Today’s News 8th July 2024

• Escobar: Why The SCO Summit In Kazakhstan Was A Game-Changer
  Escobar: Why The SCO Summit In Kazakhstan Was A Game-Changer

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  It’s impossible to overstate the importance of the 2024 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) this week in Astana, Kazakhstan. It can certainly be interpreted as the antechamber to the crucial BRICS annual summit, under the Russian presidency, next October in Kazan.

  

  Let’s start with the final declaration. As much as SCO members state “tectonic shifts are underway” in geopolitics and geoeconomics, as “the use of power methods is increasing, with norms of international law being systematically violated”, they are fully engaged to “increase the SCO’s role in the creation of a new democratic, fair, political and economic international order.”

  Well, there could not be a sharper contrast with the unilaterally-imposed “rules-based international order”.

  The SCO 10 – with new member Belarus – are explicitly in favor of “a fair solution to the Palestinian issue”. They “oppose unilateral sanctions”. They want to create a SCO investment fund (Iran, via acting President Mohammad Mokhber, supports the creation of a SCO common bank, just like the NDB in BRICS).

  Additionally, members that “are parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty stand for compliance with its provisions”. And crucially, they agree that “interaction within the SCO may become the basis for building a new security architecture in Eurasia.”

  The last point is actually the heart of the matter. That’s proof that Putin’s proposal last month in front of key Russian diplomats was fully debated in Astana – following Russia’s strategic deal with the DPRK de facto linking security in Asia as indivisible with security in Europe. That is something that remains – and will continue to remain – incomprehensible for the collective West.

  A new Eurasia-wide security architecture is an upgrade of the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership – involving a series of bilateral and multilateral guarantees and, in Putin’s own words, open to “all Eurasian countries that wish to participate”, including NATO members.

  The SCO should become one of the key drivers of this new security arrangement – in total contrast with the “rules-based order” – alongside the CSTO, the CIS and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

  The road map ahead of course includes socio-economic integration and the development of international transportation corridors – from the INSTC (Russia-Iran-India) to the China-supported “Middle Corridor”.

  But the two crucial points are military and financial: “To gradually phase out the military presence of external powers” in Eurasia; and to establish alternatives to “Western-controlled economic mechanisms, expanding the use of national currencies in settlements, and establishing independent payment systems.”

  Translation: the meticulous process conducted by Russia to deliver a fatal blow to Pax Americana is essentially shared by all SCO members.

  Welcome to SCO+

  President Putin laid down the basic tenets further on down the road when he confirmed the “commitment of all member states to forming a fair world order based on the central role of the UN and commitment of sovereign states to mutually beneficial partnership.”

  He added, “the long-term goals for further expansion of cooperation in politics, economy, energy, agriculture, high technologies and innovation are stated in the project of development strategy of SCO till 2035.”

  That’s a quite Chinese approach to long-term strategic planning: China’s five-year plans are already mapped out all the way to 2035.

  President Xi doubled down when it comes to the leading Russia-China strategic partnership: both should “strengthen comprehensive strategic coordination, oppose external interference and jointly maintain peace and stability” in Eurasia.

  Once again, that’s Russia-China as leaders of Eurasia integration and the drive towards a multi-nodal world (italics mine; nodal with an “n”).

  The summit in Astana showed how the SCO has really stepped up the game after incorporating India, Pakistan and Iran – and now Belarus – as new members, plus establishing key players such as Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Azerbaijan as dialogue partners, and strategic Afghanistan and Mongolia as observers.

  It’s a long way from the original Shanghai Five – Russia, China, plus three Central Asian “stans” – setting up the organization back in 2001, essentially as an anti-terrorism/separatism body. The SCO has evolved into serious geoeconomic cooperation, discussing in detail, for instance, supply chain security issues.

  The SCO now goes way beyond a Heartland-focused economic and security alliance, as it covers 80% of the Eurasian landmass; accounts for more than 40% of the world’s population; boasts a 25% share of global GDP – and rising; and generates global trade value of over $8 trillion in 2022, according to Chinese government numbers. Add to it SCO members hold 20% of global oil reserves and 44% of natural gas.

  So it’s no wonder that a key development this year at the Palace of Independence in Astana was the first meeting of the SCO +, under the theme “Strengthening Multilateral Dialogue”.

  A real who’s who of SCO partners was there, from President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and President of Turkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to member of the Supreme Council of the Emirates Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi, Chairman of the People’s Council of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and SCO Secretary-General Zhang Ming.

  Russia’s bilaterals with many of these SCO+ actors were quite substantial.

  India’s PM Modi did not go to Astana, sending FM Jaishankar, who maintains fabulous relations with Foreign Minister Lavrov. Modi was re-elected to his third term last month and is up to his neck working the domestic front, with his BJP now commanding a much narrower majority in Parliament. Next Monday he will be in Moscow – and will meet Putin.

  Proverbial Divide and Rule hacks seized Modi’s no-show in Astana as proof of a serious India-China rift. Nonsense. Jaishankar, after a bilateral meeting with Wang Yi, stated – in a very Chinese metaphorical way – that “the three mutuals – mutual respect, mutual sensitivity and mutual interest – will guide our bilateral ties.”

  That applies to their still unresolved border standoff; to the delicate balance New Delhi has to find to appease the Americans in their Indo-Pacific obsession (no one across Asia uses the term “Indo-Pacific”; it’s Asia-Pacific); and also relates to Indian aspirations when it comes to beinga leader of the Global South compared to China.

  China does regard itself as part of the Global South. Wang Yiwei from Renmin University, the author of arguably the best book on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), argues that Beijing welcomes a “sense of identity” provided by the fact it represents the Global South and has been obliged to resist Washington’s hegemony and “deglobalisation” rhetoric.

  The New Multi-Nodal Matrix

  Astana once again revealed how the main drivers of the SCO are advancing fast on everything from energy cooperation to cross-border transportation corridors. Putin and Xi discussed progress in the construction of the massive Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline as well as Central Asia’s need to have China as a provider of funds and technology to develop their economies.

  China is now Kazakhstan’s largest trading partner (two-way trade at $41 billion, and counting). Crucially, when Xi met Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, he backed Astana’s bid to join BRICS+.

  Tokayev was beaming: “Deepening friendly and strategic cooperation with China is an unswerving strategic priority for Kazakhstan.” And that means more projects under BRI.

  Kazakhstan – which shares a border of more than 1,700 km with Xinjiang – is absolutely central on all these fronts: BRI, SCO, EAEU, soon BRICS and last but not least, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

  That’s the famous Middle Corridor linking China to Europe via Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Georgia, Turkiye and the Black Sea.

  Yes, this corridor skips Russia: the key reason is that Chinese and European traders are terrified of American secondary sanctions. Beijing, pragmatically, supports building this corridor as a BRI project since 2022. Xi and Tokayev actually opened what can also be called the China-Europe Trans-Caspian Express via video link; they saw the first Chinese trucks arriving on the road to a Kazakh Caspian Sea port.

  Xi and Putin discussed the corridor, of course. Russia understands the Chinese constraints. And after all Russia-China trade uses its own – sanction-proof – corridors.

  Once again, Divide and Rule hacks – oblivious to the obvious, not to mention finer points of Eurasia integration – resort to their same old dusty narrative: the Global South is fractured, China and Russia don’t see eye to eye on the role of the SCO, BRI and the EAEU. Nonsense, again.

  All fronts are progressing in parallel. The SCO Development Bank was initially proposed by China. The Russian Ministry of Finance – which is a mammoth organization, with 10 vice-Ministers – was not so keen, on the grounds that Chinese capital would flood Central Asia. Now that’s changed, as Iran – which has strategic partnerships with both Russia and China – is quite enthusiastic.

  The strategically important China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway – a BRI project – developed slowly, but now will be on overdrive, by a mutual Putin-Xi decision. Moscow knows that Beijing – fearing the sanctions tsunami – cannot use the Trans-Siberian as the main overland trade route to Europe.

  So the new Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway is the solution, reducing the journey to Europe by 900km. Putin personally told Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov there’s no Russian opposition; on the contrary, Moscow fully supports interconnected projects launched by BRICS and/or financed by the EAEU.

  It’s fascinating to watch the Russia-China dynamic in play at the heart of multilateral organizations such as the SCO. Moscow sees itself as a leader of the coming multipolar order even if it does not consider itself, technically, as a member of the Global South (Lavrov insists on “Global Majority”).

  As for Russia’s “pivot to the East”, it actually started in the 2010s, even before Maidan in Kiev, when Moscow started to seriously consolidate relations with, well, the Global South.

  It’s no wonder that now Moscow clearly sees the new evolving multi-nodal reality – SCO and SCO+, BRICS 10 and BRICS+, EAEU, ASEAN, INSTC, new trade settlement platforms, the new Eurasian security architecture – as the beating heart in the complex, long-term strategy of meticulously shattering the domination of Pax Americana.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 07/08/2024 – 02:00

• This Is Democracy And This Is What It Looks Like
  This Is Democracy And This Is What It Looks Like

  Authored by Lawrence Kadish via The Gatestone Institute,

  Democracy and American politics are chaotic, unpredictable, and a mystery to our enemies.

  

  In response to the Biden-Trump presidential faceoff, the Russian media is having a field day, believing that our national conversation over the recent debate reflects democracy’s dry rot. Consider this quote….

  The result “is good for us,” stated Dmitri Novikov, a Russian legislator, when being interviewed on state television.

  “Destabilization inside an adversary is always a good thing.”

  To paraphrase a line from a Warner Brothers character, “He doesn’t know us very well… do he…”

  He certainly doesn’t know his history.

  The Japanese looked at a raucous Congress in 1940 and discerned a democracy in disarray.

  And then the vote to institute the draft was by a razor-thin majority, and the Japanese knew for sure this was a weak, indecisive nation incapable of responding to the might of their fierce Imperial military.

  They would be forced to rethink that position as their delegation made its way to the USS Missouri to sign the instruments of surrender in Tokyo Harbor.

  Hitler also viewed the United States as incapable of excelling at anything other than automobiles.

  In declaring war on America in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attack, he viewed our nation as morally corrupt, riven by racial unrest, and fielding an army smaller than 17 other nations.

  Contempt would be the least of his views about a nation that would ultimately accept the Third Reich’s unconditional surrender.

