however, you will be sadly disappointed. Just like Aura, Kinky Dolls is also $80 for 30 minutes of pure silicone ecstasy – though they do offer an outcall service for $250 an hour which we imagine includes some guy who waits in a van for you to have your way with their wares.

  Falls new by city tv KinkySdollS working in Toronto for over a year @kinkysdolls we are the first

  — kinkysdolls (@kinkysdolls) August 26, 2018

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

  *Interracial midget enthusiasts may be sadly disappointed

  

• Child Abuse Charges Dropped Against New Mexico "Jihadis" After Local DA Screws Up

  Thanks to an error by the Taos, New Mexico District Attorney’s office, 11 counts of felony child abuse charges against three of the five suspects who ran a New Mexico “Jihadi” compound where a dead child was found were dropped on Wednesday. 

  

  BREAKING: Judge dismisses original 11 child abuse counts against Siraj Wahhaj and Jany Leveille citing failure of DA’s office to adhere to 10 day rule to have preliminary hearing

  — Brandon Evans (@BrandonKOAT) August 29, 2018

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

  After Judge Sarah Backus recused herself from the case, District Judge Emilio Chavez was forced to drop the charges against Lucas Morton, Subhanna Wahhaj and Hujrah Wahhaj after the state failed to indict them within a 10-day window, forcing the frustrated judge to admonish the DA for placing him in such a position. 

  “The rule for dismissal without prejudice reads if the preliminary hearing is not held within the time of this rule, the court shall dismiss the case without prejudice and discharge the defendants,” Judge Emilio Chavez said. 

  Meanwhile, the DA didn’t even show up for the hearing. 

  Another Taos County judge called out the DA for failing to even schedule a preliminary hearing in the case. 

  “There was no excuse and no reason why the District Attorney’s office could not have requested these preliminary hearings. I don’t know if they are overworked or they don’t have enough people at their office. I don’t see the district attorney here or the chief deputy district attorney, but it is disturbing to me that the district attorney would put this court in that kind of a situation,” said Judge Jeff McCelroy.

  He added that the case was “a situation where the court is being caught between very public, very shocking information and a complete failure to follow proper procedures in prosecuting the case.”

  New charges filed

  While the original 11 counts were dropped, new child abuse charges were filed agains defendants Jany Leveille and Siraj Wahhaj – the son of a famous New York Imam, in connection with the death of 3-yaer-old Abdul-Ghani Wahhaj, according to Siraj Wahhaj’s attorney, Thomas Clark. The two will remain in jail until next week, when prosecutors will argue they should stay behind bars until trial, at which point the DA’s office can refile the child abuse charges against all five suspects for neglect of the eleven surviving children. 

  They face one count each of intentional abuse of a child resulting in death and conspiracy to commit intentional abuse of a child resulting in death (child under 12). Not-guilty pleas were entered by the court on each defendant’s behalf. –KTLA

  Police raided the compound on August 3 in search of Abdul-Ghani after his mother in Georgia said he had been kidnapped and missing for over eight months.  

  Siraj Wahhaj and Jany Leveille will remain behind bars on new child abuse resulting in death charges until no bond hearing on Sept. 4.

  — Brandon Evans (@BrandonKOAT) August 29, 2018

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

• Coffin Homes To Industrial Squatting: Hong Kong's Insane Housing Prices Push Millennials To Break The Law

  Millennials in the world’s priciest home market are going to extremes to ensure a simple roof over their heads don’t eat up the entirety of their income. 

  With the average price of used homes in Hong Kong hitting record levels over the past year —  at $1.28 million in the first quarter of 2018 — and with the median home costing 19.4 times more than median annual pre-tax household income, millennials are increasingly willing to illegally squat in industrial buildings just to stay in one of the most population dense cosmopolitan centers on earth (one now-demolished neighborhood, for example, had a density of well over 1 million people per square kilometer). 

  A new report in Bloomberg chronicles just how far affordable home-seekers are willing to go: “The rents nowadays are very unreasonable,” 32-year-old photographer Wah Lee told Bloomberg. “There’s no way for me to afford those residential units.”

  

  Lee is one of perhaps 15,000 to 20,000 or more people now living in an industrial building in order to afford living in the city (an estimated 12,000 people lived in industrial buildings in 2016, according to the Society for Community Organization, and that number has rapidly grown).

  The 32-year old told Bloomberg he pays HK$11,000 (or US$1,400) monthly, which is less than half what a typical residential unit in the area goes for.

