Jun 30

Today’s News 30th June 2021

  • CO2 Emissions For Vehicles In EU, Iceland And Norway Fall Most In Ten Years
    CO2 Emissions For Vehicles In EU, Iceland And Norway Fall Most In Ten Years

    The average total emissions for new passenger vehicles registered in the EU, Iceland, Norway and the U.K. fell the steepest in ten years in 2020, according to new data provided by the European Environment Agency.

    Total emissions decreased by 14.5g of CO2/km during the year, Bloomberg reported Tuesday.

    The decline was attributed mostly to a “surge” in the share of plug-in hybrid and fully EV vehicle registrations, which tripled to 11% from 3.5% in 2019. The agency says that despite electric cars rising in prominence, that only “limited” progress was made in electrifying vans. 

    This followed data out in 2019 which showed that car emissions had increased for the third consecutive year. In 2019, average emissions of new passenger cars registered in the European Union, Iceland, Norway and the United Kingdom (UK) were 122.3 g CO2/km, according to the European Environmental Agency. 

    The agency said that according to its provisional data, average emissions of new passenger cars registered in 2020 were 107.8 grams of CO2/km.

    Recall, we wrote back in early June that one firm, natural resource investors Goehring & Rozencwajg (G&R), a “fundamental research firm focused exclusively on contrarian natural resource investments with a team with over 30 years of dedicated resource experience,” was making the argument that EVs only offered a negligible CO2 different from ICE vehicles. 

    The firm, established in 2015, posted a blog entry entitled “Exploring Lithium-ion Electric Vehicles’ Carbon Footprint” last month, where they called into question a former ICE vs. EV comparison performed by the Wall Street Journal and, while citing work performed by Jefferies, argued that there could literally be “no reduction in CO2 output” in some EV vs. ICE comparisons. 

    The argument could be moot, however, as most auto manufacturers – like Audi, for instance, have already committed to phasing out all ICE vehicles in coming years.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 06/30/2021 – 02:45

  • Escobar: A Sea Painted NATO Black
    Escobar: A Sea Painted NATO Black

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

    US seeks to revamp post-WWI concept of Baltic-Black Sea Intermarium as a Cold War 2.0 iron wall against Russia…

    Welcome to the latest NATO show: Sea Breeze starts today and goes all the way to July 23. The co-hosts are the US Sixth Fleet and the Ukrainian Navy. The main protagonist is Standing NATO Maritime Group 2.

    The show, in NATOspeak, is just an innocent display of “strenghtening deterrence and defense”. NATO spin tells us the exercise is “growing in popularity” and now features more than 30 nations “from six continents” deploying 5,000 troops, 32 ships, 40 aircraft and “18 special operations and dive teams”. All committed to implement and improve that magical NATO concept: “interoperability”.

    Now let’s clear the fog and get to the heart of the matter. NATO is projecting the impression that it’s taking over selected stretches of the Black Sea in the name of “peace”. NATO’s supreme articles of faith, reiterated in its latest summit, are “Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea” and “support for Ukraine sovereignty”.

    So for NATO, Russia is an enemy of “peace”. Everything else is hybrid war fog.

    NATO not only “does not and will not recognize Russia’s illegal and illegitimate annexation of Crimea” but also denounces its “temporary occupation”. This script, redacted in Washington, is recited by Kiev and virtually the whole EU.

    NATO bills itself as committed to “transatlantic unity”. Geography tells us the Black Sea has not been annexed to the Atlantic. But that’s no impediment for NATO’s goodwill – which the record shows turned Libya, in northern Africa, into a wasteland run by militias. As for the intersection of Central and South Asia, NATO’s collective behind was unceremoniously kicked by a bunch of ragged Pashtuns with counterfeit Kalashnikovs.

    Meet the Bucharest 9

    The White House defines its NATO eastern flank allies as the Bucharest 9.

    The Bucharest 9 includes the members of the Visegrad Four (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia); the Baltic trio (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania); and two Black Sea neighbors (Bulgaria and Romania). No Ukraine – at least not yet.

    When the White House refers to “strengthening transatlantic relations”, this means above all “closer cooperation with our nine Allies in Central Europe and the Baltic and Black Sea regions on the full range of challenges.” Translation: “full range of challenges” means Russia.

    So welcome to the return, in style, of the Intermarium – as in “between the seas”, mostly the Baltic and Black, with the Adriatic as a side show.

    After WWI, the drive for what would possibly become a geopolitical entente included the three Baltics, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Belarus and Ukraine. That concoction was made in Poland.

    Now, under the hegemon and its NATO weaponized arm, a revamped Baltic-Black Sea intermarium is being pushed as the new Cold War 2.0 Iron Wall against Russia. That’s why the definitive incorporation of Ukraine to NATO is so important for Washington – as it would solidify the intermarium for good.

    Double O Seven does Monty Python

    The prequel to Sea Breeze took place last week, via a farcical Britannia Rules The Waves stunt enacted like a Monty Python sketch – yet with potentially explosive overtones.

    Imagine waiting at a bus stop somewhere in Kent and finding a soggy blob – nearly 50 pages – of secret documents in a trash bin detailing Ministry of Defense elaborations on the explicitly provocative deployment of the Defender destroyer off Sebastopol, in the Crimean coast.

    Even a BBC journalist embedded with the destroyer smashed the official London spin that this was a mere “innocent passage”. Moreover, the Defender weapons were fully loaded – as it advanced two nautical miles inside Russian waters. Moscow released a video documenting the stunt.

    It gets better. The soggy blob found in Kent revealed not only discussions about the possible Russian reaction to the “innocent passage”, but also digressions about the Brits, “encouraged” by the Americans, leaving commandos behind in Afghanistan after the troop pull out next 9/11.

    That would qualify as extra evidence that the Anglo-American-NATO combo will not really “leave” Afghanistan.

    A vague “member of the public” contacted the BBC when he innocently found the geopolitically radioactive materials. No one knows whether this was a leak, a trap or a silly mistake. If the “member of the public” were a true whistleblower he would have gone the Wikileaks way, not BBC.

    The “innocent passage” happened only hours after London signed a deal with Kiev for the “enhancement of Ukrainian naval capabilities”.

    On the Russian reaction front, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova summed it all up: “London has demonstrated yet another provocative action followed by a bunch of lies to cover it up. 007 agents are not what they used to be.”

    Meanwhile, in the Mediterranean front, which NATO considers its Mare Nostrum, two Russian Mig-31k fighters – capable of carrying Khinzal hypersonic missiles – were redeployed last week to Syria. The Khinzal range encompasses the whole Mediterranean, west as well as east.

    Across the Global South, NATO promoting “global peace” in the port of Odessa, in the Black Sea, is bound to evoke shades of Libya cum Afghanistan. Austin Powers, self-billed Agent Double Oh! Behave! would perfectly fit in the Kent trash bin “secret documents” caper. “Oh. Behave!” totally applies to Sea Breeze. Otherwise, the opportunity might arise to say hello to Mr. Kinzhal.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 06/30/2021 – 02:00

  • What The Pentagon Papers 50th Anniversary Means
    What The Pentagon Papers 50th Anniversary Means

    Authored by Peter van Buren via WeMeantWell.com,

    It was a humid June on the east coast 50 years ago when the New York Times began publishing the Pentagon Papers. The anniversary is worth marking, for reasons sweeping and grand, and for reasons deeply personal.

    In 1971 Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret U.S. government history of the Vietnam War, to the Times. No one had ever published such classified documents before, and reporters feared prosecution under the Espionage Act. A federal court ordered the Times to cease publication after an initial flurry of excerpts were printed, the first time in U.S. history a federal judge had invoked prior restraint and shattered the 1A.

    In a legal battle too important to have been written first as a novel, the NYT fought back. The Supreme Court on June 30, 1971 handed down a victory for the First Amendment in New York Times Company v. United States, and the Times won the Pulitzer Prize. The Papers helped convince Americans the Vietnam War was wrong, their government could not be trusted, and The People informed by a free press could still have a say in things.

    This 50 year anniversary rightfully marks all that.

    Today, journalists expect a Pulitzer for a snarky tweet that mocks Trump. In our current shameful state where the MSM serves as an organ of the Deep State, the anniversary of the Papers also serves as a reminder to millennials OnlyFansing as journalists that there were once people in their jobs who valued truth and righteousness. Perhaps this may inspire some MSM propagandist to realize he might still run with lions instead of slinking home to feed his cats.

    The 50th anniversary of the Papers is also a chance to remember how fragile the victory in 1971 was. The Supreme Court left the door open for prosecution of journalists who publish classified documents by focusing narrowly on prohibiting the government from prior restraint. Politics and public opinion, not law, have kept the feds exercising discretion in not prosecuting the press, a delicate dance around an 800-pound gorilla loose in the halls of democracy. The government, particularly under Obama, has meanwhile aggressively used the Espionage Act to prosecute whistleblowers who leak to those same journalists.

    There is also a very personal side to this anniversary.

    When my book, We Meant Well, turned me into a State Department whistleblower and set off a wall of the bad brown falling on me, Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg sent me two of his books, unannounced, in the mail.

    He wrote a personal message inside each one, explaining to me what I was doing was hard, scary, and above all, a duty. It changed me and my understanding of what was happening to me. I wasn’t arguing procedure with the State Department and grubbing for my pension, I was defending the First Amendment itself. I wrote Dan a thank you note. Here’s some of it.

    Thank you for sending me copies of your books, and thank you even more for writing “with admiration for your truth telling” inside the cover flap of one. I am humbled, because I waited my whole life to realize today I had already met you.

    In 1971 I was 10 years old, living in Ohio. The Vietnam War was a part of our town’s life, same as the Fruehauf tractor-trailer plant with its 100 percent union workforce, the A&P and the Pledge of Allegiance. Nobody in my house went to war, but neighbors had gold stars in their windows and I remember one teacher at school, the one with the longer hair and the mustache, talking about Vietnam.

    It meant little to me, involved with oncoming puberty, but I remember my mom bringing home from the supermarket a newsprint quickie paperback edition of the Pentagon Papers. There of course was no Internet and you could not buy the Times where I lived. Mom knew of politics and Vietnam maybe even less than I did, but the Papers were all over the news and it seemed the thing to do to spend the $1.95. When I tried to make sense of the names and foreign places it made no impact on me.

    I didn’t understand then what you had done. While I was trying to learn multiplication, you were making photocopies of classified documents. As you read them, you understood the government had knowledge early on the war could not be won, and that continuing would lead to many times more casualties than was ever admitted publicly.

    A lot of people inside the government had read those same Papers and understood their content, but only you decided that instead of simply going along with the lies, or privately using your new knowledge to fuel self-eating cynicism, you would try to persuade U.S. Senators Fulbright and McGovern to release the papers on the Senate floor.

    When they did not have the courage, even as they knew the lies continued to kill Americans they represented, you brought the Papers to the New York Times. The Times then echoed the courage of great journalists and published the Papers, fought off the Nixon administration by calling to the First Amendment, and brought the truth about lies to America. That’s when my mom bought a copy of the Papers at the A&P.

    You were considered an enemy of the United States because when you encountered something inside of government so egregious, so fundamentally wrong, you risked your own fortune, freedom, and honor to make it public. You almost went to jail, fighting off charges under the same draconian Espionage Act the government still uses today to silence others who stand in your shadow.

    In 2009 I volunteered to serve in Iraq for my employer of some 23 years, the Department of State. While I was there I saw such waste in our reconstruction program, such lies put out by two administrations about what we were (not) doing in Iraq, that it seemed to me that the only thing I could do — had to do — was tell people about what I saw. In my years of government service, I experienced my share of dissonance when it came to what was said in public and what the government did behind the public’s back. In most cases, the gap was filled only with scared little men and women, and what was left unsaid hid their flaws.

    What I saw in Iraq was different. There, the space between what we were doing (the waste), and what we were saying (the chant of success) was filled with numb soldiers and devastated Iraqis, not nerveless bureaucrats. It wasn’t Vietnam in scale or impact, but it was again young Americans risking their lives, believing for something greater than themselves, when instead it was just another lie. Another war started and run on lies, while again our government worked to keep the truth from the people.

    I am unsure what I accomplished with my own book, absent getting retired-by-force from the State Department for telling a truth that embarrassed them. So be it; most people at State will never understand the choice of conscience over career, the root of most of State’s problems.

    But Dan, what you accomplished was this. When I faced a crisis of conscience, to tell what I knew because it needed to be told, coming to realize I was risking at the least my job if not jail, I remembered that newsprint copy of the Papers from 1971 which you risked the same and more to release. I took my decision in the face of the Obama administration having already charged more people under the Espionage Act for alleged mishandling of classified information than all past presidencies combined, but more importantly, I took my decision in the face of your example.

    Later, whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden would do the same. I know you have encouraged them, too, through your example and with personal messages.

    So thank you for the books you sent Dan. Thank you for your courage so that when I needed it, I had an example to assess myself against other than the limp men and women working now for a Department of State too scared of the truth to rise to claim even a whisper of the word courage for themselves.

    Fast-forward to 2021. In these last few years the term “whistleblower” has been co-opted such that a Deep State operative was able to abuse the term to backdoor impeachment against a sitting president. The use of anonymous sources has devolved from brave individuals speaking out against a government gone wrong into a way for journalists to manufacture “proof” of anything they want, from claims the president was a Russian spy to the use of the military to create a photo op in Lafayette Park.

    On this anniversary we look at individuals like Ellsberg and reporters like those at the Times and know it is possible for individuals with courage to make a difference. That is something worth remembering, and celebrating.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 06/30/2021 – 00:05

  • IDF Forces Deploy New Semi-Autonomous Robots To Gaza Border 
    IDF Forces Deploy New Semi-Autonomous Robots To Gaza Border 

    An armed robot equipped with optical sensors and a 7.62mm machine gun has been spotted on the Gaza border by the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a secular Palestinian Marxist–Leninist organization, according to The Times of Israel’s Emanuel Fabian.

    Israel Defense Forces (IDF) appear to have deployed a new semi-autonomous robotic ground tank called the Jaguar that patrols the Gaza border and removes soldiers out of harm’s way from sniper attacks by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad groups. 

    The Jerusalem Post said Israel Aerospace Industries’ Elta systems develop the unmanned ground vehicle in close collaboration with IDF’s Ground Forces Command. 

    The Jaguar military robot is on a six-wheeled chassis that is heavy-duty and highly maneuverable, equipped with a weapon station, communications and sensors. A turret is mounted on the front of the robot, firing a 7.62mm MAG machine gun that can be operated remotely. 

    “We have led a groundbreaking technological development – an independent robot that reduces the combat soldier’s friction with the enemy and prevents risks to human life,” Lt.-Col. Nathan Kuperstein, Head of Autonomy and Robotics at the IDF’s Land Technology Division, said. “It even knows how to charge itself – almost like an iRobot.”

    The Jaguar can be used for several types of missions including, intelligence, surveillance, and armed reconnaissance. 

    What remains a mystery is when IDF forces deployed ground robots on the border. But this isn’t the first time the country has used artificial intelligence to defend its homeland. 

    In May, during Operation Guardian of the Walls, the IDF heavily relied on robots and machine learning to intercept missiles from Gaza Strip aimed at Israeli cities. 

    Israeli appears to be shifting to automation and artificial intelligence to defend against attacks from Gaza. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 23:45

  • An Unflinching Guide To Biden's Immigration Fiasco
    An Unflinching Guide To Biden’s Immigration Fiasco

    Authored by Charles Lispon via RealClearPolitics.com,

    The crisis of illegal immigration – to give this calamity its true name – is growing increasingly grave. The reason is no mystery. The Biden administration replaced policies that staunched the illegal flow of migrants with policies that actually encourage it.

    Instead of securing the U.S. border, the administration says it wants to deal with the “root cause,” desperation in Central America. That won’t work for two reasons. First, the administration doesn’t have the tools to markedly change conditions in Central America. Second, even if the policies could stimulate economic growth, improve safety, and reduce corruption—spoiler alert, they can’t—they won’t have any significant impact for years. Under even the most optimistic scenarios, they couldn’t reduce immigration anytime soon. It’s a policy based on a mirage.

    The Biden team is certainly right that bad conditions in Mexico and Central America drive immigration. But it’s easy to show that’s the wrong explanation for our current crisis. The reason, as all social scientists know, is that “you cannot explain change with a constant.” What is constant here? Poverty, corruption, and danger in Mexico and Central America. Since those “root causes” have not changed over the past year, they cannot explain the dramatic rise in illegal immigration since Biden took office. What does explain it? The administration’s decision not to secure the southern border and to give up any serious effort at preventing illegal immigration. Migrants have gotten the message, and they are coming north in unprecedented numbers.

    The media, always eager to protect their favorite political party, never asked Vice President Kamala Harris three crucial questions after her “root causes” trip to Guatemala and Mexico.

    • Can the U.S. really do much to improve conditions there?
    • Would relatively modest improvements have much impact on migration? And, crucially,
    • How long before these policies can have a major impact, if they work at all?