  So now the Russians – and likely the Chinese – are looking at our chaotic presidential politics and the vociferous remarks made by political partisans on both sides, and making the same historic mistake committed by our earlier enemies.

  They believe we are a nation that is slowly unraveling, making room for their despotic regimes to dominate the globe.

  Not a chance.

  This is democracy and this is what it looks like.

  Raucous, gruff, and even divisive, something unimaginable in countries where freedom is punished with prison.

  Or worse. And then, as we celebrate the Fourth of July, our nation comes together as Americans to celebrate not just our independence, but the role freedom has played in celebrating the spirit of mankind.

  Enjoy the Fourth, my fellow Americans, for it will confound our enemies and give comfort to all those around the world currently enslaved and who cherish our nation as a beacon of hope.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 23:20

• Ammo Vending Machines Arrive At Grocery Stores In Red States 
  Ammo Vending Machines Arrive At Grocery Stores In Red States 

  Nothing says ‘Merica like supermarkets with automated vending machines stocked with ammunition. A select number of supermarkets across Alabama and Oklahoma have these new machines. This means you can leave the store with milk, eggs, and boxes of 9mm and .223 rounds. 

  American Rounds installed AI-powered ammunition vending machines in several Alabama and Oklahoma supermarket stores. These vending machines are said to feature built-in AI technology, card scanning capability, and facial recognition software to verify that buyers are 21 or older and match the identity on the license. 

  “Our automated ammo dispensers are accessible 24/7, ensuring that you can buy ammunition on your own schedule, free from the constraints of store hours and long lines,” American Rounds notes on its website. 

  American Rounds shows six supermarkets, including two Fresh Value stores in Alabama and four Super C Mart stores in Oklahoma, have these new retail automated ammo dispensers. 

  

  In an interview with Newsweek, Grants Magers, CEO of American Rounds, said that the company’s AI-powered ammunition vending machines have recently been expanded to eight across four states. 

  “We have over 200 store requests for AARM [Automated Ammo Retail Machine] units covering approximately nine states currently and that number is growing daily,” Magers said. 

  He continued by suggesting these vending machines support “law-abiding, responsible gun ownership, adding, “Currently ammunition is sold off the shelf or online. These environments lead to inadvertent sales to underaged purchasers and or, in the case of retail stores, a high theft rate.” 

  Magers told local media outlet Oklahoma KOCO-TV that machines will have no ammo restrictions and are restocked weekly. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 22:45

• Nature Sets Barriers To Risky Viruses, While China's Gain-of-Function Study Is Breaking Them
  Nature Sets Barriers To Risky Viruses, While China’s Gain-of-Function Study Is Breaking Them

  Authored by Yuhong Dong M.D., Ph.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  We’re not afraid of the tigers in the zoo because we trust they cannot attack. But what if someone opens the cage?

  Many viruses are highly lethal in nature but cannot infect humans. Fear arises when these viruses break the species barrier.

  This can happen naturally or through risky research practices, particularly gain-of-function (GOF) research.

  

  What Is GOF?

  Just as all substances have functions, specific genes enable viruses to spread rapidly or cause severe diseases. GOF research involves introducing new functioning genes into a virus, enhancing its ability to infect hosts or increasing its virulence.

  There are at least three main types of new functions a virus can gain:

  

  • Expanded Host Range GOF research can enable viruses to infect new species that they previously could not. This includes crossing the species barrier to infect humans, which poses significant risks for zoonotic outbreaks and potential pandemics. A 2015 Nature Medicine article provides a pertinent example. A bat-derived SARS-like coronavirus, initially noninfectious to humans, became capable of human infection after GOF studies at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

  • Enhanced Transmission GOF research can result in viruses gaining the ability to spread more efficiently between hosts. This includes changes that allow a virus to be transmitted through new routes or, more effectively, through existing ones. In 2012, GOF research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison significantly transformed the H5N1 bird flu virus. Initially non-airborne, the virus acquired the ability to transmit through the air, demonstrating the profound impact of GOF studies on viral capabilities.
  • Increased Virulence Viruses can gain mutations that make them more virulent, meaning they can cause more severe diseases in infected hosts. This can involve an enhanced ability to evade the host’s immune system or increased replication rates within the host. A 2022 preprint paper shows researchers at Boston University created a lethal version of the Omicron variant.

  GOF can also be used to generate positive traits in germs. For example, by adding a human insulin gene, a germ gains the new function of producing insulin.

  GOF Research of Concern

  Because viral genes are relatively easy to edit, GOF studies frequently involve viruses. However, some of these studies carry significant risks and can lead to dire consequences.

  The U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) defines GOF research of concern as “research that can be reasonably anticipated to generate a pathogen with pandemic potential,” characterized by two attributes:

  1. Highly transmissible, with the potential to spread widely and uncontrollably among human populations
  2. Highly virulent and likely to cause significant morbidity and/or loss of human life

  If accidentally released from a lab into the general population, such pathogens could cause uncontrollable hazards. Additionally, the military application of GOF falls within the scope of bioweapon threats.

  Methods of GOF research generally include genetic editing, which involves directly modifying a virus’ genes, and reassortment, which involves combining genetic material from different viral strains to create new variants.

  In reality, the scope of GOF research can be much broader. Due to viral genes’ highly variable and adaptable nature, even routine culturing of viruses in cells or animals can lead to unexpected genetic alterations.

  Double-Edged Sword

  Scientists often conduct GOF research to understand the viruses and develop drugs or vaccines.

  While these reasons may sound scientifically justified, the main debate centers on the risks versus the assumed benefits. GOF research can theoretically aid in studying viral mechanisms and provide insights for developing drugs or vaccines. However, the associated risks are significant, particularly the potential to generate dangerous pathogens.

  A decade ago, two published studies on bird flu viruses were conducted by a U.S. lab and a Dutch lab, sparking significant discussion.

  Both studies were designed to better understand how the viruses’ genes could be modified to make them more transmissible in mammals. The goal was to help people better prepare for a potential future pandemic.

  Unexpectedly, after both groups of researchers separately edited the genes of a deadly H5N1 bird flu virus, they produced new strains capable of easily spreading via air droplets between mammals.

  The edited virus could spread more easily among mammals and became easier to transmit to humans.

  “Why would scientists deliberately create a form of the H5N1 avian influenza virus that is probably highly transmissible in humans?” This critical question was raised in a 2012 Nature article.

  Subsequently, in October 2014, U.S. authorities announced a “pause” on funding for 18 GOF studies involving influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses.

  The pause was short-lived. In 2018, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Dutch Healthcare Authority approved funding for further GOF research, sparking another wave of objections. Harvard University epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch expressed concerns in a Science article, stating that scientists are being asked to “trust a completely opaque process where the outcome is to permit the continuation of dangerous experiments.”

  Finally, after yielding to public pressure, investigators for the two research studies declined to renew the grants originally submitted for their GOF research. Consequently, such bird flu GOF studies were officially halted in the United States in 2020.

  In the United States and most European countries, where scientists can express their opposing opinions, the development of GOF experiments faces multiple regulatory hurdles and ethical reviews.

  However, in countries without these safeguards, the pursuit of GOF research could proceed unchecked, potentially putting the world at significant risk.

  

  China’s Bird Flu GOF Research

  Risky GOF studies on bird flu viruses in China have been underway since the 2010s.

  In a study published in Science in May 2013, a group of scientists at Harbin Veterinary Research Institute in Harbin, China, conducted GOF research by combining the highly lethal but not easily transmissible H5N1 avian influenza virus, with the highly contagious H1N1 swine flu strain, which infected millions of people in 2009.

  The resulting hybrid viruses were then tested for their ability to infect mammals, revealing the potential risks associated with such genetic manipulation of pathogens. This research underscored the dual-use nature of gain-of-function studies, highlighting both their potential to inform pandemic preparedness and the significant biosafety and biosecurity concerns they raise.

  As a result, the researchers created a new, more virulent virus. An H5N1 hybrid strain, which integrated genes responsible for transmissibility from the H1N1 virus, acquired the capability to easily spread among guinea pigs through respiratory droplets.

  In 2021, a collaborative project involving researchers from the United States, the United Kingdom, and China sought to enhance surveillance and vaccine development. While not explicitly labeled as a GOF study, these experiments conducted in a Chinese laboratory involved genetic modifications typical of GOF research.

  The experiments used a routine viral laboratory research approach known as “serial passage,” which involves growing the virus from one cell or animal model to another. Viral mutations with greater transmissibility or pathogenicity can often be selected during this process. The animal models were also carefully chosen to reproduce the virus for specific research purposes. We’ve explained this in detail in a previous article.

  Nonetheless, the most widely known GOF studies conducted in China involve research on coronaviruses.

  Breaking the Barrier

  Bats are known carriers or natural reservoirs of many viruses. Bat-hosting coronaviruses typically only infect bats or wild animals, not humans. However, this situation has changed with the advent of GOF research.

  In 2015, a team of Chinese scientists conducted GOF studies on a bat coronavirus at the WIV, which is affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and under the administration and control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

  In this study, the researchers took the gene for spike protein—the spike-shaped structure on the surface of a virus—from a bat SARS-like virus and inserted it into the backbone of a SARS virus, the virus that caused the first pandemic of this century.

  The newly created SARS-like virus, coded as SCH-014-MA15, could infect human airway cells and achieve a transmission similar to the SARS virus. It also gained the ability to infect mammals like mice and successfully cause lung diseases.

  

  The WIV has also conducted other GOF research on bat SARS-like viruses with effective results.

  According to a leaked 2014 NIH report, WIV researchers experimented on a natural bat coronavirus capable of binding with human ACE2 receptors, significantly increasing its potency. They used this bat virus to engineer three new chimeric coronaviruses.

  The results showed that in the lungs of mice, these newly created coronaviruses produced far more virus particles—up to 10,000 times higher than the original virus.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 22:10

• Mapping Hurricane Risk On America's Eastern Seaboard
  Mapping Hurricane Risk On America’s Eastern Seaboard

  Hurricanes are a fact of life for people living along America’s Atlantic Coast. Of course, the risk of a hurricane making landfall varies depending where people live along that expansive coastline.

  This infographic, via Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley, uses data from the Tropical Cyclone Impact Probabilities database at Colorado State University to show county-level risk (the red parts) of a hurricane impact, along with population centers along the coast (the spikes).

  

  Potential Hurricane Hotspots

  While a hurricane can make landfall anywhere along the coast, there are places where the probability of that happening is higher in 2024.

  Below is the full list of counties and states, which includes other countries in North America as well, including Mexico (which, at the time of publishing, is being battered by Hurricane Beryl).

  State	County	Hurricanes (1880-2020)	Avg Probability of Hurricane Impact (2024)
  Alabama		46	43%
  Alabama	Baldwin	28	29%
  Alabama	Mobile	28	29%
  Connecticut		11	13%
  Connecticut	Fairfield	9	10%
  Connecticut	Middlesex	10	11%
  Connecticut	New Haven	11	13%
  Connecticut	New London	10	11%
  Delaware		9	10%
  Delaware	Kent	4	5%
  Delaware	New Castle	1	1%
  Delaware	Sussex	9	10%
  Florida		115	75%
  Florida	Bay	26	27%
  Florida	Brevard	26	27%
  Florida	Broward	36	35%
  Florida	Charlotte	26	27%
  Florida	Citrus	26	27%
  Florida	Collier	34	34%
  Florida	Dixie	19	21%
  Florida	Duval	22	23%
  Florida	Escambia	27	28%
  Florida	Flagler	22	23%
  Florida	Franklin	21	23%
  Florida	Gulf	23	24%
  Florida	Hernando	26	27%
  Florida	Hillsborough	27	28%
  Florida	Indian River	26	27%
  Florida	Jefferson	14	16%
  Florida	Lee	28	29%
  Florida	Levy	22	23%
  Florida	Manatee	28	29%
  Florida	Martin	27	28%
  Florida	Miami-Dade	37	36%
  Florida	Monroe	50	46%
  Florida	Nassau	20	22%
  Florida	Okaloosa	24	25%
  Florida	Palm Beach	34	34%
  Florida	Pasco	26	27%
  Florida	Pinellas	26	27%
  Florida	Santa Rosa	25	26%
  Florida	Sarasota	26	27%
  Florida	St. Johns	23	24%
  Florida	St. Lucie	23	24%
  Florida	Taylor	16	18%
  Florida	Volusia	26	27%
  Florida	Wakulla	18	20%
  Florida	Walton	26	27%
  Georgia		51	46%
  Georgia	Bryan	21	23%
  Georgia	Camden	18	20%
  Georgia	Chatham	22	23%
  Georgia	Glynn	15	17%
  Georgia	Liberty	22	23%
  Georgia	McIntosh	21	23%
  Louisiana		68	56%
  Louisiana	Cameron	23	24%
  Louisiana	Iberia	25	26%
  Louisiana	Jefferson	30	31%
  Louisiana	Lafourche	33	33%
  Louisiana	Orleans	23	24%
  Louisiana	Plaquemines	35	35%
  Louisiana	St. Bernard	33	33%
  Louisiana	St. Mary	27	28%
  Louisiana	St. Tammany	24	25%
  Louisiana	Terrebonne	34	34%
  Louisiana	Vermilion	24	25%
  Maine		10	11%
  Maine	Cumberland	3	4%
  Maine	Hancock	6	7%
  Maine	Knox	6	7%
  Maine	Lincoln	3	4%
  Maine	Sagadahoc	3	4%
  Maine	Waldo	3	4%
  Maine	Washington	6	7%
  Maine	York	5	6%
  Maryland		16	18%
  Maryland	Anne Arundel	1	1%
  Maryland	Baltimore	1	1%
  Maryland	Baltimore City	1	1%
  Maryland	Calvert	2	2%
  Maryland	Cecil	1	1%
  Maryland	Dorchester	5	6%
  Maryland	Harford	0	0%
  Maryland	Kent	0	0%
  Maryland	Queen Anne’s	1	1%
  Maryland	Somerset	9	10%
  Maryland	St. Mary’s	3	4%
  Maryland	Talbot	1	1%
  Maryland	Wicomico	6	7%
  Maryland	Worcester	13	15%
  Massachusetts		22	23%
  Massachusetts	Barnstable	13	15%
  Massachusetts	Dukes	11	13%
  Massachusetts	Essex	7	8%
  Massachusetts	Nantucket	14	16%
  Massachusetts	Norfolk	7	8%
  Massachusetts	Plymouth	10	11%
  Massachusetts	Suffolk	7	8%
  Mississippi		47	43%
  Mississippi	Hancock	22	23%
  Mississippi	Harrison	26	27%
  Mississippi	Jackson	24	25%
  New Hampshire		8	9%
  New Hampshire	Rockingham	5	6%
  New Jersey		10	11%
  New Jersey	Atlantic	10	11%
  New Jersey	Burlington	8	9%
  New Jersey	Cape May	10	11%
  New Jersey	Essex	4	5%
  New Jersey	Hudson	4	5%
  New Jersey	Middlesex	5	6%
  New Jersey	Monmouth	9	10%
  New Jersey	Ocean	10	11%
  New Jersey	Salem	2	2%
  New Jersey	Union	4	5%
  New York		14	16%
  New York	Bronx	7	8%
  New York	Kings	6	7%
  New York	Nassau	8	9%
  New York	New York	9	10%
  New York	Queens	8	9%
  New York	Richmond	7	8%
  New York	Suffolk	12	14%
  New York	Westchester	7	8%
  North Carolina		68	56%
  North Carolina	Beaufort	22	23%
  North Carolina	Bertie	15	17%
  North Carolina	Brunswick	32	32%
  North Carolina	Camden	20	22%
  North Carolina	Carteret	46	43%
  North Carolina	Chowan	17	19%
  North Carolina	Craven	31	31%
  North Carolina	Currituck	22	23%
  North Carolina	Dare	45	42%
  North Carolina	Gates	12	14%
  North Carolina	Hertford	11	13%
  North Carolina	Hyde	45	42%
  North Carolina	New Hanover	32	32%
  North Carolina	Onslow	35	35%
  North Carolina	Pamlico	31	31%
  North Carolina	Pasquotank	19	21%
  North Carolina	Pender	35	35%
  North Carolina	Perquimans	18	20%
  North Carolina	Tyrrell	26	27%
  North Carolina	Washington	19	21%
  Rhode Island		11	13%
  Rhode Island	Bristol	8	9%
  Rhode Island	Kent	8	9%
  Rhode Island	Newport	10	11%
  Rhode Island	Providence	9	10%
  Rhode Island	Washington/South	9	10%
  South Carolina		48	44%
  South Carolina	Beaufort	22	23%
  South Carolina	Charleston	33	33%
  South Carolina	Colleton	26	27%
  South Carolina	Georgetown	27	28%
  South Carolina	Horry	32	32%
  South Carolina	Jasper	21	23%
  Texas		64	54%
  Texas	Aransas	16	18%
  Texas	Brazoria	25	26%
  Texas	Calhoun	20	22%
  Texas	Cameron	20	22%
  Texas	Chambers	24	25%
  Texas	Galveston	29	30%
  Texas	Harris	24	25%
  Texas	Jefferson	25	26%
  Texas	Kenedy	21	23%
  Texas	Kleberg	19	21%
  Texas	Matagorda	27	28%
  Texas	Nueces	21	23%
  Texas	Refugio	14	16%
  Texas	San Patricio	17	19%
  Texas	Willacy	19	21%
  Virginia		31	31%
  Virginia	Accomack	13	15%
  Virginia	Gloucester	7	8%
  Virginia	Hampton	12	14%
  Virginia	Lancaster	5	6%
  Virginia	Mathews	7	8%
  Virginia	Middlesex	5	6%
  Virginia	Newport News	8	9%
  Virginia	Norfolk	12	14%
  Virginia	Northampton	13	15%
  Virginia	Northumberland	5	6%
  Virginia	Poquoson	9	10%
  Virginia	Portsmouth	10	11%
  Virginia	Suffolk	11	13%
  Virginia	Virginia Beach	18	20%
  Virginia	York	9	10%
  Canada		48	44%
  New Brunswick		11	13%
  Newfoundland and Labrador		24	25%
  Nova Scotia		44	41%
  Prince Edward Island		9	10%
  Mexico		83	64%
  Campeche		33	33%
  Quintana Roo		57	50%
  Tabasco		8	9%
  Tamaulipas		43	41%
  Veracruz		32	32%
  Yucatan		43	41%
  Anguilla		28	29%
  Antigua and Barbuda		23	24%
  Aruba		7	8%
  Bahamas, The		106	72%
  Barbados		9	10%
  Belize		30	31%
  Bermuda		42	40%
  Bonaire		5	6%
  Cabo Verde		4	5%
  Cayman Islands		37	36%
  Costa Rica		3	4%
  Cuba		102	71%
  Curacao		6	7%
  Dominica		21	23%
  Dominican Republic		61	52%
  Grenada		10	11%
  Guadeloupe		28	29%
  Guatemala		23	24%
  Haiti		42	40%
  Honduras		46	43%
  Jamaica		36	35%
  Martinique		17	19%
  Montserrat		22	23%
  Nicaragua		25	26%
  Panama		1	1%
  Puerto Rico		38	37%
  Saba		23	24%
  Saint Kitts and Nevis		32	32%
  Saint Lucia		15	17%
  Saint Martin		23	24%
  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines		13	15%
  Sint Eustatius		23	24%
  Sint Maarten		23	24%
  Trinidad and Tobago		3	4%
  Turks and Caicos		32	32%
  UK Virgin Islands		35	35%
  US Virgin Islands		30	31%

  The counties that make up the southern tip of Florida have the highest risk of a major hurricane impact. Monroe County, which includes Key West, has a 46% chance of a hurricane impact, and a 27% chance of a major hurricane impact.

  Another potential hurricane hotspot is the Outer Banks region of North Carolina. Three counties that include the Outer Banks find themselves in the top five ranking for hurricane impact risk. Unlike Florida though, the risk of a major hurricane impact is much lower.

  The three counties along the coast near Houston, Texas, have between 25–30% risk of a hurricane impact. Galveston is no stranger to hurricane activity. The constant threat of storms making impact was one reason Houston—which is further inland—grew to be the much bigger city.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 21:35

• Californians Will Decide On Minimum Wage, Rent Control, Slavery, & More In November
  Californians Will Decide On Minimum Wage, Rent Control, Slavery, & More In November

  Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times,

  California voters will decide on 10 ballot measures in November, addressing a wide range of issues including the minimum wage, rent control, public safety, taxes, education, and health care.

  Each of the initiatives – including three state constitutional amendments and two multibillion-dollar bonds – will need approval from at least 50 percent of voters to pass.

  

  State Constitutional Amendments

  Prop. 3: Marriage Equality (ACA 5)

  The California Constitution currently states that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in the state, but federal law prevents the enforcement of this provision.

  A yes vote on this ballot measure means removing this state constitutional rule and establishing marriage as a fundamental right for all individuals.

  Prop. 5: Local Taxes to Fund Housing (ACA 1)

  This state constitutional amendment, if approved, will make it easier for local governments to approve bonds and special taxes for affordable housing and public infrastructure projects.

  A yes vote means the threshold to pass such bonds and taxes would reduce from a two-thirds supermajority to 55 percent.

  Prop. 6: Ban Slavery (ACA 8)

  A yes vote on this state constitutional amendment would ban forced prison labor by abolishing slavery in any form.

  It specifically targets various labor practices involving prison inmates, citing that many are compelled to work in roles such as firefighting and road paving.

  The measure would additionally prevent the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from punishing inmates who refuse to work. It also clarifies the department can still give credits—which can help advance the release date or parole hearing date, depending on the sentence—to inmates who choose to work voluntarily.

  Bonds

  Prop. 2: Education Bond

  Voters will weigh in on a $10 billion education bond designed to allocate state funds for the renovation of school buildings that are 75 years old or older. Additionally, the bond will finance testing and remediation efforts for lead contamination in school water systems.

  Should this measure be approved, it would be the first voter-sanctioned education construction bond since Proposition 51 in 2016, which authorized $7 billion for the construction and repair of public school facilities in California.

  Prop. 4: Climate Bond

  Voters will decide on a $10 billion bond aimed at prioritizing safe and affordable drinking water, wildfire prevention, extreme heat mitigation, sustainable agriculture, and clean, renewable energy.

  The proposed bond would allocate at least 40 percent of the $10 billion to disadvantaged communities.

  If approved, it will mark the largest climate investment ever made by California and the most substantial climate measure approved by voters in the United States.

  Other Ballot Initiatives

  Prop. 32: Minimum Wage

  Under the Living Wage Act, the state’s minimum wage increased to $16 earlier this year and will rise to $17 in January for businesses with more than 25 employees.

  A yes vote on the proposed ballot measure means the minimum wage will continue increasing to $18 in January 2025. Employers with fewer than 25 workers would increase from $16 to $17 in 2025 and then $18 in 2026.

  If passed, California’s minimum wage will be the highest in the nation, surpassing the $17 minimum wage of the District of Columbia.

  Prop. 33: Rent Control

  The proposed measure, titled Justice for Renters Act, seeks to repeal the nearly three-decades-old Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prevents local governments from setting rent caps on housing built after 1995 and single-family homes.

  A yes vote means the local governments will have more authority to regulate rental rates and to expand rent control to properties that were previously exempt.

  This marks the third attempt to implement rent limits in California since the state’s Rental Housing Act’s passage in 1995. Similar initiatives in 2018 and 2020 both failed to pass.

  Prop. 34: Direct Patient Care

  A yes vote on this initiative means certain healthcare providers must spend 98 percent of revenue from a 2000 federal prescription drug discount program on direct patient care. The law, if passed, will apply to providers that spent over $100 million in any 10-year period on anything other than direct patient care, and operated multifamily housing with more than 500 severe violations, according to the ballot summary.

  It also permanently authorizes the state to negotiate Medi-Cal drug prices for the whole state, the summary says.

  The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that enforcing the measure could increase state government costs by millions annually, due to compliance and enforcement.

  Prop. 35: Tax on Medi-Cal Insurance Providers

  A yes vote means a current tax on health care insurance providers, originally set to expire in 2026, will be extended indefinitely to fund health care for those covered by the Medi-Cal program.

  It also mandates that the tax revenues—collected on monthly enrollments—must only be used for specific Medi-Cal services like primary and specialty care, emergency services, family planning, mental health care, and prescription drugs.

  Prop. 36: Reform Prop. 47

  Initially passed by voters in 2014, Proposition 47 aimed to lower prison populations by downgrading some felony theft and drug crimes to misdemeanors. Ten years later, Prop. 47 returns to the ballot for voters to decide whether to reform the law amid heightened concerns about public safety across the state.

  A yes vote on the reform proposal means strengthening penalties for repeat offenders and allowing prosecutors to charge felonies for certain drug and theft crimes.

  The initiative also encourages offenders to join drug rehabilitation programs to avoid prison sentences.

  On July 1, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers introduced a competing ballot measure that also aims to reform Prop. 47, more moderately. However, he backed out at the last minute and withdrew the effort.

  Removed From Ballot

  Five initiatives were recently pulled from the ballot due to repetitive bills, moot bills, or compromises in the Legislature, and one because of concern about the costliness of advertising the initiative due to the crowded list of measures now qualified for the ballot.

  The initiatives covered such topics as low-income housing projects, tax increases, personal finance courses for high schoolers, workplace justice, and child health care.

  A voting threshold initiative, ACA 13, was moved to November 2026.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 21:00

• "Overlapping Emergencies" Pushes Countries To Bolster Food Supply Stocks 
  “Overlapping Emergencies” Pushes Countries To Bolster Food Supply Stocks 

  A new report warns that “the world entered an age of overlapping emergencies” and indicates the need for a new stabilization approach involving a buffer system to mitigate price volatility in essential commodities to promote economic stability and growth. 

  “The neoliberal stabilization paradigm of interest rate hikes and austerity left economies around the world unprepared for the shocks to essentials experienced in the overlapping emergencies of war, conflict, climate change, and pandemic,” the lead author, Isabella Weber, of the University of Massachusetts Amherst, wrote in the report. 

  

  Weber said, “More regular supply shocks are likely for food. Extreme weather events are predicted to be frequent and have already affected regional agricultural yields.” 

  “We argue that in an age of overlapping emergencies, such a new paradigm requires a refocusing on stabilization policies for essential sectors that have the potential to unleash systemic instabilities when hit by shocks,” she wrote, adding, “We revisit the classic case for public buffer stock systems.”

  She noted, “Price volatility in essential commodities can lead to sellers’ inflation because of the interaction with administered prices in the industrial sector and can hamper growth and development prospects.” 

  Separately, Bloomberg reported that Norway has initiated a plan to increase its domestic grain stockpiles.

  “This is about being prepared for the unthinkable,” Finance Minister Trygve Slagsvold Vedum said last week. 

  Norway plans to shield its citizens from commodity price spikes by storing up to 82,500 tons of state-owned grains at private companies. This buffer system will protect citizens for about three months and will be fully operational in 2029. 

  The latest data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) shows global food prices increased for the third consecutive month in May.

  

  The FAO Food Price Index on a year-over-year change shows that price acceleration could resume in the near future. 

  

  “Countries are getting more and more nervous,” Chris Hegadorn, adjunct professor of global food politics at Sciences Po in Paris, told Bloomberg. 

  Hegadorn said, “Price volatility continues to be a major problem that countries are looking for extra security.”

  It’s not just countries that are nervous about another food price spike…

  

  Let’s not forget that elevated food inflation crushes the working poor, leaving governments more suitable to food riots.

  Food inflation will by stick this decade. Get use to high supermarket prices. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 20:25

• Murthy: Gun Owners Are A Disease
  Murthy: Gun Owners Are A Disease

  Authored by Mike McDaniel via American Thinker,

  Until 1996, one of the primary tactics of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists was to treat criminal misuse of guns, as well as accidents and suicides as public health matters. There was, of course, no disease vector, no virus, bacteria or parasite. There could be no vaccine, no medication, no treatment. None of that was the point. If they couldn’t disarm law-abiding Americans any other way, they’d try to do it under the “public health” banner.

  Fortunately for free Americans, in 1996 this language was inserted into a budget bill:

  “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”

  That simple sentence, that law, drove supposed medical scientists obsessed with gun control underground. They still did anti-gun advocacy and “research” with public funds, they were just quiet about it, funneling money and “research” through NGOs and anti-gun groups.

  

  Take the link to see an NPR article about how, for more than a quarter century, they’ve done all they can to circumvent the law. And now, the Surgeon General, in what may be the dying days of the Mummified Meat Puppet Administration, is saying the quiet part out loud. Dr. Vivek Murthy, on June 25, released a report titled “U.S. Surgeon General Issues Advisory on the Public Health Crisis of Firearm Violence in the United States.”  

  Today, United States Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy released a landmark Surgeon General’s Advisory on Firearm Violence, declaring firearm violence in America a public health crisis. Firearm violence is pervasive, with more than half (54 percent) of U.S. adults or their family members having experienced a firearm-related incident in their lives. Over the last decade, the number of people who have died from firearm-related injuries, including suicides, homicides, and accidental deaths, has been rising, and firearm violence is now the leading cause of death among children and adolescents.  

  That 54% figure was derived from a telephone poll of 1271 English speakers and 73 Spanish speakers. Those doing the polling claim it is a “nationally representative sample,” but they publish nothing on the geographical distribution of the poll. Obviously, any poll that focused on blue state urban areas would produce different results than more broadly based polling. Oddly, the document is labeled “KFF Health Tracking Poll/ KFF Covid-19 Vaccine Monitor.” What that might have to do with gun issues is anyone’s guess.

  The assertion “firearm violence is now the leading cause of death among children and adolescents” is likewise misleading. This is an old trick of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists. That assertion is only potentially accurate if one includes people 18+, suicides, accidents and gangs shooting each other. One would think, considering how the federal public health bureaucracy threw away its credibility over fraudulent Covid huckstering, they’d go overboard to be accurate and truthful, but they’ve obviously learned nothing.

  Murthy’s report notes the “Black community endured the highest firearm homicide rates in every age group,” but doesn’t mention this is because Black criminals commit all manner of violent crimes in numbers far outstripping their numbers in the population. Nor does Murthy mention Democrats have done all they can to help those criminals, releasing them without bail, refusing to prosecute, decriminalizing crime in general, and in the rare cases where violent felons are prosecuted, imposing ridiculously light sentences.

  As one might imagine, Murthy’s recommendations conform exactly to Joe Biden’s handler’s anti-liberty, unconstitutional, demands:

  3. Firearm risk reduction strategies, such as:

  a. Requiring safe and secure firearm storage, including child access prevention laws;

  b. Implementing universal background checks and expanding purchaser licensing laws;

  c. Banning assault weapons and large capacity magazines for civilian use;

  d. Treating firearms like other consumer products, including requiring safety testing or safety features;

  e. Implementing effective firearm removal policies when individuals are a danger to themselves or others; and

  f. Creating safer conditions in public places related to firearm use and carry.

  Every one of these anti-gun wish list fever dreams would violate the Bruen decision.  For example “d” is an attempt to violate The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. And “f” is a stealth for establishing “gun free” zones that would encompass entire cities, even entire states. All are an attempt to directly infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans. Criminals—surprise!—don’t obey  gun laws.

  It should be no surprise the Surgeon General of a lawless administration should himself violate federal law. It reminds us of this quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson: “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

  We thought we had to keep a close eye on the health establishment over Covid and actual diseases. Now we have to keep an eye on them as they try to treat an unalienable, fundament right as a disease, and Americans exercising it, as a disease vector to be eradicated.

  Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, life-long athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 19:50

• These Are The Hottest (And Coldest) Temperatures Ever Recorded In America
  These Are The Hottest (And Coldest) Temperatures Ever Recorded In America

  The United States has experienced severe heat waves this summer, breaking daily temperature records and causing dangerous consequences like wildfires nationwide.

  This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, shows the hottest and coldest temperatures ever recorded in the United States.

  

  Data was sourced from the National Centers for Environmental Information.

  California and Alaska Hold Records for Extreme Temperatures

  Extreme heat is a deadly phenomenon, responsible for approximately 1,220 fatalities each year in the United States.

  The hottest temperature ever recorded in the country was an astonishing 134.4°F (56.7°C) in Death Valley, California, on July 10, 1913. This stands as the highest ambient air temperature ever recorded on the surface of the Earth. However, this reading, along with several others from that period, is disputed by some modern experts.

  Death Valley has a subtropical, hot desert climate characterized by long, extremely hot summers, short, warm winters, and minimal rainfall. Its extreme dryness is due to its location in the rain shadow of four major mountain ranges.

  

  Conversely, the coldest temperature ever recorded was -80°F (-62.2°C) at Prospect Creek Camp, Alaska, on January 23, 1971. Prospect Creek is a very small settlement approximately 180 miles (290 km) north of Fairbanks. In the past, it was home to numerous mining expeditions and served as a camp for the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.

  Currently, and perhaps understandably, no permanent residents live in this area.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 19:15

• "Traitors" – Musk Blasts Democrats Voting Against Republicans' Election Integrity Bill
  “Traitors” – Musk Blasts Democrats Voting Against Republicans’ Election Integrity Bill

  Authored by Matt Margolis via PJMedia.com,

  Back in May, House Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled legislation designed to ensure that only American citizens vote.

  The unfortunate reality is that Joe Biden has let in millions of illegal immigrants, and the risk that these immigrants could influence our elections is extremely high. Legislation like this is absolutely necessary.

  Johnson was pushing for the bill before the Independence Day recess with a thread explaining what the legislation does to ensure that only U.S. citizens vote. 

  🧵The SAVE Act will safeguard our elections by ensuring only American citizens vote in federal elections.

  Here’s what the legislation does:

  — Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) July 5, 2024

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

  Many on the left oppose this legislation, claiming that it’s unnecessary because it is already illegal to vote if you’re not a U.S. citizen. However, Johnson addressed this when he introduced the bill earlier this year.

  “Some have noted that it’s already a crime for noncitizens to vote in a federal election, and that is true. But here are four things that are also true,” Speaker Johnson said back in May.

  “(1) It is true that there is no mechanism to ensure only those registering or voting are actually citizens…

  (2) It is true that Biden has welcomed millions and millions of illegal aliens, including sophisticated criminal syndicates and agents of adversarial governments, into our borders and even on humanitarian parole…

  (3) It is true that a growing number of localities are blurring the lines for noncitizens by allowing them to vote in municipal elections…

  (4) It is true that Democrats have expressed a desire to turn non-citizens into voters.”

  So, what does the bill do?

  Johnson explained in a thread on X/Twitter that the legislation requires state election officials to verify citizenship before providing voter registration forms, mandates proof of citizenship to register for federal elections, and accepts various documents to ease the registration process for citizens. It also gives states access to federal databases to remove noncitizens from voter rolls and confirms citizenship for those lacking proof.

  Additionally, it directs DHS to consider removal proceedings for noncitizens registered to vote and ensures naturalized citizens are notified of their voting rights.

  Who could oppose such commonsense legislation to protect our elections?

  The Democrats, of course. 

  [ZH: House Democratic leadership is bringing out the big guns against a Republican bill set to be voted on next week that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in federal elections, Axios has learned.

  In a whip question – a roundup of the coming week’s votes with instructions for how leadership wants rank-and-file members to vote – House Minority Whip Katherine Clark’s (D-Mass.) office told House Democrats they are “urged to VOTE NO” on the bill.

  That means that Democratic leadership will send its whip team to cajole colleagues into not supporting the legislation.

  The bill, Clark’s office said, would create an “extreme burden for countless Americans” and “further intimidate election officials and overburden states’ abilities to enroll new voters.”]

  

  Elon Musk weighed in on the proposed legislation by reposting Johnson’s thread on X.

  

  He dubbed those who oppose it “TRAITORS,” and then rhetorically asked what the punishment for treason is.

  Those who oppose this are traitors.

  All Caps: TRAITORS

  What is the penalty for traitors again? https://t.co/lyREyskPv4

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 5, 2024

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

  The punishment for treason in the United States, as laid out in 18 U.S. Code § 2381, is the death penalty, or a minimum of five years in prison.

  Also, they are to be fined no less than $10,000 and rendered constitutionally ineligible to hold office in the United States.

  I’m perfectly okay with Democrats who oppose election integrity being barred from holding office. How about you?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 18:40

• Western Elites Have A Reality Problem
  Western Elites Have A Reality Problem

  Authored by Richard Porter via RealClearPolitics,

  Joe Biden’s debate performance is not, and should not be seen as, a personal failure, but as another example of the systemic institutional breakdown that drives the populist revolt across the globe.  

  

  By vigorously denying the president’s obvious decline, liberals in the legacy media tried to make us believe something that obviously was untrue. The people who claim to want to protect Americans from disinformation and American institutions from being destroyed actively worked in direct opposition to the truth and, in doing so, undermined faith in one of the nation’s most iconic institutions — the office of the president of the United States. 

  Most people engage with reality pragmatically, not politically. We focus on solving the challenges of day-to-day life functionally, not as an ideological construct. We don’t make believe, we make do. We exist in a real world filled with actual challenges to be overcome, and we use our talents and willpower to make our lives better and achieve our personal dreams. 

  Sometimes, we need experts to study, media to report, and government to address systemic problems we encounter. Increasingly, however, Western intellectuals, senior business executives, government officials, and media thought leaders are divorced from the pragmatic reality in which “make-do” people live. 

  Elites are increasingly ideological and inventive. They seem to believe that their role is to make us believe what they imagine about us and the world around us instead of helping us deal with the actual reality in which we live. 

  Rather than making our lives better, elites are absorbed with making us better instead.

  Consider what elites want to make us believe:

  Unregulated immigration and open borders are not a problem. If you disagree, you’re  jingoistic or nativist or “Christian nationalist” or some other pejorative term.

  Police are bad and arresting criminals is white supremacy because criminals are disproportionately black – so “defund the police.” If you point out that fewer criminals in jail mean more crime in our neighborhood – racist!

  Climate change threatens the very existence of human life on earth and is the number one issue facing humanity – more important than crime, drugs, hunger, housing, China, immigration, or anything else in your silly, miserable little mind.  Anyone pointing out that it was warmer in the United States 90 years ago, or that in the 35 years during which this idea has captured elite imagination none of the apocalyptic forecasts has proven to be true, is a “denier” – as if disputing a flawed computer model’s projections for 90 years in the future is somehow akin to denying the appalling reality of the Holocaust 90 years in the past. 

  Sexual identity is a “cultural construct,” but gender is indelible – so a man can be a woman, and vice versa. Anyone who doesn’t accept this at face value is a hateful “transphobe” – or something.

  Western culture is institutionally racist. If you dare ask – which institution is racist? – you’ve merely confirmed your own bias. Everyone must be trained in the new racism – and so every institution of any size must train employees in DEI ideology to learn that getting ahead on merit is a myth and they are inherently “privileged” and therefore undeserving of the fruits of their labor.

  Hamas terrorists and their supporters in Gaza are the real victims, while the Israeli civilians they attacked, raped, and mutilated are inhumane.

  The litany goes on, seemingly forever, but COVID and the elites’ authoritarian response laid bare for many the extent to which institutions fail to serve but instead seek to make us believe things that are often observably untrue. Consider all the make-believe aspects of the pandemic: The new virus came from a market, not the laboratory in the same city where the U.S. funded Chinese research into enhancing similar viruses. It was a pandemic “of the unvaccinated.” If everyone wears a cloth or paper mask, it will stop the spread; standing six feet apart will also stop the spread; cannabis dispensaries are essential, but attending church is not; and Anthony Fauci is science.

  The divide between make-do and make-believe leadership does not correspond exactly to the partisan split between right and left. Across the ocean, Tories were crushed and Labour romped precisely because Tory leadership has been of the elite, make-believe variety – on immigration and COVID.  

  Ironically, Britain will veer deeper into make-believe with Labour, as the rest of the West experiences a course correction, thanks to the political engagement and revolt of those making do. A single election is not enough for Western institutions to return to reality, but it reflects at least a partial awakening.

  Events such as the conceptually absurd pro-Hamas protests in Western capitals and at leading Western educational institutions have had the effect of shocking go-along-to-get-along pragmatists within our elites into observing that Western culture has developed a reality problem.

  Ultimately, our culture needs courageous pragmatists among the elites to push back against their imaginative and ideological make-believe colleagues with resolution, reasoning, and ridicule.

  Here’s a way to start: Be gentle to those who imagine things that are not true, but don’t play along just to get along or to avoid being called names; question narratives, don’t parrot them; and only vote for those focused on making it easier for you to make do and achieve your own goals.

  Richard Porter is a lawyer in Chicago and National Committeeman to the RNC from Illinois.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 17:30

• How Do Americans Prepare For Retirement?
  How Do Americans Prepare For Retirement?

  While the U.S. has no mandatory retirement age and forcing older workers to retire is, in fact, illegal according to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the OECD’s Pensions at a Glance report suggests an effective labor market exit age of 65.2 for men and 65.3 for women in the United States in 2022.

  One possible reason for the U.S. ranking 13th out of 39 OECD countries regarding the highest retirement age is pensions without additional private savings not being sufficient to sustain an adequate standard of living.

  When choosing how to best save up for old age, there is a clear generational divide in the country.

  Statista’s Florian Zandt highlights a Consumer Insight survey from 2022 which shows that, on average, a savings book or deposit is still the most suitable method for many respondents, ranking particularly high among Baby Boomers (28 percent) and Gen Z (22 percent).

  The former group also heavily relies on overnight deposits, with 29 percent of survey participants investing in these specific types of deposits lasting from one day to the next.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Interestingly, real estate ranks highest in the age cluster of survey respondents aged 18 to 29. 24 percent of said respondents see it as best suited for retirement savings, even though median house sale prices increased by almost 30 percent between the first quarters of 2020 and 2024.

  Another popular retirement scheme in this group is company pension plans. The only cluster of respondents with a popularity share below 20 percent consisted of those born between 1965 and 1979.

  Trust in government pensions is low across the board, trailed only by investing in commodities like precious metals. As with savings books and company pensions, the former is seen as especially suitable by both the youngest and the oldest participants in the survey.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 16:55

• The Grim Reaper: Biden Declares Two Justices Will Be Gone In Four Years
  The Grim Reaper: Biden Declares Two Justices Will Be Gone In Four Years

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  One of the least discussed aspects of the interview with President Joe Biden last night was his declaration that two of the nine justices are not long for the Court. The question is which two are facing retirement or the reaper.

  

  In arguing for his remaining as the nominee despite record low polling, the President told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos with certainty that the next president “in going to appoint at least two new appointees.”

  That must be uneasy news for the relatively small court that almost of a third will soon pass . . . one way or another.

  Liberals have been pushing Sonia Sotomayor to retire, but she has clearly rejected those calls.

  On CNN, journalist Josh Barro bluntly wondered why Sotomayor remains on the bench when younger jurists could be brought on to guarantee a liberal vote for years to come. He indicated that many liberals are frustrated with her for not stepping down: “I find it a little bit surprising, given what Justice Sotomayor describes there about the stakes of what is happening before the Supreme Court, that she’s not retired. She’s 69 years old, she’s been on the court for 15 years.”

  At 70, Sotomayor shows no signs of mental decline. She has been a highly effective justice, stepping into the vacuum created by the death in 2020 of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Of course, few ever questioned the “Notorious RBG” in her decision to stay on the Court, despite her much older age and longer tenure. While some of us noted that Ginsburg was taking a huge risk in not allowing then-President Barack Obama to pick a successor, she remained on the Court in spite of medical problems and ultimately was replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

  Ginsburg, however, was almost 20 years older than Sotomayor.

  There is no concern for deterioration or death on the bench in Sotomayor’s case. It is simply a matter of swapping out justices like light bulbs before they burn out.

  All of the justices are younger than Ginsburg when she passed (and considerably younger than President Biden who is running for a second four-year term).

  • Justice Thomas, 76.

  • Justice Alito, 74.

  • Justice Sotomayor, 70.

  • Chief Justice Roberts, 69.

  • Justice Kagan, 64.

  • Justice Kavanaugh, 59.

  • Justice Gorsuch, 56.

  • Justice Jackson, 53.

  • Justice Barrett, 52.

  Justice Clarence Thomas is the oldest, but has not indicated that he is ready to retire. He would likely want to wait for a Republican president.

  If history is a measure, he has time. Oliver Wendell Holmes retired at 90.

  A recent analysis of the court’s projected composition suggested the next time the majority of justices will be appointed by a Democrat is likely to be around 2065.

  I did not find that analysis particularly compelling.

  However, I also fail to see how Biden can be certain that 2 of the 9 justices will die or retire. After all, even Thomas is six years younger than Biden.

  If he is predicting the death or retirement of Thomas within four years, he would presumably predict his own passing or retirement years ago.

  Running on the pledge to replace two departing justices could prove awkward if the justices are reluctant to be replaced or dispatched.

  This is not the first time that such premature claims led to the inconvenient lingering of the subjects:

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 16:20

• Comer Seeks Docs, Interview With White House Physician Who Obviously Lied
  Comer Seeks Docs, Interview With White House Physician Who Obviously Lied

  White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor – who for years has been giving President Biden a clean bill of health despite obvious signs of cognitive and physical decline – has some ‘splainin’ to do.

  

  On Sunday, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer demanded to interview O’Connor, and has suggested that the doctor’s involvement in a Biden family business dealing “may have” influenced his medical assessments of the president – who was found to be too cognitively impaired to prosecute for mishandling classified documents. 

  Specifically, O’Connor counseled James Biden in connection with alleged work he was performing for Americore Health, LLC – which paid James Biden $200,000 the same day James turned around and wrote Joe a check for $200,000 for an undocumented “loan repayment.”

  “Recently, it was reported that you have ‘never recommended that [President] Biden take a cognitive test,” Comer wrote O’Connor. “In February of this year, the Committee conducted a transcribed interview with James Biden. During the interview, James Biden confirmed that you provided him counsel in connection with the alleged work he was performing for Americore.“

  Comer has requested all documents and communications related to Americore, and wants him to sit for a transcribed interview.

  “To understand the extent of your involvement in the Biden family’s financial activity, we request that you produce all documents and communications in your possession regarding Americore and James Biden. Additionally, the Committee requests you make yourself available for a transcribed interview with Committee counsel. Please contact staff by July 14, 2024, to schedule the interview,” reads the letter reported by Just the News.

  Perhaps Comer will ask him about that Parkinson’s specialist who visited the White House at least 9 times in the past year.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 15:45

• "The Sh*t Is Going To Hit The Fan On Monday": DC In Turmoil As Biden Says Only 'Act Of God' Will Dislodge Him
  “The Sh*t Is Going To Hit The Fan On Monday”: DC In Turmoil As Biden Says Only ‘Act Of God’ Will Dislodge Him

  After years of feigned outrage every time conservative media mentioned Biden’s obvious mental decline, the Democratic party is in complete disarray just four months before the election following last month’s disastrous debate against an uncharacteristically quiet Donald Trump.

  

  On one hand, the Bidens now say it will take an ‘act of God‘ (so, the CIA) to remove him from the race.

  On the other hand, seven major news organizations have staged a mockingbirdian PR coup against the man for whom they’ve spent five years running cover.

  The list, per Just the News, includes:

  • The New York Times
  • The Atlanta Journal-Constitution 
  • The New Yorker
  • The Chicago Tribune
  • The Wall Street Journal
  • The Boston Globe.
  • The Economist

  Of course, if they really want to twist the knife…

  Dear liberal media, we know you are suddenly desperate to get rid of ole Joe. So there is this thing called Ashley Biden’s diary, you may finally want to look into that

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 6, 2024

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

  According to Axios, “outside Biden’s protective bubble, a fast-growing number of Democrats are praying for —and plotting — a more earthly intervention. They want everyone from the Obamas to congressional leaders to beg Biden to drop out by this Friday.“

  Really hard to put that “Democracy is on the ballot” talking point out there when the guy saying it is also saying that only God can remove him from office. https://t.co/okLTyNhLHm

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) July 7, 2024

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

  As Just the News further notes, five Democratic Reps. have publicly called for Biden to step aside.

  • Minnesota Rep. Angie Craig: “This is not a decision I’ve come to lightly, but there is simply too much at stake to risk a second Donald Trump presidency. That’s why I respectfully call on President Biden to step aside as the Democratic nominee for a second term as President and allow for a new generation of leaders to step forward.” 

  • Texas Rep. Lloyd Doggett: “I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so.” 

  • Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva: “What he needs to do is shoulder the responsibility for keeping that seat — and part of that responsibility is to get out of this race.” Per an aide in the congressman’s office who spoke on the condition of anonymity who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly. 

  • Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton: “President Biden has done enormous service to our country, but now is the time for him to follow in one of our founding father, George Washington’s footsteps and step aside to let new leaders rise up and run against Donald Trump.” 

  • Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley: “Mr. President, your legacy is set. We owe you the greatest debt of gratitude. The only thing that you can do now to cement that for all time and prevent utter catastrophe is to step down and let someone else do this.” 

  “The sh*t is going to hit the fan on Monday, when Congress returns,” one House Democrat told Axios. “People are scared about their own races. But they’re also worried about the country, and about democracy.”

  That said, Biden still has strong support from several prominent Democrats, including:

  • Vice President Kamala Harris
  • Gov. Gavin Newsom
  • Gov. Kathy Hochul
  • Gov. Gretchen Whitmer
  • Gov. Tim Walz
  • Gov. Wes Moore
  • Sen. John Fetterman
  • Sen. Chris Coons
  • Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi
  • Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee
  • Rep. Haley Stevens
  • Rep. Jasmine Crockett
  • Rep. John Garamendi

  Meanwhile…

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 15:44

• Building The Case For Rate Cuts
  Building The Case For Rate Cuts

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  A month ago we published our Updated Rate Outlook. As we start turning our attention to the Fed announcement on July 31st, we wanted to reiterate our view (I still think that there will be 2 to 3 cuts this year, for a total of 75 bps), and update some other thoughts given recent events. 2s and 10s are more in our year-end range than our end of summer range, and other yields are a touch lower than expected (but given recent volatility, that could change in a day).

  Using the Bloomberg WIRP (World Interest Rate Probability) function, we see the market has moved a touch in our direction on Fed probabilities.

  

  Basically, 75 bps by the end of January 2025, which I expect to be pulled forward.

  No Cut in July?