  

  He shares the building with others renting in a legally ambiguous situation that the city would deem squatting, and has as neighbors a commercial meat roasting kitchen and an herbal-oil company.

  The risks and discomforts Lee and others are willing to face to save on rent include  “irritations such as rust-tainted water and intermittent blackouts, there’s one major drawback: Such living arrangements are illegal.”

  Residential use use of industrial buildings is officially banned and recently there’s been a proposal adding criminal sanctions for violators, something which in years past authorities have perhaps turned a blind eye to.

  However, the Bloomberg report notes that this changed after a recent tragedy: “Those risks were highlighted when a fire ripped through a unit in an industrial building in the New Territories in August last year, killing three people.” It was discovered the building had 17 illegal subdivided units on the floor where the fire occurred. 

  

  Experts say that unlike New York or San Francisco, where high prices are due largely to a simple lack of building space and high demand, Hong Kong’s soaring prices are driven by outdated land use laws and horribly short-sighted management, as well as outside wealthy speculators and developers competing to outbid each other. 

  A recent Vox report describing the forces at play behind the ridiculously fast-surging land and property prices that keep 75.6 percent of non-built-up areas from being used.

  But while some experiment with “nano apartments” — which involves turning unlikely spaces like drainpipes into tiny living units — or 40 sq.ft. “cubicle” apartments and even what are dubbed “coffin homes”, squatting in an industrial building brings a level free movement and open-air unparalleled for the price. 

  

  Bloomberg describes: “Along with a small kitchen and private bathroom, the 1,000-square-foot apartment features high ceilings and large windows, unusual by the standards of Hong Kong’s often poky apartments.”

  The government has ordered industrial building owners to push tenants out while at the same time currently reviewing 18 options  to increase land supply; however, legalizing living in industrial buildings isn’t one of the options. 

  While people out of desperation seek “coffin homes” on the one hand, and airy but riskier (safety-wise) industrial squatting units on the other, here’s the central irony as express recently in the Nikkei Asia Review: While real estate in Hong Kong accounts for nearly 20% of its gross domestic product, the combined market capitalization of the top four local real estate companies has increased by some $4.52 billion over the past year.

  So while thousands live in warehouses and sometimes literal cages, the trend remains that: Continuously rising property prices have shored up the Hong Kong economy and brought prosperity to the autonomous Chinese territory.

  

• PCR: According To The New York Times, Putin Rules America

  Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

  When I first read this, I thought it was a caricature of fake news. Then I realized it was a New York Times article, and being fairly certain that the arrogant presstitute organization was not taking the piss out of itself, as it is one of the main purveyors of fake news, I found the conclusion unavoidable that Julian E. Barnes and Matthew Rosenberg were so tightly bound inside The Matrix that they might actually believe the nonsense that they wrote.

  

  Here is an overview of the fantasy that the two presstitutes have penned in the New York Times:

  US intelligence (sic) had “informants close to President Vladimir V. Putin and in the Kremlin” who provided “urgent and explicit warnings about Russia’s intentions to try to tip the [2016] American presidential election.”

  The NYT presstitutes do not say why nothing was done by US intelligence which had inside information from the Kremlin itself that Putin was about to steal for Trump the US election. Certainly CIA Director Brennan and FBI Director Comey, both of whom are Hillary’s allies, would not have approved of Putin stealing the election for Trump.

  But there is no criticism from the NY Times’ presstitutes for this massive intelligence failure to act to prevent Putin from stealing the election from Hillary. Brennan and Comey sat on their hands and permitted Putin to steal the election for Trump. So, who is really guilty of “Russiagate?”

  Obviously, this NY Times article is a hoax written by imbeciles. The claim that the Putin/Trump conspiracy was leaked to US intelligence from inside the Kremlin is an invention to help to provide a background history in an effort to boost the credibility of the Russiagate orchestation that is directed against President Trump. The presstitutes in their effort to boost Russiagate’s credibility inadvertently portrayed US intelligence as negligent in its duty.

  Barnes and Rosenberg say that Putin is continuing with his dirty tricks, but the Russian traitors inside the Kremlin within Putin’s close circles “have gone silent,” depriving us of information about how the Russians are going to steal the midterm elections. The presstitutes suggest that Washington’s informers inside Putin’s government have “gone to ground” to avoid being murdered “like the poisoning in March in Britain of a former Russian intelligence officer that utilized a rare Russian-made nerve agent.”