    Back in the real world, the best Biden-Harris can expect is some small, slow improvements. Desirable as those are for humanitarian reasons, they would have no effect on migration for decades.

    Meanwhile, the flood continues unabated. When the administration repeats its false mantra “the border is closed,” they should add the Monty Python phrase “Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.”

    Normally, the flood of illegals would recede at least briefly during the summer because Mexico’s scorching temperatures make the trek so dangerous. This year, however, the caravans keep coming. Why? Because migrants see a window of opportunity that might close if the U.S. comes to its senses. So do “coyotes,” who profit from trafficking humans and drugs. They need not worry. The Biden administration is locked into its catastrophic policies and its lovefest with their party’s left wing, which refuses even to acknowledge the problem and would rebel at tough policies to prevent illegal crossings. They refuse even to call them “illegal.” Too harsh. Too accurate.

    It is unclear whether administration officials actually wanted more illegal immigrants or simply wanted to undo everything Donald Trump did and hope for the best. Whatever their goals, they quickly unwound all Trump’s immigration policies without checking to see what was working. They didn’t talk with border patrol agents (they are now firing the leaders) or consult with elected officials along the border—not even the Democrats. They didn’t ask anyone in Mexico City if the Trump policies were working and sustainable. They didn’t check with development experts to see if aid would have much impact. Due diligence was replaced with utter negligence.

    What immigration policies did the Biden administration change? What are the results so far?

    The Wall

    Trump’s policy: Build an impermeable wall in the most accessible locations, despite strong opposition from Democrats.

    Biden’s policy: Stop building the wall on day one. Stop building even portions that were already funded and under construction. Better to waste the money than to complete a successful project.

    The result: Gaping holes made illegal crossing easy. Ceasing construction sent a powerful signal to potential migrants that U.S. policy was now much more lax.

    The Rhetoric

    Trump’s policy: We will keep you out of the country. Migrants and coyotes believed him because he also implemented tough anti-immigration policies.

    Biden’s policy during the campaign: We are a welcoming country; Trump’s policies are inhumane. During a 2019 Democratic debate on ABC, he told Univision’s Jorge Ramos, “We’re a nation that says, ‘You want to flee, and you’re fleeing oppression, you should come.'”

    Biden’s policy two months into office: You can still come illegally, but please wait a little. As Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of Homeland Security, put it, “We are not saying, ‘Don’t come.’ We are saying, ‘Don’t come now.’”

    Biden’s policy five months into office: Please don’t come.

    The result: The Biden-Harris “don’t come” message has gone unheeded. Without concrete policies to back it up, people don’t believe it.

    Remain in Mexico While Seeking Asylum in the U.S.

    Trump’s policy: Negotiated agreement Mexico, requiring asylum seekers to stay there until their U.S. application was decided. Formally known as the Migrant Protection Protocols.

    Trump’s policy: Get Mexico to guard the U.S. border. As a 2019 Reuters headline put it, “Mexico says it has deployed 15,000 forces in the north to halt-U.S.-bound migration.”

    Biden’s policy: End the agreement with Mexico, which also withdrew its troops, leaving the border essentially unguarded on both sides.

    The result: After Biden switched policies, hundreds of thousands of additional asylum seekers have crossed into the U.S. instead of waiting in Mexico. Since only a federal judge can decide their cases and since the backlog is now four-to-six years and growing, these migrants are simply released into the U.S. and told to return in a few years for a court date. Some do; some don’t. Those who do attend are mostly turned down and deported.

    Refuse Entry Because of Communicable Diseases

    Trump’s policy: Under Title 42 of the U.S. Code, customs officers were authorized to prohibit entry of adults who might have a communicable disease such as COVID. Almost three-quarters of adult migrants at the border were refused entry.

    Biden’s policy: End the use of Title 42 this summer.

    The result: The change will lead to an immediate surge in illegal immigrants. No one knows if that will lead to more communicable diseases and preventable deaths.

    Grant Non-Immigrant Visas

    Trump’s policy: Sharply limited visas because they posed “a risk of displacing and disadvantaging United States workers.” (Proclamations 10014, 10052)

    Biden’s policy: Revoked Trump’s policy a month after taking office because it prevents family reunification and “harms industries in the United States that utilize talent from around the world.”

    The result: The numbers of visa admittees will jump sharply, returning to Obama-era levels. According to the State Department’s Visa Office: “From fiscal years 2016 through 2020, immigrant visas … declined from 617,752 to 240,526. Nonimmigrant visas declined from 10,381,491 to 4,013,210. Among specific immigrant categories, visas for immediate relatives fell from 315,352 to 108,292.” The Biden administration is moving back to the higher figures.

    Prohibition on Entry From Some Countries, aka ‘Muslim Travel Ban’

    Trump’s policy: Utter chaos shortly after inauguration when he announced Executive Order 13769, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry.” Most countries on the banned list had majority-Muslim populations. After courts injunctions, Trump issued a replacement order, added some non-Muslim countries, and faced still more legal difficulties. The administration’s stated rationale was the countries were not banned for religious reasons (there were lots of Muslim-majority countries not on the banned list) but solely because they could not reliably vet travelers and identify terrorists, which were standard U.S. requirements. In 2018, a 5-4 vote of the Supreme Court allowed the Trump program to go into force.

    Biden’s policy: Ending the court-approved travel ban on Inauguration Day.

    Result: No problems with Biden’s policy, so far.

    Will There Be Political Consequences?

    Whatever the motives for Biden’s immigration policies, the results have been a fiasco. Nothing is halting the tsunami of illegal immigrants, dangerous drugs, and gang members from coming. Nothing is stopping the human traffickers from scaling up their despicable trade or molesting women and children en route. The effects will be felt across the U.S. as more illegal immigrants move into communities, more gang members set up operations, and more opioids and hard drugs hit the streets.

    Biden and the Democrats are likely to pay a political price, even as the media downplays the issue. You can already hear yelps from Democrats representing border districts. Among national figures, the worst hit will be Vice President Harris, who has been the hapless point person for these hapless policies.

    In Harris’ defense, she has been handed a no-win job. The administration created the problem, and there is no way they can ameliorate it without infuriating their base. To change policies dramatically would be to concede a huge, unforced error. Worse, it would force Biden to revert to some of Trump’s policies because they actually worked.

    That won’t happen.

    Instead, Biden will cling to his current, failed policies as long as he can. Polls already show voters are unhappy. What they want is a government that fulfills its primary responsibility: provide citizens with a safe environment. They believe our country—any country—has the right to decide who can enter and to demand that they come here legally. If this bunch of politicians won’t meet that responsibility, many voters are bound to think, “Maybe I should vote for somebody who will.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 23:25

  • San Francisco Homeless Camp Costs $60,000 Per Tent, Per Year
    San Francisco Homeless Camp Costs $60,000 Per Tent, Per Year

    Today in “liberals making wonderful capital allocation decisions with your tax dollar news”…

    It turns out “solving” the homelessness problem that has (along with sky high taxes) been plaguing San Francisco, driving residents out of the city (and state), is a costly endeavor.

    In fact, a homeless encampment run by San Francisco costs the city $60,000 per year, per tent, the NY Post reported this week. 

    The city has six “safe sleeping villages,” which offer up tents and three meals a day to homeless people. They also provide security and washrooms. 

    Mayor London Breed reaffirmed her commitment to find care for the homeless (and burn through tons of taxpayer cash), stating last week: “For those exhibiting harmful behavior, whether to themselves or to others, or those refusing assistance, we will use every tool we have to get them into treatment and services, to get them indoors. We won’t accept people just staying on the streets, when we have a place for them to go.”

    The news comes as San Francisco mulls renewing the program, which could cost about $57,000 per tent. There are currently about 260 tents, the report notes.

    The city is paying “about twice the median cost of a one-bedroom apartment for each tent”, the report says. And the encampment is being funded by a 2018 business tax known as Proposition C. 

    The city is expecting to spend more than $1 billion over the next two years on homelessness. Mayor Breed calls it a “historic investment,” according to the SF Chronicle. 

    Supervisor Hillary Ronen said at a budget meeting: “It is a big deal to have showers and bathrooms, and I don’t dispute that. But the cost just doesn’t make any sense.”

    Supervisor Matt Haney, chair of the board’s Budget and Finance committee, argued for the idea: “In the past, the city would spend a lot of money without a plan. Now we actually have a plan. Prop. C is the plan. Now we have to make it work and make it real, we have to track outcomes and follow the data and be transparent about successes and challenges.” 