  We have argued, quite aggressively, that the Fed should make their first cut in July. Partly, because the economic data supports it (more on that in a minute), but it also takes the spotlight off of the Fed in the heat of the election.

  Regardless of whatever else we have learned about this election in the past few weeks, it has confirmed our view that much of it will be fought on social media. We’ve also learned or confirmed (depending on your starting point) that there are very few topics that are “off-limits” in our current election cycle.

  I physically wince at the thought of the first cut in September, stocks soaring 5%, and literally all hell breaking loose on social media as it is portrayed as helping the incumbents. It does not matter if that is true or not, social media is far more about “creating a good narrative and running with it” than with the truth. While I cannot confirm that there are more senior politicians discussing the Fed and talking about their mandate, or it is just a function of today’s media, but it seems like it.

  The data could easily justify a July cut, and from a political standpoint, it makes sense, but there does seem to be a risk that after getting “transitory” quite wrong, they are going to be overly cautious on cutting.

  The Data and the Trend in Data

  On a standalone basis, the jobs report would not signal the need for a rate cut. Academy’s NFP Instant Reaction – Goldilocks or Not? highlighted many of the reasons why this report was even better for bonds than the headline suggested.

  From a jobs standpoint, there is clear evidence that:

  • The job market, particularly the private sector, is hiring.
  • Increasingly, there is a belief that much of the “good” data has been overstated and will be revised down going forward.
  • Finally, it seems like this time last year, we were getting headline after headline of union negotiations resulting in record-breaking deals. That does not seem to be the case anymore. It is now possible to enter local establishments and not see “Help Wanted” signs plastered over the doors and walls.

  Since we are trying to develop better, faster, more reliable sources of data, we had to spend a few minutes looking at the online data. We are in the process of building a framework to track this more closely, but here are a few “interesting” anecdotes:

  • The Conference Board published their June HWOL Report (Help Wanted Online) and concluded that as of the end of May, there had been a 10% decline in job postings.
  • From May, the BBC’s Job Boards are still Rife with ‘Ghost Jobs’ is an interesting read and certainly fits my confirmation bias that many jobs listings are just fishing expeditions for good candidates (you never know who might apply), or are just easier to keep posted.
  • I was somewhat surprised when ChatGPT returned with:
    • “There are indeed more job postings on Indeed.com now compared to last year. The hiring market has shown significant growth, with companies adapting to new hiring practices post-pandemic, such as remote work, flexible schedules, and virtual interviews. This shift has allowed businesses to attract a more diverse talent pool and meet the increased demand for new employees. Employers have added hundreds of thousands of jobs early in the year, reflecting a positive trend in job availability and market growth (Indeed).”
  • I was surprised enough by that answer, that of course I clicked the link, only to find ChatGPT referenced a report from October 2021 (probably user error on my part).

  We are also starting to hear more about the Sahm Rule Recession Indicator. For long time T-Report readers, you know that I hate the use of “rules” around things that are conjectures, interesting theories, etc., but this “rule” will garner some discussion. The “rule” is that when the 3-month moving average for unemployment rises 0.5% above the minimum 3-month average in the past year, we are about to enter a recession.

  One year ago, the 3-month moving average was 3.6% and today it is 4% (this month was 4.1%). The good news is that the moving average from a year ago continues to rise, giving some buffer, but clearly, we are in the “zone” for people to notice this risk. Since the chart above is from the St. Louis Fed it seems reasonable to believe that it comes up as a discussion topic. While a year ago, when inflation seemed rampant and there was a lot of confusion about the effectiveness of Fed policy (supply chain issues, etc.), it may have made sense to force the country into a recession to fight inflation. That would seem very much like “cutting off the nose to spite the face” at this point in time.

  Speaking of Rules…

  Ok, I’ve already admitted that I don’t like the term “rules” as they are applied in economics, but the devil can quote scripture for his own purpose, so let’s look at the Taylor Rule.

  The Atlanta Fed Taylor Rule Calculator lets you estimate the Taylor “Rule” rate. Using three pre-filled scenarios, the calculation came up with estimates of 4.61%, 3.91%, and 3.79%. All of which are below today’s rate of 5.375%.

  Again, definitely not a “rule” (and looking at some historic charts, I’m not sure why it maintains that label as the deviations between the so-called “rule” and actual policy are often quite large), but it likely comes up in the conversation about appropriate monetary policy.

  Using ChatGPT I got the answer to the question of “using only the Taylor Rule, what should the fed funds rate be?”

  “According to the Taylor Rule, the federal funds rate should be approximately -1.165%. This negative rate indicates that the current economic conditions might call for an expansionary monetary policy, but in practice, rates are usually adjusted to be positive.”

  I can only assume that it meant to say it is 1.165% lower than the current fed funds rate, but who knows.

  Inflation – Saving the Best for Last

  Before diving into inflation, which warrants being the final section, at least in terms of how we are framing the argument, we want to touch on a few more “fringe” views

  Financial conditions. The Chicago Fed’s National Financial Conditions Index continues to show “easy” financial conditions (I am not sure why negative numbers are easy financial conditions and vice versa, but that is how this index is calculated). The “easy” financial conditions could give the Fed the excuse to keep their current rate policy.

  The arguments for lowering rates despite easy financial conditions would include:

  • We live in a world where we have forward guidance, dot plots, etc. Back in the Greenspan era, market participants literally watched to see which hand he was using to carry his briefcase for signals. We have come a long way and maybe so much more is priced into markets ahead of time that the financial conditions’ indices need to be updated (or ignored). Credit is a key reason why financial conditions are so good. That is a good thing as banks (and private credit) are competing to lend. It is a good thing because so many companies (and individuals) used the era of ZIRP to lock in low yields, so they are better creditors. All that is somewhat inflationary, but I cannot help but wonder if lower rates might discourage lenders? Banks, in particular, are able to access cheap funds from their deposit base, so they benefit from higher fed funds when they lend. The potential that lower yields could be disinflationary is a subject we will revisit in a moment.
  • To the extent that stock markets are impacting financial conditions, it seems like a good time to mention that the equal weighted indices, such as value and small caps (the Russell 2000 is down year-to-date), have not kept pace. While we can all question breadth or lack of breadth, the companies driving the growth are more about being at the cutting edge of a revolutionary new technology, than merely sopping up excess liquidity.

  Over time inflation gravitates towards the fed fund rate. This is a little “out there” and a decade or so ago it would have been anathema just to mention. But more and more people seem to be willing to at least discuss this possibility.

  The theory is that changes to fed funds, at least initially, act as expected on inflation. When you cut rates, you get growth and inflation, and vice versa. But, as rates stabilize for extended periods, they can become a “magnet” for inflation. During the years of ZIRP following the financial crisis, rates were low, but inflation also remained stubbornly low. Some (including me) argued that if you make the hurdle rate equal to 0%, then people and companies will produce if they can earn just above 0%. Businesses that might otherwise not be viable will be able to survive. That keeps supply high and prices lower. It seemed to create a lot of “zombie” companies. From a “behavioral” standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. Once 0% is established as the cost of doing business, it doesn’t take much to stay in business. Conversely (and even less well tested) is that if you keep rates at 5%, you set a hurdle rate of 5%, forcing inflation. People and companies only stay in business if they can beat 5%. It is not uncommon in other fields to have initial reactions change over time. Basically almost any drug fits this analogy, so why should it not be plausible in economics?

  

  There have been some good reports about how Net Interest Expense for Corporate America is actually Net Interest Income right now. Yes, there are a few companies with massive amounts of cash relative to their debt, but this is the first extended period (in at least 25 years) where the average coupon in the corporate bond index is significantly lower than fed funds. If the Fed was to cut a few times, the income generated on cash would drop immediately, but the average coupon wouldn’t budge. Is it not possible that a rate cut would slow spending and be deflationary?

  According to the SEC, money market funds had $6.4 trillion in AUM at the end of March. If you are not aware, Academy Securities offers several Academy Share Classes in the money market space – please contact your coverage officer about accessing these funds which are available on many large platforms. Using 5% and $6 trillion (to keep the math simple) that is $25 billion being pumped into the economy each and every month by money market funds alone. Maybe cutting that back would slow spending?

  I am doubtful that the Fed will consider either of these arguments, but I suspect that if they get the inflation story wrong, and inflation reignites, it will have more to do with pumping too much money into the system via high yields, and forcing businesses to raise prices to maintain profits in an overly high interest rate environment, than for any other reason (except for Geopolitical Inflation, which is a persistent threat).

  Inflation

  We get CPI on Tuesday morning, where Academy will get to perform its recurring role of doing a live breakdown on Yahoo Finance as the numbers hit the tape.

  Yes, inflation remains too high, but it has been coming down. It is 100% clear to anyone that housing inflation, which has been propping up overall inflation, merely reflects stale data. That is one reason why the Fed looks to PCE more than to CPI.

  In any given month, CPI might be doing anything, but generally, I’ve been very comfortable with the direction, and barring a commodity spike linked to some geopolitical action (that risk has been increasing), that trend should continue.

  While simplistic (and the chart is admittedly elementary) the Covid “Bump” theory seems to be a great way to think about inflation and has been playing out in real-time.

  

  Goods had a much larger jump in inflation, and it started sooner as Americans were flush with cash and had immense built-up demand for goods, especially for those who were experiencing lifestyle changes enabled by work from home. The Manheim Used Vehicle index is a good one to watch on this.

  Services took longer to start and were slower to ramp up. Not only were there rules, which varied by state, but individuals also differed on when they were comfortable doing things post-COVID. So, the services bump took longer to generate, and we continue to view Summer 2023 as the Summer of Vacations, representing peak services demand (relative to availability). As that normalizes, we should see less and less inflation pressure on the services side (as mentioned Friday, the ISM services employment index has been below 50 (and shrinking) for the last 5 months in a row).

  Maybe this chart is far too simple? Possibly, but I think that it has captured the gist of inflation and is the basis for me remaining comfortable that the worst is behind us.

  Bottom Line

  We didn’t even touch on lag effects (even Powell seemed to admit that because of this they should start sooner rather than later).

  Continue to look for 75 bps of cuts this year (with 2 or 3 cuts). I don’t see July as likely, though I think it would be prudent to start then.

  Less inverted curves.