  

  It is difficult to know what to make of presstitutes like Barnes and Rosenberg and the NYTimes who refuse to acknowledge the fact that there has been zero evidence produced that supports the alleged attack on the Skirpals, both of whom suvived a “deadly nerve agent.” There is no evidence whatsoever that the alleged deadly nerve agent was made in Russia, and there is no explanation why the deadly nerve agent was not deadly. The only possible conclusion from the total absence of any evidence is that no such attack occurred. It is just another propaganda hoax against Russia.

  More proof that there was no such attack is provided by the refusal of the British government to share its investigation, if there actually was an investigation, with anyone, not even with the accused Russians. Accusations without a shred of evidence are not a good basis for a trusting relationship with a nuclear power.

  Barnes and Rosenberg suggest that the House Intelligence Committee, encouraged by President Trump, chilled intelligence collection by “outing an FBI informant,” leaving Washington in the dark about Putin’s precise intentions.

  No, this is not a conspiracy story from the National Inquirer, now a more reliable newspaper than the New York Times. This utter nonsense is published in the New York Times, “the newspaper of record.” What a false record historians are going to have.

  What are the NYTimes’ sources for this fantasy? The presstitute organization cannot tell us.

  “American intelligence agencies have not been able to say precisely what are Mr. Putin’s intentions: He could be trying to tilt the midterm elections, simply sow chaos or generally undermine trust in the democratic process.”

  But the NYTimes knows that Putin is up to something, because “senior intelligence officials, including Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, have warned that Russians are intent on subverting American democratic institutions.”

  So here we have Trump’s own appointment, Dan Coats, undermining Trump’s effort to normalize relations with Russia. Who among Trump’s advisors advised him to appoint a Russiaphobic moron like Dan Coats? If Trump had any sense, he would fire both of them.

  Washington routinely subverts democratic institutions in other countries, such as Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Iran, Ukraine, Indonesia. Read Stephen Kinser’s The Brothers for a number of examples.

  Washington finances opposition candidates who are bought and paid for by Washington and uses various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) financed by the National Endowment for Democracy, George Soros, the International Republican Institute, and many other front groups for subversion of countries “uncooperative with Washington” in order to install a Washington puppet. Washington even has NGOs operating in Russia where they are even permitted by the Russian government to own newspapers. All anti-Putin protests are organized by Washington using the NGOs that Washington funds.

  Russia, however, has no NGOs operating in the US, and, unlike Israel, does not own the US Congress and White House. So how exactly, Director of National Intelligence (sic) Dan Coats, are the Russians going to subvert “American democratic institutions?”

  Don’t expect an answer.

  Try to understand the insults to Trump voters of the charge that they are puppets at the end of Putin’s string: Trump voters are portrayed as morons who are not capable of thinking for themselves. If they were, they would have voted for Hillary so that America could demonstrate its escape from misogyny and male domination by electing its First Woman President on the heels of the First Half-Black President. Instead the minds of American voters were warped by Putin. The $100,000 dollars spent by a Russian Internet company trying to attract advertisers prevailed over the multi-billion dollars spent by the Democrats and Republicans and by American economic interests focused on capturing the government for their agendas. The Russian plot is so powerful that a dollar spent by Russia is thousands of times more powerful than a dollar spent by Wall Street, the military/security compex, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson, etc., and so on.

  In the official story, no American voted for Trump because his/her job was sent to Asia or Mexico by global US corporations pursuing high monetary rewards for executives and shareholders at the expense of the American work force. The “Trump Deplorables” voted for Trump because they were brainwashed by a few Russian Internet ads directed at maximizing clicks in order to attract advertisers.

  No one voted for Trump because their son and daughter, on whose education the family used up its savings, acquired student loan debts and possibly a second mortgage, can only find a job as a waitress and bartender because the jobs for which they prepared at great expense are handed over to lowly paid foreigners in order that shareholders can receive large capital gains and a handful of corporate executives can receive multimillion dollar bonuses for raising profits by closing down America’s vaunted “opportunity society. Today Americans have debts and no opportunities.

  Assuming you have some sense and some ability to think independently of the lies that are fed to you daily, can you possibly believe that Americans voted for Trump because Putin tricked them with Internet ads that are unlikely to have been seen by as many as one percent of voters?

  Can you possibly believe that the loss of Trump voters’ jobs, their prospects, their children’s prospects, their home, their declining living standards, the insults heaped upon Americans by Hillary’s Democratic Party – “Trump deplorables,” “white male oppressors,” “Russia’s Fifth Column,” “misogynists,” “racists,” “homophobic,” “gun nuts” – had no impact on why Americans voted for Trump? How could any sentient American believe that Putin is the source of their problems?

  The NY Times pressitutes report without any evidence alleged efforts of Russia to create chaos in America. I could not stop laughing. There is no Russian National Endowment for Democracy operating in the US. There is no Russian funded George Soros operating in America. There are no Russian funded Non-Governmental Organizations operating in America. Yet Russis is full of Washington-funded organizations doing everything in their power to sow chaos in Russia.

  Why isn’t this most obvious of all truths reported in the NY Times?

  The answer is that no truth whatsoever, not even a tiny morsel, fits the fabricated explanations in which the insouciant Western peoples live. Everywhere in the Western World people are shielded from reality by controlled explanations handed down to them by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, BBC, et. al, and the UK, EU, Canadian, and Australian newspapers, every one of which is a propagandist for American hegemony.

  A few years ago a famous philosopher concluded that the world lives in a constructed virtual reality. At the time I thought he was crazy, but I have learned that he is correct. The entire world—even the Russians and the Chinese and the Iranians—live in a world shaped by American propaganda. The truth is that a country, the USA, which endorses freedom of determination, is in fact determined to control the world and smother all self-determination. Every country, whether Russia, China, Syria, Iran, India, Turkey, North Korea, Venezuela, that resists Washington’s hegemony is declared by Washington to be “a threat to the international order.”

  The “international order” is Washington’s order. The “International Order” is Washinton’s hegemony over the word. Russia, China, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, and now Turkey and India are threats to “international order” because they do not accept Washington’s hegemony.

  Barnes and Rosenberg report that Coats is concerned about Russia’s effort to “weaken and divide the United States.” There is no sign of Russia doing any such thing, and there is no explanation of how Putin conducts “a broad chaos campaign to undermine faith in American democracy.” If the Director of National Intelligence is concerned about the forces of division in America, he should turn his attention to the divisive consequences of the Democratic Party’s Identity Politics, to ANTIFA, to the divisive consequences of the fabricated attack on President Trump by the military/security complex and presstitute media. Indeed, the constant drumbeat of lies from the New York Times alone has caused far move divisiveness than anything Russia is alleged to have done.

  Divisiveness is what happens when the military/security complex and its media pimps turn on a President for threatening their budget by proposing peace with the enemy that they have constructed in order to justify their power and profit. It is this divisiveness that the United States is experiencing.

  

• China Unveils "Breakthrough" In Electromagnetic Rocket Technology

  Chinese state media has revealed a technological breakthrough in electromagnetic rocket design amid US regional security concerns in North Korea and the South China Sea. The new and more powerful electromagnetic rocket uses catapult rocket artillery technology rendering the weapon more powerful than any conventional artillery in the world.

  

  The Global Times reported that Han Junli, a research fellow at a Beijing-based research center under the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), had been spearheading the development of the novel electromagnetic rocket artillery, inspired by Ma Weiming, a research fellow of the Chinese Academy of Engineering dubbed “the father of the Chinese electromagnetic catapult.”

  According to rumors via The Manila Times, this technology could be mounted on future Chinese aircraft carriers to launch fighters and more massive fixed-wing planes.

  Han reportedly mentioned a military skirmish that occurred in the dangerous border region on a plateau in Southwest China, where he discussed the need with government officials for future deployment of the new rocket technology.

  

  “China has large plateau and mountainous areas where rocket artillery could destroy invading forces from hundreds of kilometers away without soldiers crossing mountains,” Han said.

  Song Zhongping, a military expert and TV commentator, told the Global Times earlier this month that conventional artillery uses powder and does not perform well at high altitudes because of the lack of oxygen.

  “Artillery that uses an electromagnetic catapult will not need to face the same problem. This makes it very valuable in warfare on plateaus.”

  The military expert said electromagnetic rocket artillery could easily reach targets more than 200 kilometers (124 miles) away at a cheap cost per round.

  The Global Times said Han’s research had made a significant technological breakthrough in electromagnetic catapult technology that it is now becoming a reality.

  The use of electromagnetic catapult for rocket artillery is an unprecedented innovation and could be able to rival Western technology.

  “China needs to not only develop weapon concepts that are already available to the world but also explore new, not-yet-present weapons to lead the frontier of technology development,” Song added.

  Rocket artillery is not the only Chinese weaponry harnessing the power of electromagnetism. Earlier this year, China decided to mount a giant railgun onto a military vessel. PLA and the US Army are the only militaries to have successfully fired railguns in repetitive experiments.

  Railguns can fire metal projectiles at extreme high-speeds and are expected to be mounted on China’s next-generation 10,000-ton Type 055 missile cruiser in the next several years.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest