- Escobar: A Matryoshka Of Psyops And Why General Armageddon Is Not Going Anywhere
Escobar: A Matryoshka Of Psyops And Why General Armageddon Is Not Going Anywhere
The main problem faced by Russia is not the Hegemon and NATO: it’s domestic…
The secret of a perfect psyop is that no one really understands it.
A perfect psyop accomplishes two tasks: it renders the enemy dazed and confused while achieving a set of very important goals.
It goes without saying that sooner rather than later we should see the real goals emerging out of the strategic play in Russia I described as The Longest Day.
The Longest Day may or may not have been a larger than life psyop.
To clear the fog, let’s start with a roundup of the usual “winner” suspects.
First one is undoubtedly Belarus. Due to the priceless mediation of Old Man Luka, Minsk is now gifted with the most experienced army in the world: the Wagner musicians, masters of conventional (Libya, Ukraine) and non-conventional (Syria, Central African Republic) war.
That is already inflicting the Fear of Hell in NATO, which is suddenly facing in its eastern flank a super pro army, very well equipped, and de facto uncontrollable, and on top of it hosted by a nation now equipped with nuclear weapons.
Simultaneously, Russia props up dissuasion on its western front. Like clockwork that is leading NATOstan to invest in ballooning military budgets (with funds it doesn’t have). That process happens to be a key plank of Russian strategy since at least March 2018.
And as an extra bonus Russia creates a 24/7 threat to the whole of Kiev’s northern front.
Not bad for a “mutiny”.
The Dance of the Oligarchs
Way more complex is Russia’s internal dynamics. Putin’s current and subsequent difficult decisions may entail loss of popularity coupled with loss of internal stability -depending on the manner Kremlin-defined strategic victories are presented to Russian public opinion.
Whatever 24/7 NATOstan mainstream media spin may come up with, the Kremlin’s official explanation for June 24 boils down to a Prighozin demonstration: he was just trying to shake things up.
It’s way more complicated than that. There were strategic gains, of course, and Prighozin seems to have followed a very risky script that in the end favors Moscow. But it’s still too early to tell.
A key sub-plot is how the Dance of the Oligarchs will proceed.
Independent Russian media was already expecting some – treasonous – players, including state functionaries, to buy their one-way ticket when the going got tough (or to say they were “ill”, or refuse to answer important calls). The Duma – fed by Bortnikov’s FSB – is already working on a hefty list.
The Russian system – and Russian society as well – see people like these as supremely toxic: in fact much more dangerous than the demshiza (a term that mixes “democracy” and “schizophrenia”, applied to globalist neoliberals).
On the military front, it gets even more complicated. Putin has charged Defense Minister Shoigu to compile the list of Generals to be promoted after The Longest Day. To put it mildly, for quite a few people, from many different persuasions, Shoigu has become a toxic element in Russian politics.
Wagner – rebranded, and under new management – will continue to serve Russia’s interests via Minsk, including in Africa.
Old Man Luka, wily as ever, has already firmly stated there won’t be any provocations against NATO via Wagner. Wagner recruiting bureaus will not be opened in Belarus. Belarussians may join Wagner directly. As it stands, most of Wagner fighters are still in Lugansk.
For all practical purposes, from now on the Russian government won’t have anything to do, militarily and financially, with Wagner.
Additionally, there are no heavy weapons to be confiscated. Already on Monday, June 26, Wagner had moved their heavy weapons to Belarus. What remains – and had not been moved during The Longest Day – was returned to the Ministry of Defense (MoD).
The Dance of the Generals
A clear winner in the whole process is Russian public opinion: they made that graphically clear in Rostov. Everyone was supporting Putin, Russian soldiers, Wagner and Prighozin – at the same time. The overall objective was to improve the Russian army to win the war. It’s as straightforward as that.
The purge inside the MoD will be tough. Under the pretext of repression or “rebellion”, operetta Generals” (as defined by Putin himself) that did not train their soldiers properly, did not organize the mobilization properly, or were incompetent in battle, will definitely be axed.
The problem is that they’re all part of Gerasimov’s circle. To put it diplomatically, he needs to answer a lot of serious questions.
And that’s what brings us to the “General Armageddon has been arrested” monster fake news gleefully parroted by the whole of the NATOstan info universe.
General Surovikin did receive Prighozin in Rostov – but he was never an accomplice to the “rebellion”. Vice-Minister of Defense Yevkurov was also at the HQ in Rostov, and received Prighozin alongside Surovikin. Yevkurov may have played the role of strategically-placed observer.
The Prighozin rebellion soap opera de facto started back in February – and nothing was done to stop it. Regardless whether one shares the official narrative – or not.
What this implies is that the Russian state saw it coming. Does that make The Longest Day the Mother of All Maskirovskas?
Once again: it’s complicated.
Unlike the collective West, Russia does not practice or enforce cancel culture. Wagner was protected via martial law. Any insult against a “musician” fighting neo-nazi Banderistan would be met by as much as a 15-year jail term. Each Wagner fighter is officially a Hero of Russia – something Putin himself always stressed.
On the maskirovka front, there’s no question the simmering tensions in Russian military circles before The Longest Day were manipulated, fog of war-style, to disorient the enemy. It worked like a charm. On the fateful June 24 itself, Surovikin was running a war, and not spending the day drinking brandy with Prighozin.
The NATOstan axis is really clutching at straws. It took just a Surovikin-related rumor to send them into rapture – proving once again how deeply they fear General Armageddon.
A key vector is how Surovikin is regarded by public opinion compared to the surviving “operetta Generals”.
He built the now legendary three-layered defense which is already burying the “counter-offensive”. He introduced the wildly successful Shahed-136 Iranian drones in the battlefield. And he organized the meat grinder devastation in Bakhmut/Artemyovsk – which has already entered the military annals.
Way back in the Autumn of 2022, it was General Armageddon who told Putin that Russian forces were not ready for a large-scale offensive.
So whatever the 5th columnists fabricate, General Armadeggon is not going anywhere – except to win a war. And Russia is not “leaving” Africa. On the contrary: a rebranded Wagner is there to stay, and remains on speed dial in several latitudes.
The trend, short term, seems to point to a – convoluted – draining of the Russian military swamp. The Longest Day seems to have galvanized Russians of all stripes into identifying who the real enemy is – and how to defeat it, whatever it takes.
“Nothing happens by chance”
Historian Andrei Fursov, reviving Roosevelt, observed that “in politics, nothing happens by chance. If it happens, you bet it was foreseen.”
Well, maskirovska rides again.
Yet the main problem faced by Russia is not the Hegemon and NATO: it’s domestic.
Based on conversations with Russian analysts, and their impressions from very sharp people who lived in Russia, Ukraine and in the West, it would be possible to identify basically four main groups trying to impose their idea of Russia.
-
The “Back to the USSR” gang. Includes, of course, some former KGB. Have some kind of support from the general population. A lot of educated specialists (old school pros, mostly pension age). This project suggests a revolution – a 1917 on steroids. But where is Lenin?
-
The “Back to the Tsar” people. That would imply Russia as the “Third Rome” and a prominent role for the Orthodox Church. Hefty funds behind it. A big question mark is how much popular support, especially in “deep” Russia, they really have. This group has nothing to do with the Vatican – which is sold to The Great Reset.
-
The Plunderers – as in robbing Russia blind in favor of the Hegemon. Congregates 5th columnists, and all manner of “totalitarian neoliberals” worshipping the “values” of the collective West. The remaining ones will soon get a knock on the door by the FSB. Their money is already blocked.
-
The Eurasianists. This is the most feasible project – in close collaboration with China, and aiming towards a multipolar world. There’s no place for Russian oligarchs here. Yet the degree of collaboration with China is still highly debatable. The real burning question: how to really integrate, in practice, the Belt and Road Initiative with the Greater Eurasia Partnership?
This is just a sketch – open for discussion. The first three projects may hardly work – for a series of complex reasons. And the fourth still has not gathered enough steam in Russia.
What is certain is that all of them are fighting each other. May the current draining of the military swamp also serve to clear the political skies.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 23:30 -
- Economic Coercion: China's Leverage In Trade
Economic Coercion: China’s Leverage In Trade
China’s rise as a global economic superpower has brought with it an ability for the nation to utilize its economic dominance for geopolitical purposes.
As Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu shows in this infographic, sponsored by The Hinrich Foundation, China’s dominant position in the solar photovoltaic (PV) supply chain has used as leverage against countries that are dependent on it for clean energy.
Dominance in the Solar Supply Chain
Solar energy is playing a significant role in the green energy transition, and as this infographic shows, China’s dominance in the sector is clear.
The solar PV supply chain starts with polysilicon, a key raw material needed to create wafers. China is home to seven of the top 10 producers of polysilicon, which includes companies like Tongwei Solar and Asia Silicon.
Where China is most dominant though, is in the manufacturing of wafers and cells. This is partly because it’s more economical to make these components close to wherever polysilicon is being produced.
The second-largest producer of cells and panels is the APAC region (ex-China), at 12% and 15% of total capacity. However, according to U.S. officials, much of this output is actually owned by Chinese firms attempting to evade U.S. tariffs.
While these companies would normally be subject to higher tariffs, the Biden administration has paused any tariff increases for the next two years. This can be interpreted as a sign of the country’s dependence on China for clean energy infrastructure, which could prove problematic given China’s history of economic coercion.
Leveraging Trade for Geopolitical Purposes
The second part of this infographic highlights past instances where China has used its commercial dominance for geopolitical purposes.
For example, in October 2010, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a jailed Chinese dissident. China began stalling Norwegian salmon imports in response, and Norway’s market share of salmon exports to China fell from 92% in 2010, to 29% in 2013, according to the Financial Times.
China took similar actions towards Australia in April 2020 after the island nation called for a detailed probe into the origins of COVID-19. Import bans on Australian goods like beef, timber, and coal were announced in retaliation. These restrictions were eventually lifted in May 2023.
Given the massive size of China’s economy, import bans such as these can heavily impact a trading partner’s industries.
More recently, China announced in December 2022 that it would be looking into new export controls over solar panel technologies. Given China’s already tight grip over the solar PV industry, this move could expand the nation’s playbook when it comes to economic coercion.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 23:00 - "The Great Reset Is What Globalists Want… But The Great Reject Is What They'll Get"
“The Great Reset Is What Globalists Want… But The Great Reject Is What They’ll Get”
By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,
Economic analyst and financial writer David Morgan went against the majority of financial gurus and predicted at the end of 2022 that there was no way the Fed was going to cut interest rates.
He said on USAWatchdiog.com in December, “Cut Interest Rates & Dollar is Done, Toast, It’s Over.” Fed Head Jay Powell said this past week the Fed was raising interest rates at least two more times to “fight inflation.” This was a direct hit by Morgan. Morgan sees a coming currency crisis and a war crisis. Morgan explains,“Yes, we have both a currency crisis and a war crisis. “
“Let’s start with the currency crisis. My favorite phrase for what is going on is ‘All fiat currency fails.’ We have never seen a time in all of recorded history that an unbacked currency does not go basically and effectively to zero. When you say that ‘All fiat fails,’ there is a subgroup that says, yeah, but not the U.S. dollar. . . .I don’t know how many people have given me pushback on that statement from all over the world. . . . When I say fail, I don’t mean it goes to absolute zero. What it means is a currency fails and a new system is implemented. . . . History is on my side…
The precursor to this is what takes place. Substitution. What is substitution? Crypto currency and gold and silver, of course. . . . and things like people going off grid.
All of these are indicators of how to mitigate the end of the U.S. dollar or the end of the currency crisis. We have this all over the place. . . . Sooner or later, there will be a run for the exits. Where are the exits? Crypto currencies, gold and silver, barter clubs or the BRICS currency.”
Morgan contends you just cannot run into an alternative to the U.S. dollar because there are going to be supply disruptions for everything. You might not be able to get what you need no matter how much money you have. So, be prepared in every way you can.
Morgan also says,
“The Great Reset is what the bankers want, but the Great Reject…will come from many who will not want to go down that way.
That’s what is going to be the most interesting because anyone who is awake, and there are more people waking up all the time, they will understand that you cannot go from one fiat phony currency, lie-based system into another one that is digital only.”
On the war crisis, the dark powers running the world want war. Why? Morgan says,
“It covers up all the things that are wrong, and it also takes them off the hook. It was the war. The war did it. All wars are bankers’ wars, and they are on both sides. They make money regardless…
The main things are profit, but it also is mitigating their responsibilities. They can get most people to think that it was the war that caused all this poverty, and, of course, the war will do that…
They don’t have a real conflict with Ukraine and Russia. They just need a way out, and it is the most profitable way out. They are going to default on all this debt, and this is how they are going to do it.”
There is much more in the 40-minute interview.
Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One on One with David Morgan, founder of “The Morgan Report,” for 7.1.23.
To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here
There is lots of free information that will be sent to you if you subscribe to TheMorganReport.com by email. This is totally free, and you will get new analysis and content every week in your mailbox.
Ty
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 22:30 - Visualizing 'Real' US Home Price Growth Over The Last 50 Years
Visualizing ‘Real’ US Home Price Growth Over The Last 50 Years
U.S. home prices grew significantly in 2022, even as interest rates climbed higher.
Yet, as Visual Capitalist’s Dorotrhy Neufeld details below, in inflation-adjusted terms, this growth rate was far lower. By Q4 2022, it fell to being flat year-on-year, making it the slowest real growth seen in a decade.
The graphic below compares nominal and real residential property price growth over 50 years based on the latest data from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).
Nominal vs. Real Home Price Growth
In 2022, opposing forces of rising mortgage rates and a narrow supply of housing produced a moderate nominal growth rate of just over 7% as of Q4 2022. That said, real price growth dropped to 0% over the period.
Here’s how that looks in context of the recent highs and lows of housing price growth:
Recent Highs: During the pandemic, growth hit almost a 20% year-over-year rate by Q1 2022, which was record home price growth at the time. It was driven by ultra-low interest rates and remote work leading people to seek out more space.
Recent Lows: In both real and nominal terms, home price growth sank to their lowest levels in 2008. The property market crashed after a wave of easing lending requirements. This flooded the market with an oversupply of houses as subprime homeowners couldn’t afford to make payments, leading prices to plummet.
Factors Influencing Home Price Growth
Today, a mix of factors are supporting nominal house prices.
First, the housing supply remains low.
Total existing inventory stood at 1 million in April, under half the four-decade average. As interest rates have increased, homeowners have been hesitant to sell and the number of mortgage applications has fallen. In turn, this is pushing prices higher.
In fact, the majority of primary mortgages have interest rates locked in under 4%. As of July 1, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate stood much higher, at 7.02%.
Along with this, new home sales are falling.
After hitting a 15-year peak in 2021, sales sank almost 27% year-over-year in April. New home sales are often considered a leading indicator for the residential market.
Wider Implications
The U.S. residential market is valued at about $45 trillion, and has historically been highly sensitive to interest rates.
While the rapid increase in interest rates haven’t yet had a major impact on housing prices, some cracks are beginning to show.
On the other hand, if prices remain stubborn, it may contribute to inflationary pressures, leading the Federal Reserve to continue with rate increases, given the market’s sheer size and influence on the overall U.S. economy.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 22:00 - Hunter Biden's Former Business Partner Was Willing To Testify Before Grand Jury; Delaware US Attorney Didn't Answer His Calls
Hunter Biden’s Former Business Partner Was Willing To Testify Before Grand Jury; Delaware US Attorney Didn’t Answer His Calls
Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,
Tony Bobulinski, a former business partner who worked directly with Hunter and James Biden on a sketchy deal with a Chinese energy firm and who came forward as a whistleblower before the 2020 election, was never asked to testify to the Delaware grand jury investigating Hunter Biden, CBS News reported Thursday.
Bobulinski was reportedly “open to testifying, and his attorney reached out to the office of Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss,” but the prosecutor did not return their calls, two sources familiar with the discussions told CBS News’ Catherine Herridge.
Weiss’ decision to ignore Bobulinski is the latest indication that prosecutors purposefully tanked the investigation to protect Hunter’s father, Joe Biden.
Last week, whistleblower documents were released revealing that federal prosecutors repeatedly interfered on Hunter Biden’s behalf during the probe into the younger Biden’s business dealings. According to former IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapley and an unnamed IRS agent, federal prosecutors blocked two search warrants and refused to press more extensive criminal charges. The whistleblower also testified that when agents sought a search warrant for Hunter Biden’s storage locker, prosecutors tipped off Biden’s legal team so they could remove any incriminating evidence.
Shapley also said he was stopped from pursuing investigative leads into “dad” or the “big guy.”
Shapley, who is still a supervisory special agent with the IRS, says he was prevented from pursuing any leads that involved President Joe Biden, including the now-infamous 2017 email from James Gilliar, a business associate of Hunter Biden’s, which bore the subject line “Expectations” and outlined a “provisional agreement” for “equity” in a deal with a Chinese energy company.
Two of Hunter Biden’s former business partners who received the message told CBS News that a line in the email — “10 held by H for the big guy?” — was shorthand for 10% held by Hunter Biden for his father.
Shapley told CBS News that his efforts to look further into money trails that involved “dad” or “the big guy” were blocked by a senior prosecutor working for Weiss.
“I would say that they limited certain investigative leads that could have potentially provided information on the president of the United States,” Shapley told CBS News.
Shapley also alleges that in August 2020, an iCloud search warrant recovered the threatening July 2017 WhatsApp “shake-down” message from Hunter Biden to Chinese businessman Henry Zhao about an outstanding payment.
“I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight,” Hunter Biden allegedly wrote. “And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”
According to Shapley, prosecutors “denied” the IRS investigators’ efforts to learn more about the message.
On Sept 4, 2020, according to the IRS whistleblowers, the DOJ ordered a “cease and desist” on any overt investigation of Hunter Biden or Biden family influence peddling. They also claim that the FBI hid the 1023 form alleging foreign bribery from the IRS case attorneys overseeing the case.
The FBI verified that Hunter Biden’s laptop was real in 2019, yet worked with social media platforms to censor reporting on it before the 2020 election.
And now it has come to light that prosecutors didn’t even bother to have a the key witness testify before the grand jury.
Bobulinski came forward in October of 2020, revealing during a conference press in Nashville, Tennessee two hours before the presidential debate that he had personally met with Joe Biden in May 2017, as part of discussions over the potential business deal with Chinese energy firm, CEFC.
“In my approximately hour long meeting with Joe that night, we discussed Biden’s history, the Biden’s family business dealing plans with the Chinese, with which he was plainly familiar, at least at a high level,” Bobulinski said. Joe Biden has repeatedly claimed that he had nothing to do with Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings.
“I’ve heard Joe Biden say that he’s never discussed business with Hunter, that is FALSE,” Bobulinski alleged. “I have first-hand knowledge about this because I directly dealt with the Biden family, including Joe Biden,” he added.
The FBI had Bobulinski sit for an interview the next day, and made him turn over copies of his cell phones.
In a statement, James Comer, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, said prosecutors “prevented investigators from taking any steps to verify this evidence that could lead to President Biden.”
“The fact that a key witness associated with the CEFC deal was not brought in to testify before the grand jury proves again that the Justice Department is engaged in a coverup,” said Comer, who vowed to “pursue a thorough investigation into the Department of Justice’s misconduct.”
Attorney General Merrick Garland insisted on June 23 that Weiss had “complete authority to make all decisions on his own.”
s the U.S. attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration, [he] would be permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to,” Garland said.
Earlier this month, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to just two federal misdemeanor counts of failing to pay his taxes, and was spared prison time.
A federal judge still needs to sign off on “sweetheart” plea bargain prosecutors brokered with Hunter Biden’s legal team.
U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika of the District of Delaware set a court date of July 26 for Biden to make his initial court appearance related to the plea deal
Noreika, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Donald Trump, will have the power to either approve or reject the plea agreement.
credittrader
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 21:30 - India's Way To A More Peaceful Nation?
India’s Way To A More Peaceful Nation?
Over the years, India’s score on the Global Peace Index has fluctuated, reaching a low during the 2019-2020 Citizenship Act protests.
However, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, due to other countries struggling more, the nation’s rank in the report has still improved somewhat more gradually.
In its latest release Wednesday, India ranked 126th – a “medium” score.
You will find more infographics at Statista
The last time the country scored in this category was 2018 – in the meantime, it was classified as “low”.
The report does not take into account this year’s violence in Manipur, however, which will be reflected in next year’s release.
Before the incidents, India’s score on the Global Peace Index had improved drastically, improving in the regions of “violent crime, neighboring countries relations and political instability”, according to the report.
However, India was still only the 21st most peaceful country in Asia out of 26 surveyed, coming in right at the bottom of the “medium” category.
The publication put the economic cost of violence in India at $1 trillion PPP dollars or 6 percent of GDP.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 21:00 - Israel Buys 25 More Lockheed F-35 Stealth Jets In $3 Billion Deal
Israel Buys 25 More Lockheed F-35 Stealth Jets In $3 Billion Deal
Israel’s Ministry of Defense announced the purchase of a third squadron of F-35 stealth fighter jets in a deal worth $3 billion, Reuters reported on Sunday. Israel will now boast 75 of the Lockheed Martin manufactured war planes in its arsenal.
The defense ministry added further that the deal will be financed through the defense aid package Israel receives from the US.
Israeli F-35s Israel was the first foreign recipient of the F-35, also known in the US as the Joint Strike Fighter and in Israel by its Hebrew name “Adir.” Israel first used the F-35 in combat when it bombed Syria in 2018.
“The F-35 squadron has become an operational squadron,” Maj. Gen. Amikam Norkin said at the time. “We are flying the F-35 all over the Middle East – we might be the first to attack with F-35 in the Middle East,” he said.
Norkin presented images of the F-35 violating Lebanese airspace by flying over Beirut. The development and production costs of the F-35, paid primarily by the US military, have been estimated at near $1.5 trillion. It is considered the most expensive military weapons system in history.
The F-35 is considered crucial in what Israeli planners call the “war between wars” against Iranian supported units of the Syrian military, as well as in the event that Israel would choose to eventually strike Iran’s nuclear program.
Just before the F-35 deal was announced Sunday, Israeli warplanes again bombed Syrian sites. Syrian state media SANA reported that the “Israeli enemy carried out an air aggression from the direction northeast of Beirut, targeting some points in the vicinity of the city of Homs.”
The bombing resulted in material damages, but no casualties. With this latest attack, Israel has bombed Syria 19 times since the start of 2023 and 13 times since the earthquake struck the country in February.
Israel’s air force has regularly bombed Syria since the start of the US-led covert war on Damascus starting in 2011. At the time, Israeli officials insisted they were taking no part in the war, which was unleashed by Washington using extremist Salafist militias who attacked Syrian security forces and police under the cover of anti-government protests.
However, Israeli officials acknowledged in 2013 they had hoped to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad since the start of the war, while reports later emerged of the Israeli air force bombing Syrian army positions to assist the Al-Qaeda affiliated Nusra Front during battles between the two sides.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 20:30 - White House Wants To Block Sunlight To Save Planet From 'Global Warming'
White House Wants To Block Sunlight To Save Planet From ‘Global Warming’
Despite the European Commission’s recent warning that large-scale interventions such as solar engineering to reverse ‘climate change’ could have “unintended consequences,” the White House published a new report Friday indicating that the Biden administration wants to manipulate planetary systems to block the sunlight to save the planet.
The congressionally mandated report released by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy shows the Biden administration is very eager to explore “geoengineering” methods to block sunlight because they allege the planet is burning and there’s an imminent climate crisis that will destroy the world.
“A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation,” the White House report said.
The report continued, “SRM offers the possibility of cooling the planet significantly on a timescale of a few years.”
In a statement, the White House said, “There are no plans underway to establish a comprehensive research program focused on solar radiation modification.”
There is no official government policy that was attached to the report. The administration noted Congress ordered the report.
The report was released one day after the European Commission outlined the potential risks and “unintended consequences” of manipulating planetary systems to fight global warming.
The commission warned:
In the context of accelerated global warming, deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s natural systems (referred to as “geoengineering”), such as solar radiation modification, is attracting more attention. However, the risks, impacts and unintended consequences that these technologies pose are poorly understood, and necessary rules, procedures and institutions have not been developed.
Some of these risks include:
These technologies introduce new risks to people and ecosystems, while they could also increase power imbalances between nations, spark conflicts and raises a myriad of ethical, legal, governance and political issues.
Blocking the sun’s rays globally with artificial particles in the name of ‘climate change’ is gaining traction. However, there’s too much risk involved that could possibly harm biodiversity and agriculture on a global scale. The fact that this technology could alter global weather patterns and the Biden administration wants to explore it — is frightening.
… and Mr. Burns from the animated television series The Simpsons tried this.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 20:00 - The Affirmative Aftermath: Schools Now Insist That Race Had A Major Impact In Admissions
The Affirmative Aftermath: Schools Now Insist That Race Had A Major Impact In Admissions
There is an interesting debate unfolding around the country in the aftermath of the Supreme Court barring the use of race in college admissions.
For decades, colleges and universities have sought to downplay the weight given to race in court while insisting that it was one of a number of factors used in maintaining diversity. Now, however, schools are insisting that, without considering race, minority admissions will plummet.
During the Supreme Court oral arguments over affirmative action, Harvard’s counsel Seth Waxman struggled with an argument that race consideration was needed to maintain current admissions for minorities. Yet, he also maintained that it was not a major factor and that the consideration of race with regard to Asian students produced only a “slight disparity” and “had no effect with respect to outcomes.”
It was no easy argument. As in past cases, the Court was assured that it was just one of a number of “tips” that was not substantial in the decisions. Yet, after the Court barred the use of race criteria, schools are now arguing that it will make a massive difference and substantially reduce minority admissions.
Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has ruled that race could not be a determinative or major factor in admissions. In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Court ruled against affirmative action. In his plurality decision, then-Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. stopped short of barring the use of race in admissions entirely. Instead, he cited Harvard University’s admissions policy as an example of how race can be one of a number of diversity elements.
In the 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court upheld Michigan’s use of race but then-Justice Sandra Day O’Connor cautioned that the court “expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” That was 20 years ago.
Since that time, universities have insisted that they only use race as one of many factors and that it does not carry the determinative weight rejected in Bakke. For decades, universities and colleges maintained this difficult line of downplaying the importance of race in admissions.
However, even the limited use of racial classifications continued to divide the Court for decades. In 2017, Chief Justice John Roberts declared:
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
In his decision last week, Roberts noted that minority students could still raise their own individual struggle with racial discrimination in essays, but that schools cannot employ threshold classifications to give an advantage or disadvantage because of race.
Many of us support efforts to maintain diverse classes and see the value of such diversity in the education process. I have found economic diversity to be one of the most important elements to my classes. Students who come from lower income families often have a sharply different view on many of the issues that we discuss in our classes.
Yet, it is the frank discussion of the racial criteria that is so interesting in the aftermath of the decision. Many now insist that racial criteria was determinative in a large number of applications.
The latest was State University of New York (SUNY) system Chancellor John B. King, Jr. who gave a strikingly conflicted account on NPR that was not challenged in the interview.
On Friday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” King stated that an admissions process based only on individual merit would result in “fewer black and Latino students on campuses.” Yet, at the same time, he insisted that use of individual merit alone would not impact white or Asian students.
He told host Steve Inskeep:
“Yeah. Again, I think they’re misrepresenting how the admissions process works. There are policies at Harvard, for example, where students are admitted because they are legacies, because they’re one of multiple generations in their family to go to Harvard. There are students who are admitted because they’re a tuba player. There are students who are admitted because they’re great lacrosse players. And so, there [are] a range of factors as universities try to build a diverse class.”
King then emphasized “by removing the tool of race-conscious admissions, the evidence is it results in fewer black and Latino students on campuses.”
Of course, a minority student who plays the tuba can still get that “tip” with other indications of individual merit separate from racial classifications. Minority students clearly have similar “tips” based on individual merit from achievements in tuba to tennis to trigonometry. If the factor was given no more weight than a tuba talent, one would think that the drop in admissions would not be as severe given a myriad of other qualifications or tips in applications.
Soon after the decision, California Gov. Gavin Newsom objected to the ruling in saying that admitting students solely based on their individual merits, without considering race, would result in a massive drop in minority admissions.
Likewise, over at The Nation, Elie Mystal insisted that, without factoring in race, minority admissions always drop: “In California, which ended its affirmative action policies over 25 years ago, the studies show that, without affirmative action, Black enrollment plummets, Latino enrollment plummets.” He insisted that this was a victory for “mediocre white people.”
[Mystal later attacked Justice Thomas on MSNBC, describing Thomas as a “mutilated version of a black justice” who just did whatever his wife, who is white, tells him to do. Rather than accept that Thomas holds opposing constitutional views, Mystal insisted “he doesn’t want to see anything that Ms. Ginni tells him he shouldn’t be able to see.”]
The difference between the arguments and the aftermath of the affirmative action decision is striking. What was presented as a relative modest “tip” based on race to the Court is now being presented as a huge factor in admissions. If left to individual merit, advocates and administrators now insist that that minority admissions will sharply decline and white/Asian admissions will rise.
Nevertheless, King insists that such determinative use of race had no negative impact on white or Asian students while insisting that the number of admissions for white or Asian students will increase substantially when only individual merit is accessed.
That was all to explain why people just do not understand “how the admissions process works.”
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 19:30 - Ahead Of Independence Day, These Are The Most-Searched-For Foods To BBQ In Each State
Ahead Of Independence Day, These Are The Most-Searched-For Foods To BBQ In Each State
You know it’s coming… The White House will most likely be bragging on July 4 or days before via Twitter that Americans are finally saving on cookouts as ‘Bidenomics‘ is a success. Anyone with a wallet who works hard for their money knows the White House is full of malarky.
Americans have been battered with two years of negative real wage growth, forcing them to deplete personal savings and rack up record credit card debt in a high-interest rate environment to survive the worst inflation storm in a generation. But don’t worry because none of that matters to White House officials — they’re in cheerleading mode about taking credit for everything good and none of the bad.
As Independence Day quickly approaches, Americans will still be paying near-record high prices for hamburger meat. The good news is that egg prices have collapsed, which could provide relief for deviled egg lovers. Food inflation likely has abated from last year’s levels but remains well over pre-Covid levels.
For those planning cookouts, USA Today has released the latest BBQ trends across all 50 states and the District of Columbia of the most searched foods.
Even though residents in sixteen states wanted veggies, the rest of the country preferred meat.
Here are the top ten searched BBQ foods:
-
BBQ chicken
-
BBQ ribs
-
BBQ pork chops
-
BBQ meatballs
-
BBQ shrimp
-
BBQ pulled pork
-
BBQ brisket
-
BBQ baked beans
-
BBQ salmon
-
BBQ meatloaf
There were 16 states and Washington, DC, that saw higher search trends for grilling vegetables versus meat.
On a state-by-state basis, here’s the most searched “how to grill” food:
Alabama – Corn on the cob
Alaska – Corn
Arizona – Burgers
Arkansas – Ribs
California – Tri tip
Colorado – Chicken breast
Connecticut – Spare ribs
Delaware – Salmon
District of Columbia – Chicken breast
Florida – Mahi mahi
Georgia – Wings
Hawaii – Ahi tuna
Idaho – Steak
Illinois – Pork chops
Indiana – Corn in husk
Iowa – Asparagus
Kansas – Salmon
Kentucky – Shrimp
Louisiana – Steak
Maine – Chicken
Maryland – Eggplant
Massachusetts – Swordfish
Michigan – Asparagus
Minnesota – Asparagus
Mississippi – Ribs
Missouri – Corn on the cob
Montana – Asparagus
Nebraska – Corn on the cob
Nevada – Burgers
New Hampshire – Asparagus
New Jersey – London boil
New Mexico – Chicken
New York – Clams
North Carolina – Filet mignon
North Dakota – Asparagus
Ohio – Chicken
Oklahoma – Corn on the cob
Oregon – Lamb chops
Pennsylvania – Filet mignon
Rhode Island – Salmon
South Carolina – Pork chops
South Dakota – Burgers
Tennessee – Pork chops
Texas – Ribs
Utah – Chicken
Vermont – Salmon
Virginia – Portobello mushrooms
Washington – Flank steak
West Virginia – Asparagus
Wisconsin – Brats
Wyoming – Burgers
The good news is Americans have yet to search for “how to grill” insects. As we’ve noted, there’s a push by international non-governmental agencies, such as WEF, as well as some governments, to reset the food supply chain to swap out meat diets for insects. Americans won’t stand for that nonsense.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 19:00 -
- Dalio: Why The World Is On The Brink Of Great Disorder
Dalio: Why The World Is On The Brink Of Great Disorder
Authored by Ray Dalio, op-ed via Time.com,
I’m a global macro investor who has been betting on what’s going to happen for over 50 years. I’ve been through all sorts of events and cycles in all sorts of places over a long time which led me to study how these events and cycles work. In the process, I learned that I needed to study history to understand what’s going on and what’s likely to happen.
Early in my career, I learned though a couple of painful mistakes that the biggest things that surprised me did so because they never happened in my lifetime but had happened many times in history. The first time that happened was on August 15, 1971 when I was clerking on the floor of the New York Stock exchange and the U.S. defaulted on its debt promise to allow people to turn in their paper dollars for gold. I thought that this was a big crisis that would send stock prices down but they went up a lot. I didn’t understand why because I’d never experienced a big currency devaluation before. When I looked back in history, I saw that the exact same thing happened on March 5, 1933 when Roosevelt defaulted on the U.S.’s promise to let people turn in their paper money for gold and stocks went up. That led me to study and learn why—which is that money could be created, and when it’s created, it goes down in value which makes things go up in price. That experience led me to study the rises and declines of markets, economies, and countries which I’ve done ever since. For example, my studying how the 1920s debt bubble turned into the 1929-33 financial collapse led me to anticipate and profit from the 2008 financial crisis. That’s how I learned that it’s critical to take a longer-term perspective and understand the mechanics behind why history rhymes.
A few years ago, I saw three big things happening that hadn’t happened in my lifetime but had happened in the 1930-45 period. These were:
-
The largest amounts of debt, the fastest rates of debt growth, and the greatest amounts of central bank printing of money and buying debt since 1930-45.
-
The biggest gaps in wealth, income, values, and the greatest amounts of populism since the 1930-45 period.
-
The greatest international great powers conflict, most importantly between the U.S. and China, since 1930-45.
Seeing these three big things that never happened in these magnitudes in my lifetime led me to study the rises and declines of markets, economies, and countries over the last 500 years, as well as the rises and declines of China’s dynasties the last 2,100 years.
That examination showed me that these three big forces—i.e. the debt/money one, the internal conflict one, and the external conflict one—transpired in big cycles that reinforced each other to make up what I call the Big Cycle. These cycles were driven by logical cause-effect relationships Most importantly, this study of the last 500 years of history taught me that:
-
The previously described financial conditions repeatedly proved to be leading indicators of big financial crises that led to big shifts in the financial order.
-
The previously described levels of political and social gaps repeatedly proved to be leading indicators of great conflicts within countries that led to big changes in domestic orders.
-
The previously described great powers’ conflicts repeatedly proved to be leading indicators of international conflicts that led to big changes in the world order.
Said differently, history shows that the painful seismic shifts part of the Big Cycle comes about when there is simultaneously 1) too much debt creation that leads to debt bubbles bursting and economic contractions which cause central banks to print a lot of money and buy debt, 2) big conflicts within countries due to big wealth and values conflicts made worse by the bad economic conditions, and 3) big international conflicts due to rising world powers challenging the existing world powers at a time of economic and internal political crises In doing this study, I also saw two other big forces that had big effects. They are:
-
Acts of nature (droughts, floods, pandemics) including climate change.
-
Learning leading to inventions of technologies that typically produced evolutionary advances in productivity and living standards —e.g., the First and Second Industrial Revolution, and computing/AI revolution.
I call these the Five Big Forces. I saw how they affect each other and change in logical ways to produce the Big Cycle that produces big changes in the world order. I came to realize that if one understands and follows each of these forces and how they interact, one can understand most everything that’s changing the world order. That’s what I’m trying to do.
I will give you a quick summary of what I learned from my study but if you want to lean more about how and why things change you can get that in my book Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order.
Where We Are and What’s Likely Ahead
1. The Financial/Economic Force
In the U.S., we are now in middle part of what I call the short-term debt cycle and is also known as the business cycle. These short-term debt cycles have lasted 7 years on average, give or take about 3 years. There have been 12 1/2 of them since the new monetary world order started in 1945. So, we are now about half-way though the 13th of the cycles, at the point of the cycle when the central bank has tightened money to fight inflation that is just before the debt and economic contractions which will likely come over next 18 months.
We are also in a late and dangerous part of the long-term debt cycle because the levels of debt assets and debt liabilities have become so high that it is difficult to give lender-creditors a high enough interest rate relative to inflation that is adequate to make them want to hold this debt as an asset without making interest rates so high that it unacceptably hurts the borrower-debtor. Because of unsustainable debt growth, we are likely approaching a major inflection point that will change the financial order. Said differently, it appears to me likely that we are approaching a debt/financial/economic restructuring that will lead to big changes to the financial order.
More specifically. it appears likely to me that because of large deficits the U.S. Treasury will have to sell a lot of debt and it appears there will not be adequate demand for it. If that happens, it will lead to either much higher interest rates or the Fed printing a lot of money and buying bonds which will devalue money. For these reasons, the debt/financial conditions could worsen, perhaps very significantly, over the next 18 months.
2. The Domestic Order Force
In several countries, most importantly the U.S., we have seen a growing percentage of the population that are populist extremists (about 20-25 percent of the right are extreme and about 10-15 percent of the left are) and a shrinking of the percentage of the population that are bipartisan moderates. Though the bipartisan moderates still remain in the majority, they constitute a declining percentage of the population and they are far less willing to fight and win at all costs. In studying history, I saw this growing populism of both sides and increased conflict has repeatedly occurred when large gaps in wealth and values existed at the same time as bad economic conditions. At such times, significant percentages of the population chose populist political leaders who vowed to fight and win for them rather than compromise. In my book, I described the state the U.S. is now in as Stage 5 (“When There Are Bad Financial Conditions and Intense Conflict”) of the “internal order cycle,” which comes just before some sort of civil war and changes in the domestic order. That is what is now happening.
Looking ahead, the next 18 months will be an increasingly intense big election period which will lead to much greater political conflict which is likely to sharper the divide between the left and the right. Thirty-three Senate seats, the presidency, and control of the House will be fought over by a number of populist candidates and there will likely be poor economic conditions, so the fights will be vicious and there will be a real test of rule-following and compromising, both of which are required to make democracies work. You can see the movement toward a win at all cost fight while the respect for the legal and political systems declines. You can see this dynamic playing out even now, in things like Donald Trump and his followers being at war with the justice system, or as he and his followers would say, the system’s war against him. Whichever perspective you have, it is clear that we are headed into a type of civil war over the next 18 months. To me the most important war is between the bipartisan moderates and the populist extremes, yet the bipartisan moderates are for the most part quietly staying out of this fight. The only thing the Democrats and Republicans can agree on, which most Americans also agree on, is being anti-China which brings me to my next big force.
3. The International World Order Force
The conflicts between the U.S. and China are likely to intensify as domestic political tensions will likely lead to increased aggressiveness toward China. That is because in the U.S. most everyone is anti-China and those running for office will want to out-China-bash each other in an election year. China and the US are already dangerously close to some form of war, whether an all-out economic one or, worse, a military one. There are also important elections in Taiwan next year, which is already a flash point in U.S.-China elections, and a U.S.-backed push for Taiwanese independence is something to keep a close eye on when weighing the potential for even more overt U.S.-China conflict. There are several issues—Taiwan, chips, dealing with Russia, sanctioning investments—that are being fought over, and both sides are preparing for war. I don’t mean to say that we are destined for war, but I do mean that the odds of some form of a major conflict are dangerously high.
4. Acts of Nature
Acts of nature are of course harder to predict accurately, but they appear to be getting worse and are likely to be more costly and damaging over the next five to ten years due to climate change. Also, the world is entering an El Niño phase of the climate cycle over the next year.
5. Technology
What can we expect from technology/human inventiveness? Like acts of nature, it is hard to know exactly, though there should be no doubt that generative AI and other technological advances have the potential to cause both massive productivity gains and massive destructions, depending on how they are used. The one thing that we can be sure of is that these changes will be greatly disruptive.
Exactly how events will unfold is beyond my ability to say, but there is no doubt in my mind that those who assume that things will work in the orderly ways we have gotten used in the last few decades will be shocked and probably hurt by the changes to come.
How well these changes are managed will make all the difference. If our leaders can rise above their tendencies to fight and instead focus on cooperating, we can certainly navigate these tricky times to create a better world for most people. Presumably, this outcome is best for everyone, so we should be strongly against civil disorder and war between nations, keeping it in the back of our mind so we strive for cooperative decision-making. For example, now that a debt ceiling agreement has passed, it would be great to see the Democrats and Republicans mutually agree on a bipartisan group of very skilled people to come up with a practical, long-term bipartisan plan. I wrote an article “Why and How Capitalism Needs to be Reformed?” years ago which is still relevant today in case you’re interested. Having said that, it is probably unrealistic to believe that we can materially change the course of events, so what is most important for most people is to visualize the worst. If you do that, you will be prepared for it and will probably be fine.
In closing I should say that the most important thing I’ve learned in my 50 years of being a global macro investor is that I can be wrong. For that reason, while I suggest that you consider what I am sharing, I also suggest that you assess it and the circumstances for yourself.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 18:30 -
- "I Don't Think We'll Ever Get To The 2024 Election", Col. Douglas Macgregor (Ret) Warns
“I Don’t Think We’ll Ever Get To The 2024 Election”, Col. Douglas Macgregor (Ret) Warns
Retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor joined Patrick Bet-David on his PDB Podcast for a lengthy discussion of Russia, Ukraine, the woke military, the Trump Tape, China, and much more.
However, one section in particular caught our attention.
Bet-David recently laid out how he thinks 2024 will play out in a long tweet:
2024 strategy to have Newsom replace Biden:
Step 1: have Newsom go around defending Biden. Selling Biden’s record.
Shows loyalty
Step 2: have him constantly attack Desantis.
Dems are convinced Trump will be forced to drop out
Step 3: if Biden doesn’t step down, have mainstream media attack him
It’s already happening. ABC, CBS & NBC all went after him starting this week.
Step 4: once Jill notices these endless attacks have a private meeting with Biden sharing strategy to save face if he steps down
1. Multiple documentary showing him as modern day FDR.
2. Massive Simon & Schuster book deal 💰
3. Defend his legacy & be pardoned by Newsom if 💩 hits the fan
Step 5: choose one of few options to step down
1. Due to health
2. Jill and I prayed about it and we decided it’s time for us to go spend time with the grandkids.
3. “We fixed everything Trump broke and now it’s time for someone else to do it”
4. Edify Newsom as being loyal to Biden unlike Desantis not being loyal to Trump.
Step 6: In order to prevent Kamala from backstabbing, let her become the first female president for a split second when Biden steps down.
Hilary will lose her mind but what’s new?
Step 7: Divide Desantis and Trump camp to make sure MAGA Doesn’t vote for Desantis
Step 8: Newsom becomes 47 [48]
And last but not least, it’s very likely that NONE of the above will happen, which is why it’s called a prediction.
Remember: ONLY THE PARANOID SURVIVE.
In response to this, Macgregor went dark, beginning by noting that “first of all I think it’s brilliant. And I think that if we were living in a linear world – in other words, when one event follows the next logically; you’re absolutely right.”
“But,” Macgregor warns “I don’t think we’ll ever get to the 2024 election.”
“I think things are going to implode in Washington before then.”
From there it gets more ominous…
Watch the full podcast below (fwd to 1:51:30 for the discussion above):
Full transcript:
I don’t think we’ll ever get to the 2024 election.
I think things are going to implode in Washington before then.
I think our economic Financial condition is fragile – it’s going to come home to roost in ugly ways.
Now I will tell you I don’t know exactly how it will happen, but I think we’re going to end up in a situation where we find out the banks are closed for two or three weeks, and nobody can get into them.
I think we’re going to run into something like that.
I also think that the levels of violence and criminality in our cities is so high that it’s going to spill over into other places in society.
People that normally think they can live remote from the problem are now beginning to be touched by the problem.
Then I look at this thing in Ukraine.
I think Ukraine is going to lose catastrophically – it’s going to be a complete collapse and that too is going to have an effect here at home because people are going to say, well, wait a minute everybody told us Ukraine was winning, everybody told us X Y and Z.
I mean sort of the the Russian hoax on steroids.
All of those things are going to come together or converge in some way that’s going to prevent us from reaching you know the status quo. Oh. another election… Oh, another set of campaigns… And so forth…
Cloward and Piven would be proud!!
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 18:00 - California Teachers' Union Threatens Local School Board With Legal Action Over Flag Policy
California Teachers’ Union Threatens Local School Board With Legal Action Over Flag Policy
Authored by Micaela Ricaforte via The Epoch Times,
California’s statewide teachers’ union sent a letter June 27 to the Chino Valley Unified School board criticizing its recent decision to allow only government flags on school property—and threatening to take legal action against the board if the policy is not reversed.
Chino Valley Unified School Board President Sonja Shaw speaks in support of a parental rights policy proposal at a press conference in Chino, Calif., on June 15, 2023. (California Family Council/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
The board voted 4–1 June 15 to allow only the California and U.S. flags on school property.
The California Teachers Association—with more than 300,000 members—in partnership with local union Associated Chino Teachers alleges in the letter the decision violates teachers’ right to free speech under the First Amendment as well as a state employment law.
The union also said the district further violated state employment laws because it made a decision that affected the current status quo for teachers without giving the local union proper notice or a chance to negotiate terms.
The letter asked the board to reverse its policy by July 3 or face legal action.
“In the event that the board insists on interfering with the constitutional … rights of district employees, the [union] will pursue all available legal remedies for the district’s conduct, including, but not limited to, filing a suit in Superior Court and/or an unfair practice charge with [the Public Employee Relations Board],” the letter stated.
School district Board President Sonja Shaw told The Epoch Times that administrators reached out to the local union to give them a chance to voice their concerns about the flag policy after it was first introduced on June 1.
However, she said, administrators did not meet with the union until June 28, nearly two weeks after the board voted to approve the policy.
Shaw further stated she considered the letter a “bullying tactic,” and was prepared for any legal action the unions might take.
“They think they can bully us, threatening us with lawsuits,” Shaw said.
“I’m not backing down.”
She said she believed the teachers’ unions should be focused on student academic issues.
“This has nothing to do with taking away freedom from a teacher. We all know at a workplace you have limitations and standards,” Shaw said.
“[The upset over flags] is a weird push towards things that shouldn’t be their focus, especially when our kids are dealing with learning loss and mental health issues.”
She added that most parents and residents she’d heard from supported the flag policy—and added that the letter was evidence that teachers’ unions were more concerned with pushing their own agendas than actually serving the community.
At the board meeting, Shaw gestured to the American flag and said, “This is why we’re here. This flag unites us all … the United States stands for all of us. A teacher who has to display sexuality in their classroom is a problem for me as a parent and board member.”
The meeting drew nearly 300 parents, teachers, and community members.
A parent speaks at a Chino Valley Unified School Board meeting where board members voted to block the LGBT pride flag from being displayed in classrooms in Chino, Calif., on June 15, 2023. (Screenshot via YouTube/Chino Valley Unified School Dist Board Videos)
Some who spoke during public comment thanked the board for taking the complicated issue on.
“Just as Bibles, prayer, and the Ten Commandments have been taken out of classrooms, we need to hold fast to those standards of equality and not allow a flag that represents a minority of the district population to be displayed in our classrooms or on our campuses,” said one parent. “Many students here have religious beliefs that don’t align with what the Pride flag represents … We are all Americans here … and the stars and stripes represent every single student in the district.”
Others said they were concerned that the policy would make LGBT students “unsafe.”
“This policy is incredibly damaging to our community,” said one high school student during public comment.
“Pride flags provide a symbol of hope and safety. It’s a reminder we are not alone in our struggles.”
The issue comes after several local Orange County governing boards—including the Orange Unified School Board and the city of Huntington Beach—voted this year to allow only government flags to fly on official or district property.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 17:30 - USSC Chief Justice Roberts Slams 'Misleading' Liberal Justices Over 'Disturbing' Activist Opinions
USSC Chief Justice Roberts Slams ‘Misleading’ Liberal Justices Over ‘Disturbing’ Activist Opinions
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts took aim at his liberal colleagues last week, writing at the end of his majority opinion striking down Joe Biden’s student debt relief program; “It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary.”
The Court ruled last week along ideological lines that the Biden administration’s program was unconstitutional based on the administration’s justification. The law cited allows the Secretary of Education to “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs,” which the state of Missouri opposed.
“Today, we have concluded that an instrumentality created by Missouri, governed by Missouri, and answerable to Missouri is indeed part of Missouri; that the words ‘waive or modify’ do not mean ‘completely rewrite’; and that our precedent—old and new—requires that Congress speak clearly before a department secretary can unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy,” said Roberts, adding “We have employed the traditional tools of judicial decision-making in doing so.”
In his majority opinion, Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee, slammed Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee – who claimed that the majority was “distorting standing doctrine to create a case fit for judicial resolution,” because Missouri did not suffer harm by the student loan program.
“The statute, read as written, gives the Secretary broad authority to relieve a national emergency’s effect on borrowers’ ability to repay their student loans. The Secretary did no more than use that lawfully delegated authority. So the majority applies a rule specially crafted to kill significant regulatory action, by requiring Congress to delegate not just clearly but also micro-specifically,” wrote Kagan, adding “Congress in broadly authorizing loan relief, the Secretary and the President in using that authority to implement the forgiveness plan. The majority instead says that it is theirs to decide.”
According to Roberts, “reasonable minds” may disagree with the majority, but that “It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.”
This isn’t the first time the liberal minority has taken aim at the conservative majority. As the Epoch Times notes;
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, for instance, dissented from the ruling striking down racially discriminatory admissions policies at U.S. universities by claiming that the court was “subvert[ing]” the protection from the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment.
“Because the Court’s opinion is not grounded in law or fact and contravenes the vision of equality embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment, I dissent,” Sotomayor, an Obama appointee, wrote.
The majority had ruled that policies used by Harvard University and the University of North Carolina were unconstitutionally discriminatory. The schools themselves had admitted they discriminated against applicants who were not African American or Hispanic.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, a George W. Bush appointee, said that American society has not been, and is not, colorblind but that the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment requires disregarding racial distinctions.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 17:00 - Seymour Hersh On Prigozhin's Folly: The Russian 'Revolt' That Wasn't Strengthens Putin's Hand
Seymour Hersh On Prigozhin’s Folly: The Russian ‘Revolt’ That Wasn’t Strengthens Putin’s Hand
Authored by Seymour Hersh via Substack,
The Biden administration had a glorious few days last weekend. The ongoing disaster in Ukraine slipped from the headlines to be replaced by the “revolt,” as a New York Times headline put it, of Yevgeny Prigozhin, chief of the mercenary Wagner Group.
The focus slipped from Ukraine’s failing counter-offensive to Prigozhin’s threat to Putin’s control. As one headline in the Times put it, “Revolt Raises Searing Question: Could Putin Lose Power?” Washington Post columnist David Ignatius posed this assessment: “Putin looked into the abyss Saturday—and blinked.”
Secretary of State Antony Blinken—the administration’s go-to wartime flack, who weeks ago spoke proudly of his commitment not to seek a ceasefire in Ukraine—appeared on CBS’s Face the Nation with his own version of reality: “Sixteen months ago, Russian forces were . . . thinking they would erase Ukraine from the map as an independent country,” Blinken said. “Now, over the weekend they’ve had to defend Moscow, Russia’s capital, against mercenaries of Putin’s own making. . . . It was a direct challenge to Putin’s authority. . . . It shows real cracks.”
Blinken, unchallenged by his interviewer, Margaret Brennan, as he knew he would not be—why else would he appear on the show?—went on to suggest that the defection of the crazed Wagner leader would be a boon for Ukraine’s forces, whose slaughter by Russian troops was ongoing as he spoke. “To the extent that it presents a real distraction for Putin, and for Russian authorities, that they have to look at—sort of mind their rear as they’re trying to deal with the counter offensive in Ukraine, I think that creates even greater openings for the Ukrainians to do well on the ground.”
At this point was Blinken speaking for Joe Biden? Are we to understand that this is what the man in charge believes?
We now know that the chronically unstable Prigozhin’s revolt fizzled out within a day, as he fled to Belarus, with a no-prosecution guarantee, and his mercenary army was mingled into the Russian army. There was no march on Moscow, nor was there a significant threat to Putin’s rule.
Pity the Washington columnists and national security correspondents who seem to rely heavily on official backgrounders with White House and State Department officials.
Given the published results of such briefings, those officials seem unable to look at the reality of the past few weeks, or the total disaster that has befallen the Ukraine military’s counter-offensive.
So, below is a look at what is really going that was provided to me by a knowledgeable source in the American intelligence community:
“I thought I might clear some of the smoke. First and most importantly, Putin is now in a much stronger position. We realized as early as January of 2023 that a showdown between the generals, backed by Putin, and Prigo, backed by ultra-nationalist extremists, was inevitable. The age-old conflict between the ‘special’ war fighters and a large, slow, clumsy, unimaginative regular army. The army always wins because they own the peripheral assets that make victory, either offensive or defensive, possible. Most importantly, they control logistics. special forces see themselves as the premier offensive asset. When the overall strategy is offensive, big army tolerates their hubris and public chest thumping because SF are willing to take high risk and pay a high price. Successful offense requires a large expenditure of men and equipment. Successful defense, on the other hand, requires husbanding these assets.
“Wagner members were the spearhead of the original Russian Ukraine offensive. They were the ‘little green men’. When the offensive grew into an all-out attack by the regular army, Wagner continued to assist but reluctantly had to take a back seat in the period of instability and readjustment that followed. Prigo, no shy violet, took the initiative to grow his forces and stabilize his sector.
“The regular army welcomed the help. Prigo and Wagner, as is the wont of special forces, took the limelight and took the credit for stopping the hated Ukrainians. The press gobbled it up. Meanwhile, the big army and Putin slowly changed their strategy from offensive conquest of greater Ukraine to defense of what they already had. Prigo refused to accept the change and continued on the offensive against Bakhmut. Therein lies the rub. Rather than create a public crisis and court-martial the asshole [Prigozhin], Moscow simply withheld the resources and let Prigo use up his manpower and firepower reserves, dooming him to a stand-down. He is, after all, no matter how cunning financially, an ex-hot dog cart owner with no political or military accomplishments.
“What we never heard is three months ago Wagner was cycled out of the Bakhmut front and sent to an abandoned barracks north of Rostov-on-Don [in southern Russia] for demobilization. The heavy equipment was mostly redistributed, and the force was reduced to about 8,000, 2,000 of which left for Rostov escorted by local police.
“Putin fully backed the army who let Prigo make a fool of himself and now disappear into ignominy. All without raising a sweat militarily or causing Putin to face a political standoff with the fundamentalists, who were ardent Prigo admirers. Pretty shrewd.”
There is an enormous gap between the way the professionals in the American intelligence community assess the situation and what the White House and the supine Washington press project to the public by uncritically reproducing the statements of Blinken and his hawkish cohorts.
The current battlefield statistics that were shared with me suggest that the Biden administration’s overall foreign policy may be at risk in Ukraine. They also raise questions about the involvement of the NATO alliance, which has been providing the Ukrainian forces with training and weapons for the current lagging counter-offensive. I learned that in the first two weeks of the operation, the Ukraine military seized only 44 square miles of territory previously held by the Russian army, much of it open land. In contrast, Russia is now in control of 40,000 square miles of Ukrainian territory. I have been told that in the past ten days Ukrainian forces have not fought their way through the Russian defenses in any significant way. They have recovered only two more square miles of Russian-seized territory. At that pace, one informed official said, waggishly, it would take Zelensky’s military 117 years to rid the country. of Russian occupation.
The Washington press in recent days seems to be slowly coming to grips with the enormity of the disaster, but there is no public evidence that President Biden and his senior aides in the White House and State Department aides understand the situation.
Putin now has within his grasp total control, or close to it, of the four Ukrainian oblasts—Donetsk, Kherson, Lubansk, Zaporizhzhia—that he publicly annexed on September 30, 2022, seven months after he began the war. The next step, assuming there is no miracle on the battlefield, will be up to Putin. He could simply stop where he is, and see if the military reality will be accepted by the White House and whether a ceasefire will be sought, with formal end-of-war talks initiated. There will be a presidential election next April in Ukraine, and the Russian leader may stay put and wait for that—if it takes place. President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has said there will be no elections while the country is under martial law.
Biden’s political problems, in terms of next year’s presidential election, are acute—and obvious. On June 20 the Washington Post published an article based on a Gallup poll under the headline “Biden Shouldn’t Be as Unpopular as Trump—but He Is.” The article accompanying the poll by Perry Bacon, Jr., said that Biden has “almost universal support within his own party, virtually none from the opposition party and terrible numbers among independents.” Biden, like previous Democratic presidents, Bacon wrote, struggles “to connect with younger and less engaged voters.” Bacon had nothing to say about Biden’s support for the Ukraine war because the poll apparently asked no questions about the administration’s foreign policy.
The looming disaster in Ukraine, and its political implications, should be a wake-up call for those Democratic members of Congress who support the president but disagree with his willingness to throw many billions of good money after bad in Ukraine in the hope of a miracle that will not arrive. Democratic support for the war is another example of the party’s growing disengagement from the working class. It’s their children who have been fighting the wars of the recent past and may be fighting in any future war. These voters have turned away in increasing numbers as the Democrats move closer to the intellectual and moneyed classes.
If there is any doubt about the continuing seismic shift in current politics, I recommend a good dose of Thomas Frank, the acclaimed author of the 2004 best-seller What’s the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America, a book that explained why the voters of that state turned away from the Democratic party and voted against their economic interests. Frank did it again in 2016 in his book Listen, Liberal: Or, Whatever Happened to the Party of the People? In an afterword to the paperback edition he depicted how Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party repeated—make that amplified—the mistakes made in Kansas en route to losing a sure-thing election to Donald Trump.
It may be prudent for Joe Biden to talk straight about the war, and its various problems for America—and to explain why the estimated more than $150 billion that his administration has put up thus far turned out to be a very bad investment.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 16:30 - US Cities Replacing Fireworks With Drones, Citing Sustainability Concerns
US Cities Replacing Fireworks With Drones, Citing Sustainability Concerns
This year a number of US cities are replacing traditional Fourth of July fireworks with drone shows citing fire danger and air quality concerns.
In California, firework shows in La Jolla and Ocean Beach will be replaced with high-tech drone light shows, according to NBC 7 San Diego.
Salt Lake City, Utah, is trying an alternative way of celebrating Independence Day with its first-ever drone show. The city’s mayor, Erin Mendenhall, cited the drones will mitigate fire risk.
“As temperatures rise and fire danger increases, we must be conscientious of both our air quality and the potential for wildfires,” Mayor Mendenhall wrote in a press release.
In neighboring Colorado, the City of Boulder has also decided to try drones this year instead of fireworks.
“The shift from traditional fireworks to drones was not an easy decision and based on a number of factors, including increased fire danger fueled by climate change,” the City of Boulder wrote on Facebook.
More and more metro areas are going with drone shows rather than fireworks due to sustainability reasons.
As for Americans having backyard BBQ parties, they’re not giving up their roman candles, mortars, firecrackers, and bottle rockets anytime soon. Americans spent $370 million on pyrotechnics from China in 2020.
Meanwhile…
… and then there’s this.
While metro areas are switching to drone shows, red-blooded Americans will never give up bottle rockets and mortars. They’re just too much damn fun until someone blows off a finger.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 16:00 - No, Joe, There Is No Such Thing As A "Fair Share" Of Taxes
No, Joe, There Is No Such Thing As A “Fair Share” Of Taxes
Authored by Brian Balfour via The American Institute for Economic Research,
President Joe Biden recently trotted out the well-worn progressive complaint about the rich not paying their “fair share” of taxes.
“It’s about time the super wealthy start paying their fair share,” Biden said on June 18 to a crowd in Pennsylvania.
Claiming that billionaires “paid a lower rate than schoolteachers, than firefighters, probably anyone in this room,” Biden insisted the rich should “(J)ust pay your fair share, man.”
Missing from such conversations is just what exactly one’s “fair share” of taxes is, and how that is determined to be fair. That’s because the notion of any objective measure of taxes as being a “fair share” is a complete illusion.
Taxes are what citizens are compelled to pay in exchange for government services, like criminal justice, national defense, healthcare, education, and not to mention pork projects, war, and corporate welfare. Given this exchange of money for goods and services, one could plausibly compare the notion of a “fair share” of taxes to that of a “fair” or “just” price of commodities.
As Murray Rothbard points out in Power and Market: Government and the Economy, the notion of a “just price” was debated by ethicists and scholars for hundreds of years. Indeed, the history of this debate can be traced back to Aristotle, who described a “just exchange” as the trading of goods of like value while deeming as immoral the exploiting of arbitrage opportunities for profit. Thomas Aquinas, in the 13th Century, held a similar view, while allowing for profit from selling an item for more than you acquired it.
The Spanish Scholastics of the 16th and 17th centuries introduced to the debate the concept of subjective value, suggesting that the just price was in accordance with the valuation of the prospective buyer, in contrast to any objective value inherent within the good itself. This notion of subjective value largely carried into the present day. Because no such quantitative, universal measure of a just price could be agreed upon, “the only possible objective criterion for the just price is the market price” voluntarily agreed to by buyer and seller, according to Rothbard.
In other words, ethicists and economists for centuries grappled with the concept of a “fair price” for a good or service. Finally, a consensus was reached that the only fair price is one mutually and voluntarily agreed upon by seller and buyer.
When it comes to taxes, however, voluntary agreement is removed.
Government imposes its arbitrarily chosen tax rates by threat of force. Because mutual consent is removed from the transaction, there can be no such thing as a “fair share” of taxes.
Tax rates are largely politically motivated and arbitrarily chosen, and stacked with exemptions and penalties to help incentivize behaviors favored by the politicians writing the voluminous tax code. Regardless of the rates, there is no “fairness” to be achieved.
Some may argue that a “fair” tax share for various income groups should be proportional to the share of income earned for those groups. According to the Tax Foundation, however, the top one percent of income earners paid 42.3 percent of federal income taxes while earning 22 percent of the nation’s income. The top ten percent earned 49.5 percent of total income while paying nearly 74 percent of all income taxes.
The average effective income tax rate for the top ten percent was 20.3 percent, more than six times the 3.1 percent rate paid by the bottom 50 percent.
By this measure, many could argue that the rich are paying well above their “fair share,” which is why this measure is never mentioned when Biden and company are asked to specify what a “fair share” would be.
Complicating the concept of a “fair share” of taxes further still, to the extent the discussion is on income taxes, is that one’s income in any given year may not neatly categorize someone as “rich” or not.
A person’s income represents merely a snapshot in time. Of course, people move about income levels over the course of their lives. Today’s “low-income” individual may be a recent college graduate from an upper middle-class family merely working an entry-level job on her way to a lucrative career.
Conversely, this year’s “high-income” earner may be a small business owner who struggled for decades and finally had a successful year, but still remains deep in debt. This snapshot report in no way tells us anything about the financial well-being over the lifetimes of the people being judged as rich or not. In short, simple “income” statistics often provide a misleading snapshot of citizens’ financial well-being, and therefore of how taxes really affect them.
It’s not quite so easy to look at a person’s W-2 in a given year and determine if he is “rich” and therefore must be compelled to pay a “fair share.”
Moreover, taxes are the lifeblood of the political class.
The more taxes they extract from citizens, the greater power they hold over society and its scarce resources.
More taxes means more political favors to be doled out, voting blocs to be rewarded, and patronage networks to pay off.
The discussion of the non-existent concept of a “fair share” of taxes should be dropped immediately and exposed for what it is: an arbitrary and artificial notion used to disguise political power grabs.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 15:30 - Zelensky Implores Military To "Show Results" Before NATO Summit Amid Waning Enthusiasm In West
Zelensky Implores Military To “Show Results” Before NATO Summit Amid Waning Enthusiasm In West
In a rare public sign of desperation, Ukraine’s President Vladimir Zelensky is pleading for his military to “show results” ahead of the major NATO summit to be convened in Lithuania on July 11. This comes amid rumblings out of Washington that US arms to Kiev could slow or be cut if Ukrainian forces are incapable of advancing.
Over the weekend Zelensky spoke to several journalists and addressed the past several days of headlines out of the West which have suggested the counteroffensive could be failing. He explained that “torrential rains” had “slowed down some processes quite a bit” – but that the reality still is that “every kilometer” of liberated territory and gains “costs lives”.
Image: Ukrainian Presidential Press Service He urged more Western weapons while blaming that gains from last fall had been lost in part because of the late arrival of artillery. His top generals have also been complaining about lack of air superiority, while continuing to press for F-16 fighter jets.
“We stopped because we couldn’t advance. Advancing meant losing people and we had no artillery,” he asserted in the press briefing. “We are very cautious in this aspect. Fast things are not always safe.”
He then emphasized that he has a duty to his troops and to not take risks that are unnecessary: “If they tell me that two months will pass and thousands of people will die, or three months and fewer people will die, of course, I will choose the latter,” Zelensky said. “Between time and people, the most important thing is people.”
Related to the pressing urgency of more and continued Western military support, Zelensky specifically called out Republicans in US Congress. Again this comes against the backdrop of Kiev’s concerns over waning enthusiasm for the war effort out of Washington and the West at a sensitive moment of NATO’s annual summit.
He slammed the “dangerous messages coming from some Republicans” – but praised the Thursday visit of former Vice President Mike Pence.
“Mike Pence has visited us, and he supports Ukraine. First of all, as an American, and then as a Republican,” Zelensky said. “We have bipartisan support. However, there are different messages in their circles regarding support for Ukraine. There are messages coming from some Republicans, sometimes dangerous messages, that there may be less support.”
He stressed that maintaining bipartisan support is “the most important thing for Ukraine” regardless of who wins the 2024 US presidential election. He also at one point said, “NATO without Ukraine is not NATO.” The UK has meanwhile remained the most outspoken advocate of Kiev’s entry into NATO, while Germany and the US have voiced caution and reluctance on the question of eventual full membership.
With the NATO summit now less than ten days away, the race is on for Ukraine’s forces to “show results”.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 15:00 - Musk's Tweet-Limiting Move Is To Prevent The Completion Of The "AI-Censorship-Death-Star"
Musk’s Tweet-Limiting Move Is To Prevent The Completion Of The “AI-Censorship-Death-Star”
Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock this weekend, you will know that Twitter CEO Elon Musk said Saturday that the social media platform will limit how many tweets users can read due to “extreme” levels of system manipulation and data scraping.
Musk said in a statement that Twitter has applied the following temporary limits on users, with new unverified accounts limited to reading just 600 posts per day.
In yet another exercise in irony, this post achieved a record view count!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 2, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Claiming the sudden change is being implemented to combat “extreme levels of data scraping and system manipulation,” Musk said the daily restrictions would eventually be raised to 8,000 posts for verified users, 800 for unverified accounts, and 400 for new unverified users.
Immediately, the socials came alive with claims of ‘free speech’ suppression etc…
Putting hard limits on reads is web 1.0 stuff.
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) July 1, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
OMFG pic.twitter.com/KHlJvKsv0N
— y0da_ (@totSamiy_yoda) July 1, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
But the irony went to ’11’…
If dying from irony were possible, it would’ve been be a massacre
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 2, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
So they want ‘more’ twitter not less? But we thought it was a cesspool of nazi porn?
Musk said at the time that hundreds of organizations or more were scraping Twitter data “extremely aggressively,” with a negative impact on user experience.
However, there may be more to this than ‘user experience’ deterioration, or an effort by Musk force more monetization.
Musk hinted at the ‘other’ reason in April, when he threatened to sue Microsoft, which has invested billions into OpenAI, after accusing the company of using Twitter data for training.
“They trained illegally using Twitter data. Lawsuit time,” Musk wrote on Twitter on April 19.
Which brings us to Mike Benz’s excellent discussion this morning of what may really be going on behind the scenes, that yet again – the world’s richest man could be the only one uncancellable enough to battle.
Benz begins his trek with the statement: “AI censorship is where all of the magic happens.”
He points out, the Twitter Files showed how The FBI might come in and get 22 tweets censored, but AI is how IEP (and other 3rd-party censorship groups) were able to get 22 million tweets censored.”
Before 2016, Benz explains, you could not ‘control’ the internet; but since then, there has been an “AI Censorship Deathstar” under construction, which “relies on massive scraping of Twitter data to track trending narratives, to systemically surveil, to build intelligence dossiers, and to track and turn down – all at one – communities online.”
Twitter is the best social network of all for this massive data scraping (and training) since all consumers of information are also creators.
This explicitly makes scraping data there far more important for early narrative detection and countering ‘wrongthink’ via fact-checking, Google Ad suppression, political pressure (possibly enforcing hate speech laws like Michigan just passed), or mainstream media propaganda focus.
Also, on the other side, while Musk appears to have got the ‘Trust & Safety’ censors/bannner/throttlers out of the loop, this massive data scrape allows any establishment-favored narratives to be amplified.
And it appears to be working as ChatGPT admitted it was unable to access real-time tweets this morning…
NEWS: It looks like ChatGPT’s web browser extension can no longer access Twitter’s data. https://t.co/jv0jgIQ9w3
— T(w)itter Daily News (@TitterDaily) July 2, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Which apparently pleased Musk…
Elon reacts to this news: https://t.co/tqab98Oice
— T(w)itter Daily News (@TitterDaily) July 2, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
So – is this just another money-making scheme for Twitter; or is Musk really the world’s last best hope for ‘freedom’ of speech.
“You are going to see the censorship industry howl over this,” Benz concludes, and “whether Musk knows it or not, he has stepped on a rattlesnake.”
While the censorship-industry will “in a wierd way, while the boot [of Musk’s tweet-read-limit] may be cutting off some amount of openness of Twitter, it may also represent in some way, the boot of freedom.”
Watch the full Benz clip below:
Wow. Musk has no idea the DARPA rattlesnake he just stepped on by this doing this…
My take on @elonmusk’s new rate limit policy, from the lens of the censorship industry: https://t.co/AZ5SPIgHiz pic.twitter.com/Rw4KBZsT9O
— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) July 1, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Finally, one wonders did Musk’s move just nuke the AI-stock-boom’s 100x forward-revenue-multiple case?
Tyler Durden
Sun, 07/02/2023 – 14:00
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