  

  -50 seems to be a level of support. 0 would be the next target, which would be 33 bps from here. “Less inversion” is why we think the 10s are still generally rangebound between 4.3% and 4.5% (with occasional breaks above and below).

  Credit. All good. We should see new multi-year tights on spreads by the end of the summer.

  Equities. Momentum and AI are ruling the day, and it is unclear what stops them. At least the CNN Fear & Greed Index climbed to Neutral. I’m really not sure that we’ve seen a situation where major indices are hitting new highs, and this index is mired in “Fear” territory.

  Hope you have had a great 4th of July extra-long weekend (and enjoyed what seemed like 2 Fridays in one week), but now back to the grind!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 15:10

• Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election; Le Pen Limps To 3rd Behind Macron!
  Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election; Le Pen Limps To 3rd Behind Macron!

  Well, no one saw that coming…

  

  The last-minute-arranged broad left-wing coalition known as The New Popular Front (NFP), was leading a tight French legislative election Sunday, ahead of both President Emmanuel Macron’s centrists and Le Pen’s rightists, projections showed.

  Provisional estimates from four pollsters suggest the following seat projections:

  • Left Alliance Set for 170-215 Seats

  • Macron’s Group Set for 150-182 Seats

  • Le Pen’s Group Set for 110-158 Seats

  It looks like the anti-National Rally front worked better than anyone expected, catching the polling companies by surprise.

  The projected results suggest that the co-ordinated anti-RN strategy, under which the left and center tactically withdrew their candidates from run-offs, had paid off.

  

  If confirmed in final voting tallies, the projections suggest that none of the three main blocs will be able easily to command a governing majority, potentially leaving France in a period of political gridlock.

  There are some big barriers to that given that Macron himself has called France Unbowed – a big part of the left’s New Popular Front – an extremist party and some of his supports have called against voting for its candidates.

  AP reports that the French leftist leader,Jean-Luc Melenchon says elections are an “immense relief for a majority of people,” demands prime minister resign.

  Melenchon says the New Popular Front government would apply its program and nothing but the program as he refuses any negotiation with Macron’s party or any combination. As Bloomberg reports, that theoretically would mean some disruptive changes of economic policy, and by decree according to Melenchon:

  • Undoing the pension reform;

  • raising the minimum wage;

  • a 90% top marginal tax rate;

  • and freezing prices of some consumer staples.

  Not a pretty picture for French bonds either way.

  France was going to choose between debt, more debt and way more debt.

  Way more debt it is. Fascinating.

  Deficit and debt projections via Bloomberg. pic.twitter.com/jmiU7IdKhg

  — Daniel Lacalle (@dlacalle_IA) July 7, 2024

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

  Andrea Tueni, head of sales trading at Saxo Banque France:

  “This is a big surprise, it’s a real blow for the RN. That being said, it’s not necessarily good for markets: The Nouveau Front Populaire taking the lead could generate concerns due to their program which was the most poorly perceived by the markets.”

  French National Rally Leader Jordan Bardella warns this vote “has thrown France into the arms of the far-Left.”

  🇫🇷🔴 “Unfortunately, the alliance of dishonour and the dangerous electoral arrangements between #Macron, #Attal and the far left deprive the French of the governing policy they wanted when they voted for us last Sunday.” @J_Bardella speaks after projections showed the… pic.twitter.com/xFrMQKyqdQ

  — FRANCE 24 English (@France24_en) July 7, 2024

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

  As @RUNews posted on X:

  “Macron now faces a total mess. He aimed to stop ‘Hitler’ party and mobilized Lenin (Mélenchon), but now he has both Lenin and Hitler, leaving him stuck in the middle.”

  Presumably all the globalist fear mongering over the so-called ‘Hitler-ite’ Le Pen pushed the French people back into the immigrant-loving arms of the Left? Or something else went down?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 14:18

• Federal Court Blocks Title IX Expansion to Include Gender Identity In Texas And Montana
  Federal Court Blocks Title IX Expansion to Include Gender Identity In Texas And Montana

  Authored by Matt McGregor via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A district judge has granted Texas and Montana’s request for a preliminary injunction against the federal government’s attempt “to impose a sweeping new social policy” that allows for Title IX coverage for gender identity.

  

  The ruling follows others in which federal judges have brought Title IX revisions to a halt.

  In this most recent decision, Texas District Judge Jeremy Kernodle ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) can’t force state health care providers to fund gender-affirming care by threatening them with the loss of federal funding.

  In May 2024, HHS issued a press release on its Final Rule, which expanded the definition of Title IX protections in 2016 to include “discrimination based on the basis of gender identity” to fit in with Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Title IX was initially established in 1972 to protect women from discrimination in public education.

  “When Congress enacted the ACA in 2010, no agency—or court—had ever interpreted ‘on the basis of sex’ to mean ‘on the basis of gender identity,’” Judge Kernodle wrote. “But in 2016, HHS began to do so, issuing a rule purporting to implement Section 1557 and prohibiting discrimination on the basis of ‘gender identity.’”

  Texas and Montana, two states that exclude gender-affirming care procedures from their Medicaid programs and prohibit doctors from performing them on minors, sued HHS, arguing that the federal health department has no authority to mandate that the states adhere to these revisions.

  HHS said in its press release that the regulations were updated to prevent “dehumanizing beliefs” surrounding medical treatments and conditions such as gender dysphoria.

  “The Department will approach gender dysphoria as it would any other disorder or condition,” HHS said in its Final Rule. “If a disorder or condition affects one or more body systems, it may be considered a physical or mental impairment.”

  HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said the Final Rule’s intent is to “strengthen protections” and ensure “equal access to this nation’s health care system and its social service programs for people with disabilities and their families.”

  “It is comprehensive in scope, advancing justice for people with disabilities and helping to ensure they are not discriminated against under any program or activity receiving funding from HHS just because they have a disability,” Mr. Becerra said.

  Judge Kernodle wrote in his order that the Final Rule proposes an “absurd” policy in that health care entities are prohibited from limiting services exclusive to one sex, such as providing a prostate exam.

  The Final Rule would also allow men who identify as females to be allowed in “female-exclusive facilities, including shared hospital rooms.”

  The Final Rule also affects health insurance coverage like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Judge Kernodle wrote.

  “As applied to state-sponsored insurance plans like Medicaid and CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program], the Final Rule has the effect of requiring states to pay for ‘transition’ and other ‘gender-affirming’ procedures,” he said.

  As in other rulings on this issue, the primary reason for Judge Kernodle’s decision was that the states demonstrated that they would face irreparable financial harm by failing to comply with HHS’s rule.

  Both states receive billions in federal funding, he wrote, which would “likely be withheld for violating the Final Rule,” he wrote.

  “The loss of such funding for Medicaid and CHIP would devastate these programs and their beneficiaries,” he said.

  Other Rulings

  On July 3, Mississippi District Judge Louis Guirola also ruled that HHS couldn’t enforce its reinterpretation of Title IX protections to include gender identity.

  Plaintiffs in up to 15 states, including Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, and Mississippi, filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Mississippi.

  Judge Gurioloa said the plaintiffs have proven that they would “incur substantial costs” if they didn’t comply with the Final Rule by losing federal funding, which was the deciding factor in his order.

  “As a result, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have established all four elements for imposing a preliminary injunction and stay,” he wrote.

  Other rulings include Kansas v. U.S. Department of Education, in which a federal judge ruled the Department of Education couldn’t impose its redefinition of sex to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

  The Human Rights Campaign (HRC)—an LGBT advocacy organization—issued a press release criticizing the ruling.

  “This ruling is not only morally wrong, it’s also bad policy,“ HRC Director Kelly Robinson said.

  “Everyone deserves access to the medical care they need to be healthy and thrive.”

  “This isn’t over,” she added. “All LGBTQ+ people should receive the health care they deserve and be able to make informed decisions about our own bodies.”

  The Epoch Times contacted the HRC and HHS for comment on this new ruling.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 14:00

• "Getting Fully Valued": Nvidia Receives Rare Downgrade 
  “Getting Fully Valued”: Nvidia Receives Rare Downgrade 

  Nvidia’s price surge over the past 18 months mirrors the exuberance of the ‘Roaring Twenties,’ particularly the bull market of the late 1920s, and is reminiscent of Radio Corporation of America’s meteoric rise following the emergence of the radio industry. 

  According to a recent note from Bryan Taylor, the chief economist at Global Financial Data, RCA shares soared 200-fold in the 1920s. By the late 1929s, RCA shares peaked then crashed 98% through early 1932.

  

  These days, the resilient economy (however, the labor market is slowing) and the AI-fueled bubble (it only took 23 days for Nvidia to add a trillion dollars in market cap) have Goldman’s chief equity strategist David Kostin telling clients that quarter two earnings season will be a massively high bar to beat—and this could be a day of reckoning for investors. 

  New Street Research analyst Pierre Ferragu apparently has gotten the memo that the AI party isn’t some linear fashion, and last Friday, he downgraded Nvidia from a “buy” to “neutral.” 

  Ferragu told clients in an industry report that he was conducting a “health check” on AI stocks, indicating that shares of the AI chip leader are “getting fully valued for the base case” after soaring 154% this year, on top of 240% gains in 2023. 

  Many analysts have questioned whether Nvidia’s $3 trillion market cap can be maintained.

  

  Further upside “will only materialize in a bull case, in which the outlook beyond 2025 increases materially, and we do not have the conviction on this scenario playing out yet,” Ferragu said. 

  While the “quality of the franchise is nevertheless intact,” there is, “if anything, a risk of derating” should the outlook remain unchanged, he added.

  Ferragu noted, “Although Nvidia remains the strongest franchise for AI data centers, near-term expectations and valuation justify a more prudent view on the stock.” 

  He reiterated continued bullishness for Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing and Advanced Micro Devices, indicating both stocks have “upside in both in our base and high scenarios.” 

  New Street set a one-year price target of $135 for Nvidia, compared with Friday’s $125.83 close. 

  Data from Bloomberg shows that seven of the 72 analysts tracked have a neutral rating on Nvidia or about 9.7%. There are currently 64 buys and one sell

  

  Ferragu said, “This doesn’t mean the end of the trend – we still see very strong growth ahead and upside potential in most names we cover,” adding, “It nevertheless means investors must now be more careful and selective in their exposure to the trend.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 07/07/2024 – 13:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest