Mar 03

Today’s News 3rd March 2019

  • The Real Reason Why Globalists Are So Obsessed With Artificial Intelligence

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    It is nearly impossible to traverse web news or popular media today without being assaulted by vast amounts of propaganda on Artificial Intelligence (AI). It is perhaps the fad to end all fads as it supposedly encompasses almost every aspect of human existence, from economics and security to philosophy and art. According to mainstream claims, AI can do almost everything and do it better than any human being. And, the things AI can’t do, it WILL be able to do eventually.

    Whenever the establishment attempts to saturate the media with a particular narrative, it is usually with the intent to manipulate public perception in a way that produces self fulfilling prophecy. In other words, they hope to shape reality by telling a particular lie so often it becomes accepted by the masses over time as fact. They do this with the idea of globalism as inevitable, with the junk science of climate change as “undeniable” and they do it with AI as a technological necessity.

    The globalists have long held AI as a kind of holy grail in centralization technology. The United Nations has adopted numerous positions and even summits on the issue, including the “AI For Good” summit in Geneva. The UN insinuates that it’s primary interest in AI is in regulation or observation of how it is exploited, but the UN also has clear goals to use AI to its advantage. The use of AI as a means to monitor mass data to better institute “sustainable development” is written clearly in the UN’s agenda.

    The IMF is also in on the AI trend, holding global discussions on the uses of AI in economics as well as the effects of algorithms on economic analysis.

    The main source for the development of AI has long been DARPA. The military and globalist think tank dumps billions of dollars into the technology, making AI the underlying focus of most of DARPA’s work. AI is not only on the globalist’s radar; they are essentially spearheading the creation and promotion of it.

    The globalist desire for the technology is not as simple as some might assume, however. They have strategic reasons, but also religious reasons for placing AI on an ideological pedestal. But first I suppose we should tackle the obvious.

    In most white papers written by globalist institutions on AI, the thrust centers on mass data collection and surveillance. The elites are careful to always assert that their interests focus on the public good. This is why the UN and other agencies argue that they should be the leaders in oversight of mass data collection. That is to say, they want us to believe that they are objective and trustworthy enough to manage rules for data surveillance, or, to manage the data itself.

    For the safety of the public, the globalists want centralized management of all data collection, ostensibly to save us from those evil corporations and their invasion of data privacy. Of course, most of those corporations are also run by globalists that fill the guest books of events like the World Economic Forum to discuss the advancements and advantages of AI. The WEF has made it a mandate that AI be promoted widely and that the business world and the general public be convinced of AI’s advantages. Bias against AI must be prevented…

    So, what we have here is yet another false paradigm in which globalist institutions are opposed to corporations in terms of how AI is used.  Yet, globalist corporations and globalist institutions both develop AI as well as pro-AI sentiment.  The public, with its innate distrust of corporate moral compass, is supposed to be convinced to support UN regulatory reforms as a counterbalance. But in reality, corporate powers have no intention of fighting against UN control, they will ultimately welcome it.

    This was the goal all along.

    The actual effectiveness of AI as a means to help humanity is questionable. AI is primarily about “learning algorithms”, or machines that are programmed to learn from experience. The problem is that a learning algorithm is only as effective as the human beings that program it in the first place. That is to say, learning is not always a cause and effect process. Sometimes, learning is a spontaneous epiphany. Learning is creative. And, in some cases, learning is inborn.

    When a machine is pitted against a human in a system built on very simple and concrete rules, machines tend to prevail. A chess game, for example, is designed around hard rules that never change. A pawn is always a pawn and always moves like a pawn; a knight always moves like a knight. While there can be moments of creativity in chess (which is why humans to this day are still on occasion able to beat computers at the game), the existence of the rules makes AI seem smarter than it is.

    Human systems and natural systems are far more complicated than chess, and the rules tend to change, sometimes without warning. As quantum physics often discovers, the only thing that is predictable when observing the universe and nature is that all things are unpredictable. How well would an algorithm do in a chess game where a pawn could suddenly evolve to move like a knight, without any specific predictable patterns? Not very well I suspect.

    And this is where we get into the crux of how the image of AI is being inflated into a kind of half-assed electronic god; a false prophet.

    AI is being inserted not only into chess, but into everything. Mass surveillance is impossible to manage by humans alone; the amount of sheer data is overwhelming. So, one core purpose of AI for the globalists becomes clear – AI is meant to streamline mass surveillance and automate it. AI is meant to scour social media or electronic mail for “key words” to identify potential miscreants and opposition. It is also meant to monitor public sentiment towards specific issues or governments. The goal is to gauge and eventually “predict” public behavior.

    This becomes more difficult when we start talking about individuals. While groups are more easily observed and mapped in their behavior, individuals can be abrupt, volatile and unpredictable. AI mapping of personal habits is also prominent today. It is more visible in the corporate world where marketing is tailored to individual consumer patterns and interests. That said, governments are also highly interested in tracking individual habits to the point of creating psychological profiles for every person on the planet if possible.

    This all boils down to the idea that AI will one day be able to identify criminals before they ever commit an actual crime. In other words, AI is meant to become and “all seeing eye” that not only monitors our behavior, but also reads our minds as a force for a pre-crime identification.

    The question is not whether AI can actually tell us who is a future criminal. AI is obviously incapable of accurately predicting a person’s behavior to such a degree. The question is, WHO is setting the standards that AI is looking for when identifying potential “criminals”? Who gets to set the rules of the chess game? If an algorithm is programmed by a globalist, then AI will label anti-globalists as future or current criminals. AI does not truly think. AI does not enact the power of choice in its decisions. AI does as it is programmed to do.

    The globalist obsession with AI, however, goes far beyond centralization and control of populations. As noted above, there is a religious factor.

    In my recent article ‘Luciferianism: A Secular Look At A Destructive Belief System’, I outlined the root philosophy behind the globalist cult. The primary tenet of luciferianism is the idea (or delusion) that certain special people have the ability to become “gods”. But, there are some consequences of this belief that I did not explore in that article.

    First, in order to become a god, one would have to have total observational power. Meaning, you would have to be able to see all and know all. Such a goal is foolish, because observing everything does not necessarily mean a person knows everything. Total observation would require total objectivity. Bias blinds people to the truth right in front of their faces all the time, and globalists are some of the most biased and elitist people on the planet.

    Completely objective observation is impossible, at least, for humans and the algorithms they program. From physics to psychology, the observer always affects the observed and vice versa. That said, I think the globalists don’t really care about this reality. It is enough for them to pretend they are gods through mass surveillance. They aren’t actually interested in attaining godlike enlightenment or objectivity.

    Second, to become a god, in a mythological or biblical sense, one would be required to create intelligent life from nothing. I believe that in the minds of the luciferians the creation of AI is the creation of an intelligent life form, rather than software. Of course, luciferians have a disturbed notion of what constitutes “intelligent life”.

    As I examined in my article breaking down and debunking luciferian ideology, the existence of inherent psychological archetypes form the basis for the human ability to choose, or to be creative in their choices. The existence of inherent understanding of good and evil establishes the foundation of human conscience and moral compass – the “soul” if you will. Luciferians argue despite ample evidence that none of this actually exists. They argue that humans are blank slates – machines that are programmed by their environment.

    To understand this ideology or cult built on blank slate theory, we must consider the fact that globalists often exhibit the traits of narcissistic sociopaths.  Full blown narcissistic sociopaths make up less than 1% of the total human population; they are people who actually lack any inherent empathy or the normal personality tools that we would associate with humanity.  It would not be an exaggeration to say that such people are more like robots than people.

    I have also theorized that luciferianism is a religion designed by narcissistic sociopaths for narcissistic sociopaths.  It is a kind of binding or organizing tool to gather sociopaths into an effective group for mutual benefit – A club of parasites.  If this theory is true, then it represents something that is rarely if ever dealt with in mainstream psychological or anthropological observation; the existence of a cabal of narcissistic sociopaths conspiring together to hide their identities and to become more successful predators.

    To summarize, luciferianism is the perfect belief system for narcissistic sociopaths.  They are, in a way, inhuman.  They are blank slates devoid of humanity, and so they adopt a religion which treats this notion as “normal”.

    So, it makes sense that they would consider something as simple and empty as AI to be intelligent life.  As long as it is able to be programmed to act “autonomously” (which they seem to consider sentience), their definition of intelligent life is fulfilled. There is nothing intelligent about artificial intelligence when it comes to moral or creative actions, but narcissistic sociopaths have no concept of this anyway.

    I leave readers with this to consider; last year an AI program was given the task of creating its own works of art. The outcome was highly publicized and some of the art was sold for over $400,000. I inivte you to look at this artwork here if you have not seen it already.

    From what I have witnessed, the common human reaction to this “art” is for people to recoil in horror. It seems like a strange parroting of human elements of art, but with none of the soul. Intuitively, we understand that AI is not life; but for globalists it is the very definition of life, probably because the soulessness of the creation is reflective of the soulessness of the creators.  Just as Christians believe that mankind was made in the image of God, luciferians in their pursuit of godhood have created a “life form” that is perhaps ironically just like them.

    *  * *

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

  • Which Degrees Will Earn You The Most (And The Least)?

    There are a number of considerations to be made when deciding which degree course to pursue. Most people though will at least at some point think about their earning potential once they’ve graduated.

    According to gov.uk analysis, in England, the graduates earning the most compared to the average degree five years after graduation are those that studied medicine – coming in at 74.3 percent more for women and 62.7 percent for men. In second place for both genders is economics which on average allows graduates to bring home 54.8 percent (women) and 40.9 percent (men) more.

    Infographic: Which degree will earn you the most? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    At the other end of the spectrum, the graduates earning the least compared to the average degree five years after graduation are those that studied the creative arts – equating to 21 percent less for women and 29.2 percent less for men. 

    Infographic: Which degree will earn you the least? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

  • Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor Snow Will Stop The Post Office From Spying On You

    Authored by John Kiriakou via ConsortiumNews.com,

    It’s called the “Mail Cover Program” and it’s run by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). Yes, even the Post Office is spying on us…

    “We also spy on you.” (Wikimedia Commons)

    You may remember that last year some nut was arrested for mailing bombs to prominent Democrats, media outlets, and opponents of Donald Trump. Less than a week after the bombs went out, a suspect was arrested. Almost immediately, video turned up of him at a Trump rally, wearing a “Make America Great Again” hate and chanting for the camera. He was soon tried, convicted, and jailed. End of story.

    But it wasn’t the end of the story. The investigation into the bomb incidents focused attention on an almost unknown federal surveillance program—one that poses a direct threat to the privacy and constitutional rights of every American. It’s called the “Mail Cover Program” and it’s run by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). Yes, even the Post Office is spying on us.

    The Mail Cover Program allows postal employees to photograph and send to federal law enforcement organizations (FBI, DHS, Secret Service, etc.) the front and back of every piece of mail the Post Office processes. It also retains the information digitally and provides it to any government agency that wants it—without a warrant.

    In 2015, the USPS Inspector General issued a report saying that, “Agencies must demonstrate a reasonable basis for requesting mail covers, send hard copies of request forms to the Criminal Investigative Service Center for processing, and treat mail covers as restricted and confidential…A mail cover should not be used as a routine investigative tool. Insufficient controls over the mail cover program could hinder the Postal Inspection Service’s ability to conduct effective investigations, lead to public concerns over privacy of mail, and harm the Postal Service’s brand.”

    Return to Sender

    Not only were the admonitions ignored, the mail cover program actually expanded after the report’s release. Indeed, in the months after that report was issued, there were 6,000 requests for mail cover collection. Only 10 were rejected, according to the Feb. 2019 edition of Prison Legal News (P.34-35) .

    I have some personal experience with the Mail Cover Program. I served 23 months in prison for blowing the whistle on the CIA’s illegal torture program. After having been locked up for two months, I decided to commission a card from a very artistically-inclined prisoner for my wife’s 40th birthday. I sent it about two weeks early, but she never received it. Finally, about four months later, the card was delivered back to me with a yellow “Return to Sender – Address Not Known” sticker on it. But underneath that sticker was a second yellow sticker. That one read, “Do Not Deliver. Hold For Supervisor. Cover Program.”

    Why was I under Postal Service Surveillance? I have no idea. I had had my day in court. The case was over. But remember, the Postal Service doesn’t have to answer to anybody – my attorneys, my judge, even its own Inspector General. It doesn’t need a warrant to spy on me (or my family) and it doesn’t have to answer even to a member of Congress who might inquire as to why the spying was happening in the first place.

    The problem is not just the sinister nature of a government agency (or quasi-government agency) spying on individuals with no probable cause or due process, although those are serious problems. It’s that the program is handled so poorly and so haphazardly that in some cases surveillance was initiated against individuals for no apparent law enforcement reason and that surveillance was initiated by Postal Service employees not even authorized to do so. Again, there is no recourse because the people under surveillance don’t even know that any of this is happening.

    Perhaps an even more disturbing aspect of the program is the fact that between 2000 and 2012, the Postal Service initiated an average of 8,000 mail cover requests per year. But in 2013, that numberjumped to 49,000. Why? Nobody knows and the Postal Service doesn’t have to say.

    The question, though, is not how many cases are opened under the Mail Cover Program or even how many requests there are for the information. The real question is, “How is this constitutional?” Perhaps a secondary question is, “Why hasn’t anybody challenged the program in the courts?” In general, Americans don’t–or at least haven’t–objected to a gradual loss of civil liberties and constitutional rights. That has to stop. When even the Post Office is spying on you, you know the republic is in trouble.

  • Dershowitz Suggests Press Blackout During "Orgy Island" Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Hearing

    The legal team for Attorney Alan Dershowitz has cautioned against press access to a hearing regarding his former client and associate, convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein – who was given a slap on the wrist in 2008 by then-US Attorney for southern Florida (and current Labor Secretary) Alex Acosta. Epstein sexually abused dozens of underage girls in his Palm Beach mansion, while Acosta is under fire separately of the sealed records appeal. 

    Epstein, a billionaire and friend of the Clintons (Bill Clinton flew on his “Lolita Express” Boeing 727 jet dozens of times), was convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution – on of two counts for which he served 13 months in “custody with work release.” 

    Epstein, now 66, reached the deal in 2008 with then-Miami U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta’s office to end the federal probe that could have landed him in prison for life. Epstein instead pleaded guilty to lesser state charges, spent 13 months in jail, paid financial settlements to victims and is a registered sex offender. –Time

    Background facts from 2/21/2019 ruling in Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 vs. United States

    The sealed records appeal relates to a 2015 defamation lawsuit in New York brought by Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre says Maxwell helped Epstein traffic herself and other underage girls to sex parties at the billionaire pedophile’s many residences. The case was settled in 2017 and the records were sealed – leading to an appeal by the Miami Herald and several other parties seeking to make them public in the hopes of shedding more light on the scope of Epstein’s crimes – along with determining who else was involved and whether any undue influence tainted the case.

    Oral arguments are scheduled Wednesday. 

    Dershowitz’s attorney asked a New York judge whether the media should be barred from Wednesday’s hearing in the US District Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, since “his oral arguments on behalf of his client could contain sensitive information that has been under seal,” reports the Miami Herald‘s Julie K. Brown. 

    The appeals court had not responded to his concern as of Friday, but if the hearing is closed during his lawyer’s argument, it would represent the latest in a long history of successful efforts to keep details of Epstein’s sex crimes sealed.

    …

    Two women — one of whom was underage — have said Epstein and his partner, British socialite and environmentalist Ghislaine Maxwell, directed them to have sex with Dershowitz, 80, and other wealthy, powerful men. Dershowitz and Maxwell have denied the claims. –Miami Herald 

    Dershowitz – having been publicly implicated in Epstein’s crimes by Giuffre, attempted to have the judge to unseal certain records in the case which he claims will exonerate him. Conservative pundit Mike Cernovich, a Dershowitz associate, also filed a motion to release some of the sealed documents. Both requests were denied in 2016, as the case (which settled in 2017) was ongoing, with the judge citing the need to avoid taining a potential jury pool. 

    After the case was settled, the Herald filed a more extensive motion, arguing that with the case now closed, all the documents should be made public. The motion, filed in April 2018, came as the Herald was working on an investigative series, Perversion of Justice, which detailed how Epstein and his lawyers manipulated federal prosecutors to obtain one of the most lenient sentences for a child sex offender in history.

    Dershowitz’s lawyer, Andrew G. Celli Jr., emphasized to the Herald that Dershowitz is not trying to ban the media from the proceeding; he is simply giving the court a heads up that his arguments could include information that has never been made public because it’s under seal. –Miami Herald 

    “What the letter says very clearly is we intend to make reference to the sealed material in open court, so we want to notify the judges that this is my intention to make my arguments,” said Dershowitz attorney, Andrew Celli. “We want the courtroom to be open so long as we can argue the substance of what we want to unseal.”

    First Amendment Foundation executive director Barbara Petersen suggested that Dershowitz’s request has come across as more of a “veiled threat.” 

    “It’s like ‘if you don’t keep out the media, then we are going to reveal stuff and let the chips fall where they may,’” said Petersen. “They don’t want it to come out and they don’t want to make a motion and ban the media, so they are hoping the judges do it for them.” 

    Separately, over a dozen House Democrats signed a letter last week demanding that the DOJ reopen the Epstein investigation after a Florida judge ruled that labor secretary Alex Acosta violated the law by not informing Epstein’s victims about his sweetheart plea deal. 

    “We urge the DOJ to reopen the non-prosecution agreement to allow for a thorough investigation of these heinous crimes,” reads the letter to newly minted Attorney General William Barr. Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) was the lead signatory on the letter. 

    “While the government spent untold hours negotiating the terms and implications of the (agreement) with Epstein’s attorneys, scant information was shared with victims,” wrote Judge Kenneth A. Marra of the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. “Instead, the victims were told to be ‘patient’ while the investigation proceeded.”

    Bradley Edwards, an attorney representing two of the victims, says that Marra’s decision should mean that Epstein’s plea deal is thrown out – possibly exposing him to federal charges once again. Epstein’s plea deal also granted immunity to anyone who assisted him in procuring underage girls or concealing their abuse. 

    “Rather than work to correct the injustices done to the victims, the government spent 10 years defending its own improper conduct,” Edwards told Time in an email. “It is time for the government to work with the victims, and not against them, to hold everyone who committed these crimes accountable.“

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    */

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    <!–*/

    */

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

    /*–>*/

  • University Denounces "Repulsive" Selfie Of White Students In "Charcoal Face Masks"

    Authored by Greg Piper via The College Fix,

    Image itself – not just the caption – shows ‘racism’

    The University of Tennessee-Knoxville isn’t waiting to investigate before making broad, public denunciations of its own students and launching an inquisition.

    It released a statement Thursday that claimed its students had been caught wearing blackface, citing a Snapchat photo that another student tweeted earlier in the day.

    The photo itself doesn’t suggest any intent. One student with a mud-colored substance on his face appears to be taking a selfie of himself and three friends, including another student with thinner charcoal streaks on his face who is looking away. They both appear to be shirtless.

    What set off outrage was the caption:

    “We for racial equality boys. Bout to get this free college now that I’m black.”

    The administration didn’t wait for context before publicly denouncing the image itself – not just the caption – as “repulsive.” It said flatly that the image by itself showed “blackface” and “racism.” The Bias Education and Response Team – which the statement misnamed – and Office of the Dean of Students is “determining how to handle this incident.”

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

    The student who tweeted the photo shared responses she got from students who claimed to be in the photo, including the lone female and the selfie taker.

    “I literally thought he was just taking a picture of his face mask,” she wrote. “I wasn’t aware the guy in [sic] who made the post made a racist comment with it.”

    The selfie taker, identified as Ethan Feick, confirmed the substances on their faces were “charcoal face masks” intended to “help with acne.” He took responsibility for the caption, a “joke that was certainly not funny in the least.”

    Yahoo named all four students in the photo on Thursday and linked Feick’s Twitter account, which he has since removed. Another Twitter user responded to the original poster with screenshots of the students’ Instagram accounts.

    Out of all the users calling for the punishment and expulsion of the students, one objected:

    This isn’t really Blackface … because it’s not inherently making fun of black people, just a benefit we have in the American education system.

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

    The Knoxville News Sentinel also said the image appears to show the two students wearing “a black skin care mask.” It reported Friday that Vice Chancellor for Student Life Vince Carilli called the image a “hate-filled act” that has “prompted anger and fear in our community.”

    Randy Boyd, interim president of the UT System, also tweeted his appreciation for the Knoxville administration’s “swift response” to a photo it didn’t bother investigating before denouncing its students.

    A protest on campus defending its controversial “Sex Week” morphed into a protest against the Snapchat photo, according to the Sentinel.

    The UTK administration has yet to respond to a College Fix email Friday afternoon asking if it had confirmed the students were intending to display blackface, or that one of them had written the caption, before denouncing them in its Thursday missive to the community.

    The administration has already suggested that it won’t release the results of its investigation if it doesn’t fit the narrative it’s currently peddling. “Federal law prohibits the university from sharing how the university handles matters with individual students,” it wrote Thursday.

    Universities often misuse the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act to hide information that is not covered by the law, as its legislative sponsor has acknowledged.

    h/t Inside Higher Ed

  • Boeing Unveils "Wingman" Combat Drone That Supports Stealth Jets 

    Boeing Australia has announced plans to manufacture a drone with artificial intelligence that can act as a “loyal wingman” for fourth and fifth generation aircraft.

    On Wednseday, Defence Minister Christopher Pyne unveiled the Boeing Airpower Teaming System (ATS), an Australian-designed unmanned platform that flies alongside high-value assets such as the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet, Boeing P-8 Poseidon, and Boeing E-7 Wedgetail.

    Designed by Boeing Phantom Works in Brisbane, the largest Boeing development center outside the US, the ATS will be the first combat aircraft designed and manufactured in Australia since the Jindivik drone of the 1950s.

    The drone was developed in connection with the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) and the Defence Science & Technology (DST) Group. Boeing further partnered with other defense firms such as BAE Systems Australia, Ferra Engineering, RUAG Australia, Micro Electronic Technologies, AME Systems, and Allied Data System, for the ATS development program.

    “The partnership will produce a concept demonstrator of a low cost unmanned ‘Loyal Wingman’ aircraft, capable of operating in concert with Air Force’s fifth generation air combat capability,” Minister Pyne said in a statement.

    “There is significant value investing in innovative, future leaning initiatives like this, particularly in the early conceptual stages where Defence can explore concepts and define the role such capabilities can play in our national security framework.”

    The first version of the ATS will employ electronic warfare sensors. Boeing said future versions of the drone would incorporate various types of advanced weaponry. 

    The drone’s artificial intelligence will allow it to fly independently or support manned aircraft while maintaining a safe distance between other aircraft, Boeing said.

    The 38-foot-long, jet-powered drone, with a range of 2,000 miles, will be able to conduct electronic warfare, intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance missions. 

    “The Boeing Airpower Teaming System will provide a disruptive advantage for allied forces’ manned/unmanned missions,” vice president and general manager of Boeing Autonomous Systems, Kristin Robertson said.

    “With its ability to reconfigure quickly and perform different types of missions in tandem with other aircraft, our newest addition to Boeing’s portfolio will truly be a force multiplier as it protects and projects air power.”

    Boeing said it would manufacture the drone in Australia, with the future intent to exporting to allied countries once series production begins.

  • California Bill Would Legalize Crypto For Tax Payments From Cannabis-Related Businesses

    Authored by Ana Alexandre via CoinTelegraph.com,

    Lawmakers in the United States state of California have introduced a bill to allow cannabis-related business to pay fees and taxes in stablecoins. The bill was introduced by the California State Assembly on Feb. 21.

    image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

    Assembly Bill 953 would allow the state, city and county tax offices in California to accept stablecoins — cryptocurrency pegged to a physical asset or a fiat currency — from cannabis-related companies seeking to pay their excise or cultivation taxes, with effect from Jan. 1, 2020. The bill further reads:

    “The bill would authorize that city or county in determining that method to either accept stablecoins directly into a digital wallet controlled by that jurisdiction or to utilize a third-party digital asset payment processor that allows for the immediate conversion of any payments made by stablecoins into United States dollars and deposit into an account of that jurisdiction.”

    Cannabis has been legalized in several states in the U.S. However, cannabis businesses have difficulty securing simple financial services from banks, the vast majority of which are secured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and are thus prohibited from servicing an industry that is still deemed illegal under federal law.

    Cannabis dispensaries can hold hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash at any given time. The bill is apparently an attempt to curtail the vast amounts of cash that end up in state tax offices and need to be processed. California State Treasurer Fiona Ma recently testified before the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services regarding the tax collection process for cannabis businesses. She stated:

    “Duffel bags and sometimes suitcases of cash would arrive quarterly at some of our designated offices and some business owners had to drive 350 miles to pay their taxes.”

    In 2017, the Dash network began implementing Dash as a payment option in the cannabis industry’s point of sale devices. In doing so, Dash reportedly aimed to save the industry 10-15 percent, as the decreased flow of paper money will stymie the need for cash boxes, safes and guards.

    Other U.S. states have also introduced bills that would allow tax payments in cryptocurrency. In January, legislators in the U.S. state of New Hampshire proposed a bill to accept Bitcoin (BTC) for state payments. “This bill requires the State Treasurer […] to develop an implementation plan for the state to accept cryptocurrencies as payment for taxes and fees beginning July 1, 2020,” the document reads.

  • Retail Apocalypse: 465 Store Closures In 48 Hours

    Following government shutdown delays, data for Dec and Jan spending and income collapsed on Friday. This was one of the most significant drops in consumer spending since the financial crash.

    As if the situation wasn’t already dire enough, US consumers dialed back their spending in the last several months has put a sizeable dent into sales growth and foot traffic at US malls.

    Last month, we noted that the “Retail Apocalypse” Isn’t Over: It Is Only Just Getting Started”.

    We were right.

    Fox 5 NY is reporting that major chains such as Gap, JCPenney, Victoria’s Secret and Foot Locker have all announced massive closures, totaling more than 465 stores in the last 48 hours.

    All four companies reported its fourth-quarter results last week for the holiday period, with three of them (Gap, JCPenney and Victoria’s Secret) reporting a sizeable decline in same-store sales, while Foot Locker had modest growth.

    With somewhat decent growth, because apparently, consumers still need to walk, Foot Locker shocked investors Friday with 165 store closures across the country.

    That comes less than 24 hours after Gap told investors it would close 230 over the next several years after the company’s same-store sales plunged 7% during the holiday quarter.

    If the hemorrhaging wasn’t enough, JCPenney was back on the chopping block with 18 more department store closures through the second half of this year, including three from January.

    Bob Phibbs, CEO of New York-based consultancy the Retail Doctor, believes JCPenney will announce another round of stores closures in the second half.

    “It is mind boggling that JC Penney still thinks they have time when the clock has run out and there’s no real plan. Closing 18 stores is barely a drop in the bucket of JC Penney’s more than 850 stores. If this was a big, bold effort to reinvigorate the brand, they would have announced they were closing hundreds of stores and investing in an outstanding experience at their other locations,” Phibbs told FOX Business.

    That builds on recent store closure announcements by Gymboree, Payless ShoeSource, Charlotte Russe and Ann Taylor, to name a few. Even Tesla last week announced it would be closing most of its US showrooms.

    A whopping 4,500 store closures have been announced by retailers in the first several months of this year. The number is expected to increase in the coming months, as growth prospects for the US economy are expected to be at near zero for the first quarter.

  • CNN Analyst And Former Obama Admin Official Compares Trump's CPAC Speech To Hitler

    One CNN analyst and former Obama administration official was clearly triggered by President Trump’s rambling, expletive-filled, two-hour-plus CPAC address.

    During an appearance on CNN where she offered some “informed commentary” on Trump’s speech, Sam Vinograd, a former member of Obama’s national security council, said Trump’s “xenophobic” talking points about immigrants and white heritage reminded her of  “certain leader” who presided over a genocidal European regime during the first half of the 20th century.

    Though she didn’t use said leader’s name, we think it’s pretty clear to whom she’s referring (spoiler alert: It’s Hitler).

    “Well, Ana, his statement makes me sick, on a personal level, preserving your heritage, reclaiming our heritage, that sounds a lot like a certain leader that killed members of my family and about six million other Jews in the 1940s,” Vinograd began. “But our national security level, the president talks about preserving our heritage as a catch-all for implementing policies that misallocate resources.”

    “He pretends there are massive flows of illegal immigrants coming over our borders and is spending billions of dollars on a border wall emergency, instead of paying attention to real national security threats. He sounds a lot like despotic leaders that have talked about white heritage and white nationalism around the world and is putting resources in the wrong place, and pretending that there are foreign people trying to influence our country in a way that just isn’t accurate.”

    Of course, the fact that, by comparing Trump to Hitler, Vinograd contributed to the trivialization of the historical plight of the Jewish people was apparently lost on her.

    She also slammed Trump for “denigrating our institutions” and suggested that Trump’s talking points mirrored the of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    “He denigrated our institution, the Department of Justice and U.S. Congress. He spread misinformation and conspiracy theories, he undermined the credibility of several of our institutions, he sewed divisions, he sewed confusion, he was speaking to his base, but he was also saying things that really looked like Vladimir Putin scripted his speech.”

    It’s just the latest example of “Trump Derangement Syndrome” run amok on “the most trusted voice in news”.

    Trump

    Tears

    By the way, if you’re confused about what Putin’s to-do list looks like, allow Vinograd to fill you in.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Digest powered by RSS Digest