    Good luck with that.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 23:05

  • By 2030 You'll Own Nothing And You'll Be Happy
    By 2030 You’ll Own Nothing And You’ll Be Happy

    Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

    The title of this article projects an ominous future where the masses are controlled by a few. Over the years I have written several articles covering the elite gathering in Davos. The global elites see the World Economic Forum (WEF) as an opportunity to promote their views and various causes.

    These people often fail to see that many of us have come to view Davos, as a notorious rendezvous for the world’s elite that grant us the honor of paying for their schemes in some way or form.

    Such gatherings are not for our sake but more for the benefit of plutocrats like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The Global Reset they are pushing often reeks of their desire to “break the world” with their ruthless corporate agendas that continue to move political power into the hands of the globalist elite. To counter this attitude reassuring words are cast out over the airwaves to us, the minions of the world, to encourage faith in their wisdom. Oh, what a tangled web those in charge of our fate have woven for us as they rush to sell and bargain away our freedom for power and wealth. 

    When the WEF revealed its Davos 2021 Agenda, it confirmed the event this year would be digital and herald the public unveiling of its Great Reset Initiative. Angel Gurría and Klaus Schwab have outlined how governments and businesses can shape a new labor market that supports workers to thrive in the future. This underlines how the covid-19 pandemic has accelerated systemic changes that were apparent before its inception.

    The Covid-19 pandemic has been used as confirmation that no institution or individual alone can address the economic, environmental, social, and technological challenges of our complex, interdependent world. It is also being touted as a reason to support the “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” One hundred and ninety-three UN member states adopted this 15-year global framework and its ambitious set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in September 2015.

    With 169 targets and over 230 indicators, the 2030 Agenda envisions a secure world free of poverty and hunger, with full and productive employment, access to quality education, and universal health coverage. Thrown into the mix is the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, and an end to environmental degradation.

    The 2030 Agenda is a global framework of action for people, the planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership. It integrates social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, as well as peace, governance, and justice elements. It makes clear that developing and developed countries alike will implement the Agenda. This is important in ensuring that no one is left behind in the achievement of the SDGs.

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=wef+own+nothing&&view=detail&mid=31BF038609615C11271E31BF038609615C11271E&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dwef%2Bown%2Bnothing%26%26FORM%3DVDVVXX

    A great deal of attention has been given to some of the ideas and vision the WEF has floated. A powerful one became visible when WEF public relations released a video entitled: “8 Predictions for the World in 2030. Its 2030 agenda offers a telling glimpse into what the technocratic elite has in store for the rest of us. It promotes the idea that  by 2030 “You will own nothing. And you’ll be happy. The UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is a comprehensive plan that outlines how we can abolish poverty and transform the world into a peaceful, sustainable environment for all. 

    When persuasive speakers cloak an agenda in flowery rhetoric, it is often difficult to determine what is noble or separate something altruistic from a sinister plot. Nor, can we be certain that events will unfold more favorably if simply left to develop on their own rather than being manipulated. Still, the ideas flowing out of the World Economic Forum and those seeking a reset and a New One World Order reek of self-serving bias. 

    Not all of what the world economic forum predicts will happen but events are being shaped to unfold in that way. Examining what is being called for, sheds a bit of light on how we might expect our future to look. The ideas and predictions of the WEF do not seem so farfetched when you consider,

    • Many people are already comfortable and busy renting things like cars, tools, apartments, so this has become a normal way to live. It is easy to argue that shared commodities save resources.  

    • Many people think the US will be unable to keep its position as the world leader. In fact, in many ways, the US has already abdicated this role.

    • When it comes to things such as organ printing we tend to jump the gun in predicting it is just around the corner but research is continuing and huge progress is being made.

    • The argument you simply can’t feed 10 billion people with meat and move these people into heavy consumer-based lifestyles has merit. At some point, the population must stop expanding or we will create a nightmare of food shortages and cause more damage to the planet. 

    • Down the road, billions of people will be displaced, especially at the shore, because of rising sea levels. Others because of droughts. This means we will have to learn how to deal better with migration or we will have huge cultural wars.   

    • Western values are already being tested because of globalization and migration. The fact that change and the future might scare us does not mean we can simply deny reality and call everything we don’t like or understand a conspiracy. Life is impermanent and nothing stays the way it is. We all die eventually and history shows even big civilizations vanish. 

    The agenda to change the world includes things such as controlling people through things such as social credit scores. Expect these to be linked to those you associate with including family members you seldom agree with. Sadly, the people that drew up this plan forgot that what they are proposing is the abolition of private property or communism a theory that has failed to ever bring prosperity to any country. 

    Another key part of this plan focuses on controlling the masses, this is also problematic and reeks of totalitarianism. While many people view big tech as the great enabler, a very dark side of it exists, surrendering to its allure gives big tech and those in charge of it the power to enslave the human race. When mankind turns its future over to technology and no longer takes responsibility for learning the most basic lessons that have brought us so far it gives up its soul. The idea we will move in the direction of creating a benevolent form of artificial intelligence that will protect and watch over us is far-fetched. It is frightening to entrust that in the future machines will value the contributions humans make to the overall scheme of things.

    Intertwined and masked within the WEF plan are a lot of factors that will negatively impact people. These include a total lack of privacy, the loss of control to move about freely, or the ability to purchase anything you want with your money and controlling how that property is used. Of course, this is all for the greater good, but is it?  History shows that in a society where private ownership is banned or not encouraged people lack skin in the game. This tends to result in people failing to shoulder responsibility for much of what happens.

    In the past, each year as the highfalutin Davos extravaganza unfolded I seem to get a pain in my stomach that some might consider envy, but having attended my share of events I consider it more of a sickening feeling related to the over the top self-importance of many attending. Much of my angst is directed at the politicians and such that have their travel expenses picked up by governments. 

    How ironic that we pay the same clowns that create so many of our problems to gather in luxury to discuss how they might further their deeds. I find it so interesting that someone flying across the globe on a private aircraft can sit down and discuss their environmental concerns and how each of us must do more to save the planet. In some ways, a person might even go so far as to describe such a gathering as downright evil.

    In his writings, George Orwell pointed out that when society has a problem rather than rely on education, the natural impulse of totalitarians is to limit the choices or speech of others.  The instinct to compel rather than to persuade is evident in many politicians across the world. As big businesses and big tech have grown to where the rival or control governments, it is not surprising to see their leaders adopt this attitude. While growing inequality makes the prediction you will own nothing more likely, it does little to guarantee we will be happy. 

    *  *  *

    The three articles below are related to this post.

    https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2020/01/davos-where-elite-decide-our-fate.html

    https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2020/04/government-overreach-is-taking-away.html

    https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2020/08/the-spreading-feeling-this-is-happening_2.html

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 22:45

  • Best Places To Live On A $50k Salary In Every State 
    Best Places To Live On A $50k Salary In Every State 

    By now, it’s become quite clear, even to the working poor, that quantitative easing and all the easy money policies by the Federal Reserve have created some of the worst wealth inequality this nation has ever witnessed. With inflation soaring and millions of people left in the dust as the rich get richer, GOBankingRates has compiled the best places to live comfortably on a $50,000 salary.

    These days, it makes no sense for the working poor to live in big cities where living costs are skyrocketing, and their insurmountable debts continue to pile up. The best thing one can do, for the own sanity and health, is to move to an area where they can afford to live and save money.  

    GOBankingRates compiled places in each state where someone earning $50,000 a year could live comfortably. 

    The study identified towns with at least 5,000 households and a median income between $45,000 and $50,000 a year using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, then looked at the basic cost of living as sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The city with the most left over from $50,000 after covering expenses in each state was selected. For Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland and North Dakota, income restrictions were relaxed.

    Here’s a partial list of cities in each state that a person making just $50,000 per year can live comfortably and save money:

    Montgomery, Alabama

    • Median income: $48,011

    • Total annual necessities: $20,775

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $29,225

    Fairbanks, Alaska

    • Median income: $62,602

    • Total annual necessities: $30,786

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $19,214

    Kingman, Arizona

    • Median income: $49,029

    • Total annual necessities: $23,723

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $26,277

    Paragould, Arkansas

    • Median income: $45,841

    • Total annual necessities: $20,140

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $29,860

    El Centro, California

    • Median income: $47,864

    • Total annual necessities: $25,803

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $24,197

    Sterling, Colorado

    • Median income: $45,647

    • Total annual necessities: $22,545

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $27,455

    New London, Connecticut

    • Median income: $46,298

    • Total annual necessities: $24,551

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $25,449

    Wilmington, Delaware

    • Median income: $45,032

    • Total annual necessities: $24,426

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $25,574

    Myrtle Grove, Florida

    • Median income: $47,941

    • Total annual necessities: $22,900

    • Amount (from $50,000) left over after annual necessities: $27,100

    For the complete list, click here. 

    In the age of remote working, making the switch to a small town or to an affordable one is easier than ever. Just hope the internet connection can support Zoom calls. Then again, there’s always Starlink… 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 22:25

  • New York City Mayor's Race "Plunges Into Chaos" As 130,000 'Test-Run' Votes Lead To Unprecedented "Discrepancy"
    New York City Mayor’s Race “Plunges Into Chaos” As 130,000 ‘Test-Run’ Votes Lead To Unprecedented “Discrepancy”

    Update (2220ET): The BOE has confirmed Hardt’s reporting:

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

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

    *  *  *

    Update (2220ET): Wtih the New York City Mayoral race “plunged into chaos” (as the NYT puts it), journalist Bob Hardt now reports that the Board of Elections counted 130,000 ‘test-run’ votes, which would account for most of the ‘discrepancy’ reported earlier. Hardt added that the BoE will now head ‘back to the drawing board’ to produce corrected ranked-choice numbers tomorrow. Presumably by then the outcome of the election will have been decided and things can go smoother then…

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

    *  *  *

    Hours after the New York City’s Board of Elections released an updated ranked voting tally for the Democratic Primary which showed frontrunner Eric Adams’ lead shrinking considerably, BOE officials acknowledged a ‘discrepancy’ in the ballot count.

    At issue: on the day of the primary, the BOE reported just under 800,000 votes with 96.6% of scanners reporting. On Tuesday, however, the tally was 941,832 votes – nearly 20% higher, according to PIX11.

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

    The new figures narrows Adams’ lead over former sanitation commissioner Kathryn Garcia to just 51.9% (368,898) to 48.9% (352,990) – while there are still 100,000 absentee ballots which need to be processed, and could tip Garcia over the top.

    In response, Adams’ campaign fired off a statement questioning the count, and demanding an explanation for the “irregularities.”

    “The vote total just released by the Board of Elections is 100,000-plus more than the total announced on election night, raising serious questions,” reads the statement. “We have asked the Board of Elections to explain such a massive increase and other irregularities before we comment on the Ranked Choice Voting projection.“

    Liberals, in response, accused Adams of going ‘full Trump’ and spreading ‘the big lie’ – that the election isn’t as secure as advertised.

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

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 22:22

  • China: 100 Years Of Chaos
    China: 100 Years Of Chaos

    Authored by Bill Blain via MorningPorridge.com,

    “My little baby is all grown up and saving China.”

    The big event this week is how China celebrates 100 years of it’s Communist Party. What does it mean for markets, and where is China likely to go from here?

    Lots going on this week in terms of the data and the end of Q2 – across financial markets investors will be scrabbling to ring fence returns made this year, and figure out where they are going to come from in the remaining quarters. Just how vulnerable, or resilient markets prove to be – well, that is always the question.

    However, the really big event this week is China celebrating 100 years of the CCP on Thursday. Actually, no one knows the exact date the cadre first assembled in a Shanghai smoky room – as he grew the cult, Mao only chose July 1st as an auspicious date for the commemoration years later. He who wins writes the histories..

    More than a few market speculators fear the Chinese may decide to do something silly to mark the day – I suspect lots of very long dull speeches.

    There are lots of questions around the 100 years of Chinese Capitommunism.

    How has communism thrived and survived in China when it so spectacularly failed in Russia, Eastern Europe and Cuba? How does the cult of Xi compare to the cult of Mao? How sustainable is the party’s role and control of the state? Can China take on the west economically and win? What about the aspirations of the Chinese people?

    You will find a multitude of opinions, answers and imaginings in the press this week.

    In the words of the old Chinese curse, the CCP’s rule has been “interesting”. Chaotic recovery paralleling the Soviet Union is one reading of Chinese history post-Communist victory in 1945. Just like in Russia the initial state collectivisation/industrialisation plans following the civil war caused untold misery and deaths through starvation as it became clear the revolutionary government lacked skills and personnel – who had fled the nation.

    Famine was followed by the purges of the Cultural Revolution shoring up the Party’s status, before the spikes in the ongoing chaotic sequence dampened. From the 1980s New Economic Polices (initially straight out the Soviet playbook) moved the political sequence onto less volatile growth track incorporating a thousand flowers and capitalism with Chinese characteristics from 1980. Where Russia failed – the state effectively captured by the kleptocracy of Oligarchs – China proved more stable.

    The CCP succeeded on two levels. Its survived, and despite the unpleasantness, it delivered its side of the bargain with the people – jobs and rising prosperity. To stay on track – its demonstrated ruthlessness, clamping down hard in Tibet, Hong Kong and Xinjiang. In 1989 when the process generated just a little too much freedom and aspirations, leading to near revolution out of Tiananmen Square.

    Today we see the Chinese economy challenging the US in terms of scale – but not in terms of per capita. We see the Chinese military challenging the US hegemony. But, don’t forget; 55 years ago we though the USSR would win the race to the moon. Much is being written on how successful China will be as the challenger state to the USA – but none of it is set in the stone of history yet!

    The CCP faces far more friction and strife than we perceive from the west.

    It is no longer a revolutionary party. It is the party of state. Its longevity will depend on how it adapts to an ever changing political landscape. Its biggest threat may be its size.  Xi is merely the first among his cohort of party princelings, the children of the generation purged during the cultural revolution, to have reached the top. Like any good classical hero, his primary concern is to secure and hold his powerbase; purging rivals, dispensing with term limits on office, and launching his own Xi cult to out-shine previous emperors.

    The reality is the CCP mirrors the Dynasties that have shaped China’s. Typically they fell because they became ossified and unable to react to counter new threats – there is a danger the same is happening to the party of Xi.

    But, give Xi credit. He’s strengthened the party and yoked it successfully under his patronage. The party presents a simple choice to Chinese who want to get on in business – join the party and do our bidding in return. That’s also a recipe for corruption. Meanwhile, the core working population (in urban areas) get their jobs and rising standards of living demonstrated nightly on the Televiewer – last night it was China’s Mar’s rover, while all sources of dissent are quietly crushed by the state apparatus.

    China has one standout advantage over its rivals. Homogeneity.

    There isn’t much talk about diversity in the Chinese Congress – Han culture doesn’t have much truck with outsiders. It rejoices in how fragmented the distrusting tribes of the West have become. It’s not just race or tribe, Xi will be laughing at the increasing polarisation and fracture between Republicans and Democrats, and the way in which Western commercial and business exceptionalism is being assaulted from within by the ill-considered consequences of Wokery, ESG tomfoolery and a growing fearfulness to speak out or criticise.

    When it comes down to predicting the future I always go with the simple manta – it will not be a bad as we think, nor will it be as good as we hope. The reality is China is part of the global economy. It is exciting and full of opportunity, but it’s also repressive and breaches much of what we can accept morally – the Uyghurs and Hong Kong being the obvious abuses.

    I reckon China boils down to a number of scenarios:

    • China is brought down by the increasing bureaucracy of the Party’s attempts to control everything, or, it succeeds in finding the balance between control and economic freedom, while building the bones of its new surveillance capitalist state innovating tech and finance.

    • China’s botched human rights, and wolf-warrior diplomacy, closes doors and markets around the globe, forcing the Middle Kingdom’s economy to domesticise, or, the next generation of CCP leaders come early and steer China back onto an open trade, capitalist economic accommodation with the west.

    • Trade wars and embargos stifle Chinas efforts to invent and innovate, causing its economy to decline medium term, or China sets its own tech ecosystem that competes directly with the west in global markets.

    These are all scales. They usually find balance.

    My own guess is China will increasingly struggle to balance the bureaucracy of state vs wealth, its ageing demographics will slow growth, it will be forced to adopt a more measured diplomatic role (scaling back on geopolitical tensions), while a mature Chinese tech sector could prove a massive spur to the development of the next generation of tech advances in the West.

    On the other hand… lots of observers reckon its classic Thucydides Trap which originally posited the Peloponnesian Wars between Sparta and the rising strength of Athens became inevitable. Carthage and Rome is another example….

    Hope not…

    *  *  *

    Stay Updated Free Bronze subscription allows unlimited blog access, email notification and weekly round up

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 22:05

  • 76% Of San Francisco Voters Want More Cops As Crime, Appalling Street Conditions Get "More Brazen"
    76% Of San Francisco Voters Want More Cops As Crime, Appalling Street Conditions Get “More Brazen”

    A recent poll conducted by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce found that 76% of residents want more police in high-crime neighborhoods, at a moment people are fleeing the liberal, extremely high cost of living west coast city in droves, heading for places like Austin in Texas.

    A seemingly endless amount of public funds have also been poured into “solving” the homelessness problem that has (along with sky high taxes) been plaguing San Francisco, adding to residents’ desire to get out of the city.

    Via Chicago Tribune

    Fox writes of the survey among 520 registered voters who reside in the city that “Roughly 80% of those polled said addressing homelessness is a top priority. About 76% of those polled want more cops in high-crime neighborhoods, the report said.”

    And here’s some key conclusions from the new poll, according to one local prominent online magazine:

    Well, somewhere around 40 or 50 percent of people living here — people living here who respond to polls, that is — say they plan to leave in the next few years. And many of these people have told pollsters that the city’s biggest problems these days are crime, homelessness, and “street behavior.”

    San Francisco “Poop Patrol” via AP

    Rapidly deteriorating “street conditions” – which includes everything from feces all over public sidewalks, to needles littering community areas, to vagrancy, theft, and the ever present threat of harassment – are further leading respondents to answer in the following ways, as detailed by SFist…

    • This year’s poll, like last year’s, found 70% city residents saying that quality of life in the city has declined. 80% of residents polled said that addressing homelessness needs to be a high priority for the city, and 88% said that the problem had gotten worse in the past few years.
    • 71% also said that “street behavior” has gotten worse. And 80% of San Franciscans support expanding conservatorship laws and making it easier to forcibly commit the mentally ill for treatment.
    • Also, 76% of San Franciscans said that it should be a high priority for the city to increase the number of police officers in high-crime neighborhoods, and 60% supported prioritizing funding for police academy classes and recruiting new officers.

    This also as The San Francisco Chronicle has noted that “tourists are back” after a long COVID lockdown in much of the city, but this has translated to thefts becoming “more brazen”.

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

    City data shows a whopping 753% jump in car break-ins for May 2021 when compared to figures from May 2020. This might account for the surprising rise of a “bring back the police” mentality in one of America’s most progressive cities.

    …Though we doubt that those polled would actually admit to “wanting more police” publicly, or in front of their friends and neighbors.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 21:45

  • Supreme Court Leaves Eviction Moratorium Intact As Roberts And Kavanaugh Join Liberals
    Supreme Court Leaves Eviction Moratorium Intact As Roberts And Kavanaugh Join Liberals

    While it has long been known that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is a CINO (conservative in name only), it may come as a surprise that one of Trump’s own SCOTUS appointees, Brett Kavanaugh, sided with the three supreme court justices in a divided decision refusing to lift the moratorium on evictions implemented by the CDC during the covid pandemic and which is due to expire in any case at the end of July.

    The 5-4 vote had little practical value, and rejected calls by landlords and real-estate trade associations from Alabama and Georgia to block the moratorium while their challenge goes forward. They contend the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its authority by imposing the ban.

    Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the court’s three liberals in the majority. Kavanaugh cast the pivotal vote, saying he was letting the ban stay in effect even though he thought the CDC had exceeded its power.

    “Because the CDC plans to end the moratorium in only a few weeks, on July 31, and because those few weeks will allow for additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance funds, I vote at this time to deny the application,” Kavanaugh wrote.

    One wonder how he would have voted if the moratorium was set to end at the end of the year, or next summer? We’ll find out after the next split vote from SCOTUS. In any case, Kavanaugh said he would require congressional authorization to extend the ban beyond July 31, something the CDC has said it doesn’t intend to do but then again the CDC also appears unaware of the full-court press from the mainstream media to elevate the panic level over the Delta variant to code red in advance of another round of global lockdowns.

    The other eight justices gave no explanation. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett said they would have blocked the moratorium. The liberals, of course, were all for letting squatters live rent free in perpetuity.

    The decision came after a federal trial judge ruled that the moratorium exceeded the CDC’s authority but then put a stay on the ruling while the government appealed. The challengers then asked the Supreme Court to lift the stay.

    The ban applies to tenants who, if evicted, would have “no other available housing options.” The CDC and President Joe Biden’s administration say the moratorium is geared toward protecting tenants who would be forced to live in close quarters elsewhere or become homeless and dependent on shelters.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 21:36

  • NSA Claims No Spying On Tucker Carlson In Broadly-Worded Denial
    NSA Claims No Spying On Tucker Carlson In Broadly-Worded Denial

    The National Security Agency (NSA) has responded to allegations by Fox News host Tucker Carlson that they’ve been monitoring the communications between members of his crew with the intention of getting the show canceled.

    In a Tuesday tweet that nobody can respond to, the agency said that the allegation is “untrue,” adding “Tucker Carlson has never been an intelligence target of the Agency and the NSA has never had any plans to try to take his program off the air.”

    “NSA has a foreign intelligence mission. We target foreign powers to generate insights on foreign activities that could harm the United States. With limited exceptions (e.g. an emergency), NSA may not target a US citizen without a court order that explicitly authorizes the targeting.

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

    Really?

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

    While the suggestion that the NSA wouldn’t spy on Americans (beyond undefined ’emergencies’) is beyond laughable…

    let’s let Glenn Greenwald do the heavy lifting on this one – as his journalism brought us the Snowden leaks which revealed a widespread domestic surveillance apparatus.

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

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

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

    Many possibilities exist given the broad scope of their answer.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsSo Tucker is told by an NSA whistleblower that he’s being spied on, and the Pentagon just fired a pro-Trump security official for ‘unauthorized disclosure of classified information’ from the NSA. Who wants to play connect-the-dots?

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 21:22

  • Biden Plans Anti-Monopoly Executive Order Targeting Big Business
    Biden Plans Anti-Monopoly Executive Order Targeting Big Business

    Yesterday, a US district judge tossed out an anti-trust case brought against Facebook by the federal government and a coalition of states (swiftly sending the tech giant’s market cap past the $1 trillion mark). At the same time, reports emerged claiming the DoJ’s anti-trust division was preparing to revive a Trump-era anti-trust push targeting Google’s display ad business.

    With Lina Khan in charge at the FTC and Tim Wu installed as special assistant to the president on competition, increasing attention is being paid to the Biden Administration’s anti-trust plans now that breaking up Big Tech has become an issue with bipartisan support in Congress, with lawmakers of both parties supporting more scrutiny (while others said to be in the pocket of Big Tech have dutifully pushed back). As curiosity about the administration’s next steps mounts, WSJ reported Tuesday evening (following an earlier report from Reuters) that the White House is planning a sweeping executive order that would direct federal agencies to strengthen oversight of industries that they perceive to be dominated by a small number of companies.

    The order comes as House lawmakers are pushing ahead with a package of anti-trust legislation aimed at restraining Big Tech. The order reportedly builds on a 2016 report by the White House Council of Economic Advisors. A similar anti-trust order handed down by President Barack Obama in 2016 failed to “move the needle” on the competition front.

    The order will direct regulators of industries from airlines to agriculture to rethink their rule-making process to inject more competition and to give consumers, workers and suppliers more rights to challenge large producers.

    Based on what we know so far, it doesn’t look like the order will pressure regulators to push for the outright breakup of industrial conglomerates, large corporate farms or American tech giants.

    The goal is to broaden the way policy makers approach business concentration in the U.S., going beyond conventional antitrust enforcement focused on blocking big mergers. For example, companies in industries controlled by a small number of big firms might face new rules for disclosing fees to consumers or for their relationships with suppliers, the people familiar with the effort said.

    Opponents of tighter anti-trust rules are hopeful that the conservative SCOTUS will weigh in to block Biden’s attempts to override Congress and unilaterally impose new restrictions on American corporations (while at the same time working out a new global minimum corporate tax that would, if ever implemented, likely increase the tax bills of American multinationals).

    Big business groups and some Republicans will likely protest any new Biden measures. Businesses and conservative legal groups could challenge the rules in court, as they already have with administration moves to limit oil and gas drilling on federal lands and to extend a pandemic-related moratorium on evicting renters. Regulatory opponents are hopeful that conservative judges appointed by former President Donald Trump will make it easier to challenge Biden administration rules.

    “I find the way this is being framed questionable,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economist who worked in the George W. Bush administration and who has advised GOP lawmakers and candidates. “They’ve decided the economy isn’t competitive, but when you look closer at the data, you just don’t see a radical increase in concentration.”

    However, the supposedly “conservative” SCOTUS that Democrats spend an inordinate amount of time railing against hasn’t come through for conservatives on a handful of recent rulings, including declining to strike down the CDC’s eviction moratorium while also refusing to strike down Obamacare for the third time.

    Per WSJ, the order will likely focus on pressuring companies to disclose more information, including fees, that would provide more transparency about pricing.

    While both WSJ and Reuters reported that the executive order could land as soon as next week, White House spokeswoman Emilie Simons said no final decision has been made.

    She added that the president has in the past called for giving small farmers more protection from large concentrated farms. Biden has also called for restricting the ability of employers to force workers to sign non-compete agreements limiting their ability to go work for competitors.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 21:05

  • Fear Spreads As Another Miami Beach Condo Tower Deemed "Unsafe"
    Fear Spreads As Another Miami Beach Condo Tower Deemed “Unsafe”

    Haunted by the recent tragedy in Surfside, some residents of ocean-side apartments in South Florida have been searching for information about the structural integrity of their condominiums. The residents of a Collins Avenue building with prior warnings in Miami Beach said they are horrified about what they found.

    The fear started after Champlain Towers South, at 8777 Collins Ave., turned into the epicenter of heartbreak and grief on Thursday morning. Some of the residents of the Champlain Towers North and East decided to evacuate.

    Days following the incident, two studies on the 12-story residential structure came to light. One was a field study from 2018 by an engineering firm that discovered structural issues. Another study was from 2020 when scientists analyzed satellite data to find the tower sunk in the 1990s. 

    On Monday, residents at Maison Grande Condominium, an 18-story building with 502 units, built in 1971, were worried about the safety of their building, according to WPLG Local 10.  

    Photographs show rusted steel and cracked concrete pillars and ceilings in the parking garage of the building – a similar observation that was observed at Champlain South. 

    City records show that five inspections determined the building is an “unsafe structure.” Other warnings include the two-story parking garage and pool deck “have reached the end of their useful life and require repair, replacement,” or “a combination thereof.”

    One city official wrote in late 2020, “Structure with evidence of spalling concrete. Need to submit a report signed and sealed by [an] engineer to evaluate the structure together with methods of repairs.”

    Near the building’s entrance reads a red sign that warns: “unsafe structure” building violation notice.

    Here’s a closer view of the red sign. 

    Twitter user “Billy Corben” posted a shocking video of the structural deterioration unfolding inside the parking garage of the building. 

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

    After his post went viral, he said the condo building association announced a meeting to certify the building for “50-years.” 

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

    So fear grips condo owners of older buildings across Miami. Will there be a point where some residents sell their units for newer ones?

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 20:56

  • Arizona's Maricopa County Will Replace All Voting Machines After Audit
    Arizona’s Maricopa County Will Replace All Voting Machines After Audit

    Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

    Authorities in Maricopa County, Arizona, announced they will replace all voting machines following a Senate-ordered audit of the county’s 2020 election results.

    The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, which oversees elections in the county, issued a response to a letter sent by Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, saying the county “shares [her] concerns” that the integrity and security of the Dominion Voting Systems machines and ballots might have been compromised during the audit.

    “Accordingly, I write to notify you that Maricopa County will not use the subpoenaed election equipment in any future election,” said the letter, dated Monday.

    And in a news release, the county pledged to “never use equipment that could pose a risk to free and fair elections,” suggesting that the auditors may have compromised the machines.

    Hobbs, a Democrat, had written to the county in May that she has “grave concerns regarding the security and integrity of these machines, given that the chain of custody, a critical security tenet, has been compromised and election officials do not know what was done to the machines while under Cyber Ninjas’ control.” Cyber Ninjas is the Florida-based technology firm that helped with the audit, which was authorized earlier this year by the Republican-controlled state Senate.

    After the announcement from Maricopa County, several Republicans praised the move to do away with the machines—but not for the reasons offered by Hobbs or the county officials.

    “No more machines,” wrote Republican state Sen. Wendy Rogers on Twitter, alleging in another tweet that the machines are easily compromised.

    “Go back to the old way,” she also wrote in concurring with a tweet issued by GOP state Sen. Kelly Townsend.

    Last week, the team overseeing the audit announced that both the paper examination and counting of the ballots were finished. Senate Majority Leader Karen Fann, a Republican, told The Epoch Times over the weekend said the team will meet within the next several days and will “formulate a plan and timeline moving forward,” with other officials suggesting the audit may be completed by the end of the summer.

    Hobbs and Senate Republicans have gone back and forth in a war of words since the audit was proposed earlier this year, with the secretary of state characterizing it as a partisan operation designed to suppress voters and claimed auditors have operated with lax security.

    But Republicans have disputed Hobbs’s and other Democrats’ assertions that the audit isn’t being done securely or professionally. Fann and other GOP senators have said the audit is necessary to restore the public’s confidence in the state’s election systems.

    Alexander Kolodin, a lawyer who represents the Arizona GOP, told NTD that he believes the audit will uncover irregularities.

    “Something went wrong,” he said on June 15, “because something goes wrong in every election.”

    Meanwhile, if an audit reveals fraud, then there would be a referral to law enforcement authorities, Fann and other senators have previously said. And if fraud is revealed, according to her, they will focus on passing legislation to shore up any security flaws.

    “If the audit illuminates that there’s [sic] vulnerabilities in X, Y, and Z parts of our election system, state legislatures can target those with a laser beam and fix X, Y, and Z parts of our election system,” Kolodin also said in the interview.

    The Arizona state Senate turned over the Dominion machines to auditors to determine if any of the equipment was compromised, using a legislative subpoena issued in April to seize nine tabulating machines and 385 precinct tabulators. Dominion has categorically denied the allegations that their machines had any problems in Maricopa.

    Other than the machines, the auditors, led by Cyber Ninjas, started reviewing some 2.1 million ballots at Phoenix’s Veterans Memorial Coliseum starting several weeks ago.

    The Epoch Times has contacted the Fann’s office and Cyber Ninjas for comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 20:45

  • India, A Well Known Source Of Gold Demand, Is Turning A Keen Eye Toward Crypto
    India, A Well Known Source Of Gold Demand, Is Turning A Keen Eye Toward Crypto

    India has long been known for being a strong source of demand for gold – not only for wealth preservation, but also for cosmetic and jewelry purposes.

    But now it looks as though something else has caught the country’s eye: crypto.

    This could mean that the mantra that Bitcoin is equivalent to digital gold could actually be catching on, Bloomberg noted this week.

    Households in India own more than 25,000 tons of gold and, despite this, investments in crypto across the country grew from about $200 million to a stunning $40 billion over the past year, the report says. 

    The demand flies in the face of “outright hostility toward the asset class” from the country’s Central Bank, the piece notes. There are now more than 15 million Indians buying and selling cryptocurrencies, compared to 23 million in the U.S. and 2.3 million in the U.K. 

    One microcosm of the shift in demand is 32 year old Richi Sood. She put about $13,400 – some of which she borrowed from her family – into crypto instead of gold. After buying Bitcoin, Dogecoin and Ether, she cashed out part of her position to help her fund her startup company. She said: “I’d rather put my money in crypto than gold. Crypto is more transparent than gold or property and returns are more in a short period of time.”

    Sood represents where much of the growth in India is coming from: people aged 18-35. “Indian adults under age 34 have less appetite for gold than older consumers,” Bloomberg wrote, citing data from the World Gold Council.

    Sandeep Goenka, who co-founded ZebPay, said: “They find it far easier to invest in crypto than gold because the process is very simple. You go online, you can buy crypto, you don’t have to verify it, unlike gold.”

    Keneth Alvares, who is 22 years old, said: “I think over time everyone is going to adopt it in every country. Right now the whole thing is scary with regulation but it doesn’t worry me because I’m not planning to remove anything for now.”

    Part of the growth can be attributed to the country’s Supreme Court quashing a rule banning crypto trading by banking entities. This led to a trading surge, despite the fact that the country’s Central Bank shows “no signs” of embracing cryptocurrencies. 

    Other countries like the U.K. have also cracked down on crypto, with the latter banning Binance Markets from doing regulated business in the country. 

    This regulatory environment means that larger investors are less likely to talk openly about their holdings. Bloomberg spoke to one investor who owned more than $1 million in crypto; he said he is concerned about the prospect of retrospective tax raids. He has “contingency plans in place to move his trading to an offshore Singapore bank account” if a ban were to be enacted.

    The smaller investor in India seems to be taking the regulatory environment in stride, however. Sood concluded: “I am flying blind. I have a risk-taking appetite, so I’m willing to take a risk of a ban.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 20:25

  • With The Fed In Denial, Hawkish Bank Of Russia Sees Inflation "Not Transitory", Warns Of Possible Shock-And-Awe Rate-Hike
    With The Fed In Denial, Hawkish Bank Of Russia Sees Inflation “Not Transitory”, Warns Of Possible Shock-And-Awe Rate-Hike

    Authored by Wolf Richter via WolfStreet.com,

    US Inflation is almost as hot as in Russia, but the Fed is still blowing it off…

    Consumer price inflation in Russia is red-hot, having jumped 6.0% in May compared to a year ago, 2 percentage points above the Bank of Russia’s target of 4.0%.

    Polls in Russia show that food inflation is a top concern, currently running at 7.4%.

    But inflation in the US isn’t lagging far behind: The Consumer Price Index (CPI) jumped 5.0% in May.

    Yet the central banks are on opposite tracks in their approach to inflation.

    Federal Reserve governors keep jabbering about this red-hot inflation being “temporary” or “transitory,” and likely to disappear on its own despite huge government stimulus and the Fed’s huge and ongoing monetary stimulus, though some doubts are creeping in among a couple of them. So they’ll keep interest rates at near-zero until at least next year, and they’re still buying $120 billion a month in securities to push down long-term interest rates.

    Russia has been on the opposite trajectory, “surprising” economists at every step along the way. This trajectory started on March 19 with a 25 basis point rate hike, to 4.5%, against the expectations of 27 of the 28 economists polled by Reuters, who didn’t expect a rate hike. On April 23, the Bank of Russia hiked its policy rate by 50 basis points, to 5.0%. On June 11, it hiked by another 50 basis points to 5.5%. The next policy meeting is scheduled for July 23.

    Is a shock-and-awe rate hike next? Bank of Russia Governor Elvira Nabiullina is preparing the markets for this possibility – so it won’t be a shock, but just awe.

    At the July meeting, the central bank “will consider” an increase in the range from “25 basis points to 1 percentage point,” she told Bloomberg TV in an interview.

    “We see that inflation remains elevated” and that “inflation expectations are quite high,” she said.

    The initial factors in this surge of inflation were the weakening ruble last year and commodity and food price increases. They alone might not require a monetary policy intervention, she said.

    But now inflation expectations remain elevated, which creates second-round effects, she said.

    “That’s why we see that inflation acceleration is not transitory, as in many other countries, but more persistent,” she said. “That’s why we think we should act with rate hikes.”

    “We signaled to the markets [at the last meeting] that further policy rate increases can be necessary to curb inflation, and now we see it is warranted,” she said.

    The economy has recovered quite fast, she said. Demand growth has been outpacing supply growth. And this gap creates additional inflation pressures, and in combination with elevated inflation expectations provide us the need to neutralize our monetary policy, she said.

    “Now policy is still accommodative, if we compare the policy rate [5.5%] with the current inflation rate [6.0%] and with inflation expectations,” she said.

    This is the school of thought that negative real interest rates – interest rates below the rate of inflation – are accommodative, or stimulative for the economy. Under this theory for the US, a neutral monetary policy would be with the Fed’s policy rates at least at 3.4% if based on core PCE and at 5.0% if based on CPI.

    Nabiullina said that the magnitude of the rate hikes and the trajectory will depend a lot on the incoming data “because there are a lot of uncertainties now.”

    The Bank of Russia wants to “prevent the accumulation of inflationary risks,” but it also wants the moves to be “predictable” for the markets because sharp unexpected increases of rates can create some difficulties for markets to adapt, she said.

    Hence, the interview with Bloomberg TV. She’s clearly trying to prepare the markets for a hefty rate hike in July, perhaps a Brazilian-type rate hike of 75 basis points, or even a shock-and-awe full percentage point, while the Fed will continue to cling to its doctrine of the moment that this red-hot inflation in the US is just transitory and will dissipate on its own.

    There are whole generations who never experienced this type of inflation, this type of destruction of the dollar’s purchasing power.

    *  *  *

    Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? Using ad blockers – I totally get why – but want to support the site? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 20:05

  • Tom Brady, Gisele Bündchen Take Equity Stake In FTX Crypto Exchange
    Tom Brady, Gisele Bündchen Take Equity Stake In FTX Crypto Exchange

    It was a rough month for seven-time Superbowl champion Tom Brady, who top-ticked the recent collapse in bitcoin almost to the day with his “laser eyes” profile picture change, something he himself mocked yesterday when he tweeted “Alright the laser eyes didn’t work. Anyone have any ideas?”

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

    It retrospect, this was a rhetorical question because just one day later we learned that Tom Brady and his wife Gisele Bündchen – best known for demanding to be paid in euros top ticking the common currency ahead of its all time high in 2008 – have taken an equity stake in crypto exchange FTX (profiled most recently here) and will receive crypto as part of an endorsement deal with the crypto exchange, which includes a bonus that will be paid in crypto.

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

    West Realm Shires Services, FTX Trading Limited and Blockfolio, three companies behind major global cryptocurrency exchange business FTX, announced Tuesday a long-term partnership with Brady and Bündchen.

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

    “It’s an incredibly exciting time in the crypto-world and Sam and the revolutionary FTX team continue to open my eyes to the endless possibilities,” Brady said in a statement. “This particular opportunity showed us the importance of educating people about the power of crypto while simultaneously giving back to our communities and planet.”

    Both Brady, and Bündchen will serve as ambassadors for FTX, according to an announcement Tuesday reported Bloomberg. And while the cryptocurrency exchange declined to disclose their equity stake, but did say they will both receive an unspecified amount and type of crypto. Bündchen will also take on the role of FTX’s environmental and social-initiatives adviser, according to the release.

    “Tom and Gisele are both legends and they both reached the pinnacle of what they do,” said Sam Bankman-Fried, 29, founder and chief executive officer of FTX, said in a phone interview. “When we think about what FTX represents, we want to be the best product that is out there.”

    FTX, which unlike Coinbase operates outside the reach of US tax authorities and offers both cryptos and derivatives, has become one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges since its launch just two years ago. Bankman-Fried said he’s spoken with others in the past about possible partnerships, but something FTX always comes back to is, “How excited are they about it? How excited are we to deal with them?” When it comes to Brady and Bündchen, “they were both really into it.” Or maybe they were both just into the compensation they will receive for promoting it.

    In any case, the duo knows how to play their role well, and Brady has been an advocate for cryptocurrencies for the past few months, notably emerging as a big supporter of bitcoin in May when he changed his Twitter profile picture to show himself with so-called laser eyes.

    “This isn’t the first time that they’ve been involved in crypto, not the first time they’ve thought about it or even used it, which I think makes it a much more natural and authentic partnership,” said Bankman-Fried. “They’re examples of audiences we’d really like FTX to be the product for.”

    We can only assume this remark was off the cuff: if the target FTX audiences is really multi-millionaire Superbowl winners and Perfect 10 models, it will have a hard time growing.

    Bündchen expressed confidence that crypto adoption will continue to grow steadily, noting that the best part of the partnership for her was the technology’s environmental potential. “What attracted me most about this partnership was the potential to apply resources to help regenerate the Earth, and enable people to lead better lives, therefore generating real transformation in our society,” she said, clearly unaware of Elon Musk’s concerns about the electricity consumption of bitcoin.

    As Bloomberg further notes, as part of a conversation with Bankman-Fried during a conference earlier this year, brady said he, his coaches and teammates had been talking about cryptocurrencies and their vacillating prices on a daily basis. “It’s on all of our minds because we’re very interested, we’re learning more and more about these emerging markets,” he said. “So I’m a big believer in it, I don’t think it’s going anywhere,” though he added there will “absolutely” be volatility.

    Unlike Coinbase, FTX was founded with the goal of donating to charity and has earmarked more than $10 million so far to do so. FTX, Brady and Bündchen have all committed to annual multi-million dollar contributions for the duration of the partnership and Bündchen will play a role in choosing the charities. Her mandate will not be crypto-specific, Bankman-Fried said. She’s been “really involved in giving back basically her whole life and I think this is part of what appealed to her the most,” he said, adding that she’ll likely be working with the FTX Foundation“a fair bit.”

    Meanwhile, FTX has fully grasped that to really succeed in the world of crypto it has to constantly be in the headlines and shamelessly self-promote and has done just that, cinching a pact with Major League Baseball earlier this month and renaming the Miami Heat’s National Basketball Association stadium to FTX Arena, the first NBA stadium deal from a crypto firm.

    “A lot of what we’ve been looking at is what are the things that we can do that will really stand out and represent us well, fit our brand and really capture people’s attention,” said Bankman-Fried. “We’re going to be doing what we can to try to get news about FTX out there and get more eyeballs on it.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/29/2021 – 19:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest