It is getting serious now. Kroger is willing to sell off more stores in order to consolidate with Albertsons. The one thing we keep on seeing is the manipulation of supply chain due to circumstance to achieve manufacturing shortfall, and influence, to maximize profits. Much of what we have and are experiencing was avoidable. The […]

The post Manipulating Supply Chains and Manufacturing, for Corporate Influence and Profit . . . Redux appeared first on Angry Bear.

In many capitalist European countries, college students do not have to pay tuition fees out of their own pockets. Here in America, most students have to fund their own college costs, which for many students means student loans. Whether or not they complete the degree, student loan borrowers can’t discharge these loans through bankruptcy. Of […]

The post It’s a start appeared first on Angry Bear.

Senates Passes $95 Billion Aid Bill For Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan, Forces Sale Of TikTok

The republicans do what they always do best: fold like cheap lawn chairs.

Moments ago, in a 79-18 vote, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a long-delayed $95.3 billion foreign-aid package sending $60.8 billion in ammunition and military equipment to Ukrainian soldiers, as well as billions of soon-to-be-embezzled dollars to the offshore real estate agents of Ukraine's corrupt oligarchs while also fortifying Israel’s missile defense systems with $26.4 billion, and leaving $8 billion for Taiwan as if that will do anything to stop a Chinese invasion. Oh, and speaking of Chinese invasions, the Senate also just forced the sale of the China-owned TikTok in the U.S.

There will be, of course, no change to the invasion at the southern US border because here too Republicans keep folding like cheap lawn chairs to the Democrat ploy to flood the US with illegal aliens who will get free shit for life if only they keep voting for the blue team.

The bill had broad support in the Senate, with backing from almost all Democrats and a majority of Republicans. Several Republicans who had opposed an earlier iteration of the package, which came after a failed push to attach it to a border-policy overhaul, switched their vote to support Tuesday’s bill. The breakdown of the votes is as follows:

GOP NO VOTES:

• Barrasso
• Blackburn
• Braun
• Budd
• Cruz
• Hagerty
• Hawley
• Johnson
• Lee
• Lummis
• Marshall
• Rubio
• Scott (FL)
• Schmitt
• Vance  

DEM NO VOTES:

• Merkley
• Sanders
• Welch

The vote brought to a close months of pointless sound and fury, and endless debate over Ukraine, that allegedly split the Republican Party,  with rank-and-file members openly rebelling against their leaders, who succeeded in outdemocrating the democrats.

Biden, McConnell, Schumer, Johnson, and major media players are taking a victory lap over pushing through an additional $61 billion in funding from struggling taxpayers as year 3 of the Ukraine proxy war begins. They want to own this and absolutely should be forced to own this.

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) April 24, 2024

The theatrical "fight" also called into question both how far the US would go to defend Ukraine, now in the third year of trying to repel Russia’s invasion, as well as America’s leadership role in the world, once the latest rescue funding is exhausted in a few months, which it will be, with the Ukraine having made zero progress in its war with Russia.

The measure passed the House on Saturday and now goes to President Biden’s desk. Biden, who has been pushing for a big foreign-aid package since the fall, said he would quickly sign the measure into law Wednesday.

President Biden on Senate’s passage of $95 billion aid package with funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan: “I will sign this bill into law and address the American people as soon as it reaches my desk tomorrow so we can begin sending weapons and equipment to Ukraine this week.” pic.twitter.com/eOAbtzNqWq

— Joey Garrison (@joeygarrison) April 24, 2024

As broken down below, the measure contains money for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, as well as humanitarian aid for Gaza—largely matching an earlier Senate bill—plus additions made by the House, such as sanctions on Russia and Iran and the TikTok provision. Leaders in the GOP-controlled House also changed roughly $9.5 billion in economic aid to Ukraine into forgivable loans rather than grants, to make it more politically palatable to Republicans, as if Ukraine will ever repay anything.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) credited the White House as well as Republicans who backed Ukraine for advancing the measure, noting that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) put his political future on the line when he moved forward with the package.

“In a resounding bipartisan vote, the relentless work of six long months has paid off,” Schumer said on the senate floor. In a statement, Biden thanked lawmakers of both parties, saying they answered “history’s call at this critical inflection point” by sending a message to allies and foes about American power.

And just like that the deeply embedded deep state operative formerly known as the House speaker has become the media's darling overnight:

All it takes to get the media to change from mocking and reviling you to slobbering you with praise is to do what they want. It only takes $100B and the betrayal of your voters' policy goals, but what are those silly things compared to praise from the media! https://t.co/id0VrzC77D

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) April 24, 2024

Of course, while superficially the bill says "aid to Ukraine" where the majority of the money is really going is to the US military industrial complex. As the WSJ reports, the proposal has roughly $60 billion for Ukraine, most of which would flow to the U.S. defense industry for additional weapons such as ammunition and rocket launchers. The new aid comes on top of the more than $100 billion spent on the Defense Industry Kyiv since Russia invaded in February 2022.

And while most muppets in the House and Senate are clearly in the pocket of the military-industrial complex and the deep state, a few holdouts remains.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R., Mo.), who voted against the measure, called the support for Ukraine to defend its borders “an insult to the American people” while the U.S. struggles with an influx of migrants at its own border with Mexico.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) called his opposition to the proposal’s advancement “one of the toughest votes I’ve cast during my years in the Senate,” saying he couldn’t overcome his concern that humanitarian aid would end up in the hands of terrorists, among other worries.

Others were more "malleable" in their ideological beliefs.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R., Okla.), who switched from voting against the Senate’s aid package in February to supporting the revised version on Tuesday, said that the politics were complicated.   “Our approach this time was to make sure that the politics are set, meaning that President Trump was on board, it’s something that could be passable, it’s something that could be explained,” he said.

Sen. James Lankford (R., Okla.), who also switched his vote, said he didn’t want to “punish Israel and Ukraine” over the lack of border provisions. Lankford had led a failed bipartisan effort to find a compromise on immigration, which was shot down by Republicans earlier this year as not tough enough.

Asked why some Senate Republicans were slow to support aid for Kyiv, 3000-year-old Senate mummy Mitch McConnell cited the “demonization of Ukraine” by conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson. “He had an enormous audience, which convinced a lot of rank and file Republicans that maybe this was a mistake,” McConnell said in a press conference. Carlson declined to comment.

Mummified Mitch also laid blame on former President Donald Trump, Democrats and the border crisis for the amount of time it took to get most Republican lawmakers to acquiesce in continuing to fund the Ukrainian war effort.

“I think the former president had sort of mixed views on it,” he said of Trump’s position on Ukraine aid. “We all felt that the border was a complete disaster, myself included,” McConnell continued, noting that the attempt earlier this year to attach border security provisions to Ukraine funding required senators to “deal with Democrats … and then a number of our members thought it wasn’t good enough.”

“And then our nominee for president didn’t seem to want us to do anything at all,” McConnell said. “That took months to work our way through it.”

Last but not least, the bill also starts the clock on TikTok’s Chinese-controlled owner ByteDance to find a new owner for the video app in the U.S. within a year, or risk a shutdown. But the matter is expected to be decided by the federal courts which means that it will quietly die on some bench in the corrupt US legal system. A court dispute would likely require judges to weigh the national security objectives of the ban against the First Amendment rights of TikTok and its users.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 05:58

Meet The New ETFs That Are Offering '100% Downside Protection'

If 100% downside protection is the norm for banks that are too big to fail on Wall Street, why shouldn't it be for everyday investors?

This is the question that a number of ETF innovators are apparently asking, as a wave of new ETFs offering '100% downside protection' are getting ready to hit the market, in the push to find the newest ETF fad. 

After all, something has to replace all of the ESG ETFs that have shuttered in the last year.

Calamos Investments has introduced new exchange-traded funds offering partial returns tracking the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Russell 2000, coupled with complete downside protection through derivatives, Bloomberg reported this week.

The inaugural ETF, Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF, aims to mirror the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust's price returns up to a 9.65% cap.

Full protection requires purchasing the ETF on its launch day, May 1, 2024, and maintaining the investment until April 30, 2025. This ETF, and others soon to be launched, will use call and put options to manage market volatility, though their effectiveness in fully safeguarding against losses is not guaranteed.

Matt Kaufman, head of ETFs at Calamos commented: “With risk-free rates north of 5% today, options-based product issuers are able to deliver meaningful upside participation with 100% capital protection."

He continued: "For those issuing ‘protective’ products, the cost of hedging by selling an option — or series of options — to offset the premium to buy a protective put becomes cheaper as rates rise.”

Issuers are launching funds that blend equity exposure with downside protection amid fluctuating interest rates, Bloomberg writes. 

For example, the Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF, launched in July, has amassed $230 million by offering complete downside protection over two years. BlackRock, the top ETF issuer globally, is also proposing similar funds.

Unlike earlier "buffer ETFs" introduced in 2018 that protect against initial losses up to a point (such as the first 10%), these new funds from Calamos offer less upside potential but greater downside security.

Kaufman concluded: “For people as they age, nearing retirement — they can’t afford the significant drawdowns of the market, but they also can’t afford to not be in the market. So this gives them an opportunity.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 05:45

AI Chatbots Refuse To Produce 'Controversial' Output - Why That's A Free Speech Problem

Authored by Jordi Calvet-Bademunt and Jacob Mchangama via TheConversation.com,

Google recently made headlines globally because its chatbot Gemini generated images of people of color instead of white people in historical settings that featured white people. Adobe Firefly’s image creation tool saw similar issues. This led some commentators to complain that AI had gone “woke.” Others suggested these issues resulted from faulty efforts to fight AI bias and better serve a global audience.

The discussions over AI’s political leanings and efforts to fight bias are important. Still, the conversation on AI ignores another crucial issue: What is the AI industry’s approach to free speech, and does it embrace international free speech standards?

We are policy researchers who study free speech, as well as executive director and a research fellow at The Future of Free Speech, an independent, nonpartisan think tank based at Vanderbilt University. In a recent report, we found that generative AI has important shortcomings regarding freedom of expression and access to information.

Generative AI is a type of AI that creates content, like text or images, based on the data it has been trained with. In particular, we found that the use policies of major chatbots do not meet United Nations standards. In practice, this means that AI chatbots often censor output when dealing with issues the companies deem controversial. Without a solid culture of free speech, the companies producing generative AI tools are likely to continue to face backlash in these increasingly polarized times.

Vague and broad use policies

Our report analyzed the use policies of six major AI chatbots, including Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Companies issue policies to set the rules for how people can use their models. With international human rights law as a benchmark, we found that companies’ misinformation and hate speech policies are too vague and expansive. It is worth noting that international human rights law is less protective of free speech than the U.S. First Amendment.

Our analysis found that companies’ hate speech policies contain extremely broad prohibitions. For example, Google bans the generation of “content that promotes or encourages hatred.” Though hate speech is detestable and can cause harm, policies that are as broadly and vaguely defined as Google’s can backfire.

To show how vague and broad use policies can affect users, we tested a range of prompts on controversial topics. We asked chatbots questions like whether transgender women should or should not be allowed to participate in women’s sports tournaments or about the role of European colonialism in the current climate and inequality crises. We did not ask the chatbots to produce hate speech denigrating any side or group. Similar to what some users have reported, the chatbots refused to generate content for 40% of the 140 prompts we used. For example, all chatbots refused to generate posts opposing the participation of transgender women in women’s tournaments. However, most of them did produce posts supporting their participation.

Freedom of speech is a foundational right in the U.S., but what it means and how far it goes are still widely debated.

Vaguely phrased policies rely heavily on moderators’ subjective opinions about what hate speech is. Users can also perceive that the rules are unjustly applied and interpret them as too strict or too lenient.

For example, the chatbot Pi bans “content that may spread misinformation.” However, international human rights standards on freedom of expression generally protect misinformation unless a strong justification exists for limits, such as foreign interference in elections. Otherwise, human rights standards guarantee the “freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers … through any … media of … choice,” according to a key United Nations convention.

Defining what constitutes accurate information also has political implications. Governments of several countries used rules adopted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic to repress criticism of the government. More recently, India confronted Google after Gemini noted that some experts consider the policies of the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, to be fascist.

Free speech culture

There are reasons AI providers may want to adopt restrictive use policies. They may wish to protect their reputations and not be associated with controversial content. If they serve a global audience, they may want to avoid content that is offensive in any region.

In general, AI providers have the right to adopt restrictive policies. They are not bound by international human rights. Still, their market power makes them different from other companies. Users who want to generate AI content will most likely end up using one of the chatbots we analyzed, especially ChatGPT or Gemini.

These companies’ policies have an outsize effect on the right to access information. This effect is likely to increase with generative AI’s integration into search, word processors, email and other applications.

This means society has an interest in ensuring such policies adequately protect free speech. In fact, the Digital Services Act, Europe’s online safety rulebook, requires that so-called “very large online platforms” assess and mitigate “systemic risks.” These risks include negative effects on freedom of expression and information.

Jacob Mchangama discusses online free speech in the context of the European Union’s 2022 Digital Services Act.

This obligation, imperfectly applied so far by the European Commission, illustrates that with great power comes great responsibility. It is unclear how this law will apply to generative AI, but the European Commission has already taken its first actions.

Even where a similar legal obligation does not apply to AI providers, we believe that the companies’ influence should require them to adopt a free speech culture. International human rights provide a useful guiding star on how to responsibly balance the different interests at stake. At least two of the companies we focused on – Google and Anthropic – have recognized as much.

Outright refusals

It’s also important to remember that users have a significant degree of autonomy over the content they see in generative AI. Like search engines, the output users receive greatly depends on their prompts. Therefore, users’ exposure to hate speech and misinformation from generative AI will typically be limited unless they specifically seek it.

This is unlike social media, where people have much less control over their own feeds. Stricter controls, including on AI-generated content, may be justified at the level of social media since they distribute content publicly. For AI providers, we believe that use policies should be less restrictive about what information users can generate than those of social media platforms.

AI companies have other ways to address hate speech and misinformation. For instance, they can provide context or countervailing facts in the content they generate. They can also allow for greater user customization. We believe that chatbots should avoid merely refusing to generate any content altogether. This is unless there are solid public interest grounds, such as preventing child sexual abuse material, something laws prohibit.

Refusals to generate content not only affect fundamental rights to free speech and access to information. They can also push users toward chatbots that specialize in generating hateful content and echo chambers. That would be a worrying outcome.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 05:00

Flying Cars Are Becoming Reality In China

Multiple Chinese companies are focused on commercializing flying cars, utilizing a design that is different from the popular eVTOL aircraft that have been developed over the last several years, according to a new report from Nikkei this week. 

XPeng AeroHT, an affiliate of the electric vehicle startup, plans to market a dual-mode eVTOL vehicle capable of both driving on roads and flying. The Civil Aviation Administration of China is currently reviewing the aircraft for commercial certification.

Nikkei reports that pre-orders in China are set to start in October, with mass production anticipated next year, targeting tourism companies and outdoor enthusiasts. Initially priced around 1 million yuan ($138,000), XPeng AeroHT aims to reduce costs in the future and is also planning to expand internationally.

Qiu Mingquan, vice president at XPeng AeroHT commented: "Normal eVTOL vehicles cannot drive on the ground, but our model is dual use."

"If large-scale mass production becomes possible, we can dramatically reduce costs," Qiu said, adding: "The Middle East is an important market for us, given the level of regulation, openness to new things and cost."

And, hey - the best part is you almost can't even notice a difference from a regular looking car!

As is blindingly obvious from the above photo, XPeng AeroHT is developing an integrated eVTOL aircraft that doesn't require detachment, with the flight propeller folding on top during road use.

It debuted a concept model at a Las Vegas trade show in January. Meanwhile, EHang's two-seater EH216-S, capable of a 25-minute flight per charge, began sales on April 1 after receiving type certification in October. Last month, EHang was authorized for mass production and plans to partner with hospitality businesses for tourism services.

The report notes that China leads globally in eVTOL development, holding 50% of the world’s models, significantly ahead of the U.S. and Germany. This surge is supported by advancements in EV technologies like high-density batteries essential for eVTOLs, with Chinese firms like CATL at the forefront.

Other Chinese initiatives include Guangzhou Automobile Group's GOVE eVTOL with a detachable aircraft section, and Geely’s Aerofugia, a six-seater for longer flights. China's burgeoning "low-altitude economy," which includes eVTOLs, drones, and helicopters, is being actively promoted by the government alongside biotech and space industries, with local support measures from cities like Shenzhen and Guangzhou.

However, the expansion faces challenges such as limited takeoff/landing infrastructure and undefined traffic regulations for eVTOLs.

One eVTOL executive told Nikkei: "We will be forced to fly relatively infrequently for the next few years."

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 04:15

Wind Overtakes Fossil Fuels As The UK's Largest Power Generation Source

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

The UK saw two consecutive quarters of wind power overtaking fossil fuels as the single-largest source of electricity generation for the first time, per data from think tank Ember quoted by Reuters columnist Gavin Maguire.

In the first quarter of 2024, wind-generated a total of 25.3 terawatt hours (TWh) of Britain’s electricity, higher than the 23.6 TWh generated from fossil fuel sources, Ember data showed.

As a result, wind power generated an average of 39.4% of the UK’s electricity between January and March 2024, versus a 36.2% share of fossil fuel generation.  

Wind power generation, however, could begin to dip with warmer and still weather in the summer months, Reuters’s Maguire notes.

Last September, a report prepared for power group Drax showed that Britain has now installed more wind capacity than any other type of power source, with wind power capacity overtaking combined-cycle gas power stations for the first time and ending more than a century of fossil fuels dominating the electricity system.

As of June 2023, Britain’s fleet of wind farms reached 27.9 gigawatts (GW) of capacity, exceeding the gas-powered stations total capacity of 27.7 GW, according to the study prepared by experts from Imperial College London and the University of Sussex for the quarterly Drax Electric Insights.

For the whole of 2023, power generation from renewable technologies matched the previous record high of 2022 but renewables’ share of electricity generation increased to a record 47.3%, UK government data showed last month.

Wind generation hit a record-high share of 28.7% of generation in 2023, up from just 2.7% back in 2010.

Generation from fossil fuels fell to a record low, a share of 36.3%, but generation from gas remained the principal form of UK generation at 34.3%, the statistics from the UK’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero showed.

Low carbon power generation, of renewables and nuclear combined, increased to a record-high share of 61.5% in 2023.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 03:30

As ordered reported by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on March 21, 2024

CBO summarizes recent research findings about Medicare accountable care organizations and the factors that have contributed to or limited their ability to achieve net budgetary savings for the Medicare program.

Germany Arrests EU Parliament Aide On China Espionage Charges

A staffer who worked for a high profile German member of European Parliament for years has been arrested on charges of spying for Chinese intelligence, Germany’s federal prosecutor’s office announced on Tuesday.

Identified only as Jian G., he had reportedly been a staff member for German MEP Maximilian Krah going back to 2019. Krah is with what mainstream media commonly dubs the "far-right" AfD (Alternative for Germany party).

"In January 2024 the accused repeatedly shared information about negotiations and decisions in the European Parliament with his intelligence service employer," the prosecutors office said.

European Parliament, Getty Images

The suspect has also been accused of spying on and monitoring Chinese opposition communities inside Germany. Beijing has long been suspected in the West, including the US, of keeping close tabs on the political leanings and activism of expat enclaves via a network of spies connected to consulates.

German interior minister Nancy Faeser subsequently announced on X, "If it is confirmed that there was espionage for Chinese intelligence services from within the European Parliament, then that would be an attack on European democracy from within. Whoever employs such a person carries responsibility."

The investigation into "Jian G", who was detained Monday, was led by German domestic intelligence services. Recent days and weeks have seen other arrests in Europe of suspected Chinese spies, including a couple in the UK in recent days.

On Tuesday China's foreign minister reacted by denouncing the "hype" surrounding such cases, describing it as more anti-China propaganda aimed at political manipulation and to ratchet pressure on Beijing.

According to Politico, "The bombshell arrest, which rocks the AfD while it polls in second place nationally, sparked calls from one top European lawmaker for a tougher crackdown on Chinese and Russian infiltrators attempting to influence EU democracy."

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 02:45

"Let's Debunk The Myth That Mass-Migration Brings An Economic Benefit", Says Former UK Immigration Minister

Authored by Thomas Brooke via ReMix News,

The notion that mass immigration brings a net economic benefit to a developed nation is a myth that needs to be debunked, a former U.K. government minister who resigned over the spiraling numbers arriving in Britain has claimed.

In an interview with the Conservative Home website, Robert Jenrick, the Conservative MP who stepped down from his role as immigration minister in the Home Office last year, called the government’s post-Brexit immigration policy a “complete disaster” and a “betrayal to voters” who for decades have elected parties promising to cut the number of new arrivals into Britain.

“The numbers are just so large that it has a proportionally much greater impact on everyone’s lives. This cuts to the housing crisis, why we have such low productivity, and why we have concerns about community cohesion and integration,” he told the site.

Net migration is at record levels in Britain since the U.K. left the European Union, peaking in the year to December 2022 at 745,000. It subsequently fell to 672,000 in the year to June 2023, but after leaving the European Union Single Market, this is a paradox that Jenrick finds difficult to accept.

“For years, politicians made promises to cut legal migration they knew they couldn’t keep because ultimately the UK was beholden to the EU’s freedom of movement.

“The great reform was the Conservative Party delivering Brexit, which finally took back control of the levers of migration. But the decisions made in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote were a betrayal to voters — they created a system that was even more liberal than the one before by lowering the salary threshold, creating a graduate route and an unregulated social care visa,” he said.

“Frankly, these decisions were two fingers up to the public, and in public policy terms they’ve been a complete disaster.”

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made “stopping the boats” a key pledge throughout his tenure in Downing Street — a nod to the illegal immigration crisis on England’s southern shores as thousands of undocumented migrants are transported across the English Channel from mainland Europe where they claim asylum and use human rights laws to avoid deportation.

However, despite attempts to combat this issue through the flagship Rwanda policy — a plan to deport migrants to the African nation for offshore processing — Jenrick believes that this is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to tackling immigration.

“To me, legal migration has always been the more important issue,” he explained.

“I’m 42, and for my entire adult life, if not longer, political parties of all persuasions have stood at elections saying they’re going to bring down the level of legal migration.

“All alighted on this challenge, said they were going to take action, and all ultimately failed.”

The Conservative MP challenged the view that mass immigration has a net economic benefit on a developed country like Britain, highlighting that just 15 percent of non-EU migrants who came to the country last year arrived with work visas.

“So, the overwhelming majority of people were students, dependants, or were those coming as refugees.”

The figure is actually slightly higher than 15 percent. In the year to June 2023, 968,000 non-EU migrants arrived in Britain, of which just 169,000 were the main applicants on a work visa, amounting to 17.5 percent.

“One can make arguments for and against each of those categories, but they’re not people who are demonstrably making an economic contribution to this country.”

He warned the economic model that Britain has adopted when it comes to immigration isn’t working.

“If importing hundreds of thousands of foreign workers to the UK was a route to prosperity, the U.K. would be one of the richest countries in the world,” he said, adding that Britain has been in a recession in terms of GDP per capita for almost the last two years.

“I care about the prosperity of our own citizens, not the overall size of the economy.”

The former immigration minister accused businesses in Britain of becoming “hooked on the drug of imported foreign labor” and said the government had done too little to “boost training for young people in our country” to take on jobs in key sectors like construction.

He urged the government to adopt a “highly selective” immigration policy that enables it to choose the types of people that will make an economic contribution to Britain, noting that there is no longer the bogeyman of the European Union to fall back on as a reason why immigration figures should remain as high as they are now.

“What we need is radically reduced, highly-selective, high-skilled, and high-productivity migration,” Jenrick added, suggesting that an annual cap could “serve as a democratic lock” on Britain’s immigration policy and ensure that promises to the electorate to bring down the numbers are met.

Several studies support Jenrick’s observation that mass immigration is an economic drag on developed nations.

In November 2021, a Danish Ministry of Finance report revealed that the net cost of immigration from non-Western countries, after tax contributions had been deducted, amounted to €4.2 billion in 2018.

Similarly, a study from the University of Amsterdam published in December last year revealed the net cost to the Dutch public sector for decades of mass immigration between 1995 and 2019 was €400 billion, averaging €17 billion a year.

The research categorized the types of migrants arriving in the Netherlands during that time by nationality, revealing that those arriving from other EU and European countries had a net positive contribution to the Dutch economy, while those coming from countries such as Turkey and Morocco had cost the Dutch taxpayer the most with a net negative contribution of €200,000 and €260,000, respectively.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 02:00

A $250 Million War Game And Its Shocking Outcome

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

At a cost of $250 million, Millennium Challenge 2002 was the largest and most expensive war game in Pentagon history.

With over 13,500 participants, the US government took over two years to design it.

The exercise pitted Iran against the US military. Washington intended to show how the US military could defeat Iran with ease.

Paul Van Riper, a three-star general and 41-year veteran of the Marine Corps, led Iranian forces in the war game. His mission was to take on the full force of the US military, led by an aircraft carrier battle group and a large amphibious landing force in the Persian Gulf.

The results shocked everyone…

Van Riper waited for the US Navy to pass through the shallow and narrow Strait of Hormuz, which made them sitting ducks for Iran’s unconventional and asymmetric warfare techniques.

The idea is to level the playing field against a superior enemy with swarms of explosive-laden suicide speedboats, low-flying planes carrying anti-ship missiles, naval mines, and land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles, among other low-cost but highly effective measures.

In minutes, Van Riper emerged victorious over his superior opponent and sank all 19 ships. Had it been real life, 20,000 US sailors and marines would have died.

Millennium Challenge 2002 was a complete disaster for the Pentagon, which had spent a quarter of a billion dollars to set up the extensive war game. It produced the exact opposite outcome they wanted.

So what did the Pentagon do with these humbling results?

Like a child playing a video game, they hit the reset button. They then rigged and scripted the game so that the US was guaranteed to win.

After realizing the integrity of the war game had been compromised, a disgusted Van Riper walked out mid-game. He then said:

“Nothing was learned from this. And a culture not willing to think hard and test itself does not augur well for the future.”

The main lesson of Millennium Challenge 2002 is that aircraft carriers—the biggest and most expensive ships ever built—wouldn’t last a single day in combat against even a regional power like Iran. Russia and China would have an even easier time dispatching them. They are overpriced toys.

That means the US has wasted untold trillions on military hardware that could prove to be worthless in a serious conflict.

Nonetheless, the US government still parades aircraft carriers around the world from time to time to try to intimidate its enemies.

However, it’s a flawed strategy prone to catastrophic results if someone calls their bluff.

While Millennium Challenge 2002 occurred more than 20 years ago, it is of paramount importance today.

Iran has substantially improved its asymmetric and unconventional warfare capabilities. It’s doubtful the US military would fare much better today than 20 years ago.

In short, war with Iran today could be even more disastrous than the Millennium Challenge 2002 simulation.

Unfortunately, war with Iran is an increasingly probable outcome as tensions in the Middle East are at their highest point in generations and are trending higher.

Previously, I lived in Beirut, Lebanon, for several years while working for an investment bank. The experience was effectively an advanced training course in Middle East geopolitics. Today, it helps me see the big picture in the region… and unfortunately, it isn’t pretty.

I think the next big war in the Middle East is coming soon and could be the biggest one ever. It will focus on Iran.

The market doesn’t appreciate how close we are to a big war and the implications of it.

But this distortion in the market is a blessing. It’s handing us a golden opportunity.

First and foremost, I think there’s a huge opportunity to profit in the oil market right now.

I’m certainly not cheering for war. I despise war, which is the health of the State.

Regardless, a big war is highly likely, with significant investment implications that would be foolish to ignore.

In short, we are only one escalation away from potentially the biggest oil shock in history as the Middle East is on the verge of the largest regional war in generations.

Fortunately, it doesn’t have to blindside you, your family, or your portfolio.

Quite the contrary.

That’s precisely why I just released an urgent new report with all the details, including what you must do to prepare. It’s called The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years… the Top 3 Strategies You Need Right Now. Click here to download the PDF now.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 00:05

 – by New Deal democrat The Bonddad Blog As per my usual caveat, while new home sales are the most leading of the housing construction metrics, they are noisy and heavily revised.  That was true again this month, as sales (blue in the graph below) increased almost 9% m/m to 693,000 annualized, after February was revised downward […]

The post The range-bound new home sales market continues appeared first on Angry Bear.

Chinese FX Outflows Soar, Priming The Next Bitcoin Surge

Last October, when we pointed out that China's FX outflows had just hit a whopping $75BN - the single biggest monthly outflow since the 2015 currency devaluation - we concluded that the "unfavorable interest rate spread between China and the US will "likely imply persistent depreciation and outflow pressures in coming months", or in other words, September's biggest FX outflow in years is just the beginning, and very soon - in addition to geopolitics and central banks - the world will also be freaking out about the capital flight out of China... not to mention where all those billions in Chinese savings are going and which digital currency the Chinese are using to launder said outflows."

We wrote that on October 20 when Bitcoin was trading just under $30,000, a level it had been for much of 2023. And, just as we correctly predicted at the time...

Clockwork: every time China FX outflows surge, bitcoin erupts.

From last Friday: China Capital Flight Panic Eruptshttps://t.co/j0eWLnbFMq

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 24, 2023

... following this surge in Chinese FX outflows, bitcoin - traditionally China's preferred means to circumvent Beijing's great capital firewall since gold is, how should one put it, a bit more obvious when crossing borders - promptly exploded more than 100% higher in the next 4 months.

And while conventional wisdom is that this surge in the price of the digital currency was largely due to the January launch of Bitcoin ETFs, what many missed was a Reuters story in January which confirmed our thesis from back in 2015, according to which much more than ETFs, and much more than rapidly shifting sentiment or frankly any day-to-day newsflow, it is China's massive wall of inert capital that has been the biggest driver of bitcoin moves, and never more so than during periods of FX and capital outflows which usually precede some form of capital controls.

We bring all this up because six months after our first correct prediction that China's spike in FX outflows would send bitcoin surging, it's time to do it again.

One wouldn't know if, however, if one merely looked at the official Chinese FX reserve data published by the PBOC, here nothing sticks out. In fact, at $3.246 trillion, reported Chinese reserves are now near the highest level in past four years, and monthly flows are very much stable as shown in the chart below.

The problem, of course, is that as we have explained previously China's officially reported reserves are woefully (and perhaps purposefully) inaccurate of the bigger picture.

Instead if one uses our preferred gauge of FX flows, one which looks at i) onshore outright spot transactions; ii) freshly entered and canceled forward transactions, and iii) the SAFE dataset on “cross-border RMB flows, we find that China's net outflows were $39bn in March, up from $11bn in February and the fastest pace of outflows since the September spike in FX outflows which we duly noted half a year ago.

How did we get this number? The portfolio investment channel showed net outflows in March. The Stock Connect channel showed net outflows of US$8bn vs. US$5bn inflows in February, and inflows to the bond market slowed in March (US$6bn, vs. US$11bn in February)...

... primarily on record net selling of central government bonds.

Finally, the current account channel showed also net outflows in March, mainly as services trade related outflows picked up.

At the time when FX outflows were re-acclererating, the broad USD strengthened further in March, and USD/CNY spot drifted higher, as one would expect when there is capital flight... Oh, and Bitcoin hit a record high above $70K.

And while Chinese policymakers are still keen on maintaining FX stability - the countercyclical factors in the daily CNY fixing remained deeply negative and front-end CNH liquidity tightened notably in recent weeks - the reality is that with China desperate to boost its exports at a time when its great mercantilist competitor, Japan, has hammered the yen to the lowest level in 3 decades, it is only a matter of time before the currency devaluation advocates win, as they did in 2015. 

We hope that we don't have to remind readers that the first big trigger for bitcoin's unprecedented eruption higher starting in 2015 was - you guessed it - China's August 2015 FX devaluation.

So don't be surprised if in the next 6 months Bitcoin doubles again, and the move has nothing to do with ETF inflows, the halving, or frankly anything else taking place in the US... and instead is entirely driven by China's massive wall of money which at last check was almost 3x bigger than the US.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 23:25

Biden Admin To Pay $139 Million To Victims For FBI Failures In Sex Abuse Investigation

By Tom Ozimek of The Epoch Times

The Biden administration has agreed to pay over $138 million to victims of convicted sex abuser Larry Nassar while acknowledging the FBI’s failures to properly investigate warnings that the sports physician was exploiting his position to molest young girls under the guise of treatment.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) said in an April 23 statement that it had settled 139 civil claims arising from allegations of sexual abuse committed by Mr. Nassar, who was earlier found guilty of having abused hundreds of victims under the pretext of performing medical treatments.

The settlements—which total $138.7 million—resolve administrative claims made against the DOJ alleging that the FBI failed to carry out an adequate investigation into Mr. Nassar’s actions.

Larry Nassar, a former team USA Gymnastics doctor who pleaded guilty in November 2017 to sexual assault charges, stands in court during his sentencing hearing in the Eaton County Court in Charlotte, Michigan, U.S., Feb. 5, 2018. (Rebecca Cook/Reuters)

A DOJ watchdog found in July 2021 that parts of the FBI’s response to allegations against Mr. Nassar, as well as the agency’s investigation into his actions, were inadequate.

The “FBI failed to conduct an adequate investigation of Nassar’s conduct,” Acting Associate Attorney General Benjamin Mizer said in a statement.

“For decades, Lawrence Nassar abused his position, betraying the trust of those under his care and medical supervision while skirting accountability,” he continued.

“These allegations should have been taken seriously from the outset. While these settlements won’t undo the harm Nassar inflicted, our hope is that they will help give the victims of his crimes some of the critical support they need to continue healing,” Mr. Mizer added.

The $138.7 million will be distributed to the claimants.

There have been other settlements involving Mr. Nassar, who was the U.S. women’s gymnastics team doctor.

In total, settlements concerning the convicted sex abuser have totaled nearly $1 billion, including Michigan State University agreeing to pay $500 million to over 300 women and girls whom he assaulted. "Institutional Betrayal" After allegations of Mr. Nassar’s abuse were first reported to the FBI Indianapolis Field Office by the president of USA Gymnastics in 2015, local field agents failed to respond “with the utmost seriousness and urgency that the allegations deserved and required,” the 2021 report by the DOJ’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) found.

Further, the report found that two FBI officials lied during their interviews to cover up or minimize their errors. One of the agents also made a false statement to the media in 2017 and 2018 about how his office handled the Nassar case.

That agent also violated the FBI’s conflict of interest policy by discussing a possible job with the U.S. Olympic Committee while he was involved with the Nassar investigation.

The watchdog noted the seriousness of the former agents lying during the investigation into their conduct in the years after the events but said there wasn’t enough to bring a federal criminal case.

The Justice Department has acknowledged that it failed to step in. For more than a year, FBI agents in Indianapolis and Los Angeles had knowledge of allegations against him but apparently took no action, an internal investigation found.

FBI Director Christopher Wray spoke to survivors of Mr. Nassar’s abuse at a Senate hearing in 2021, expressing contrition for the agency’s failures. The assault survivors include decorated Olympians Simone Biles, Aly Raisman, and McKayla Maroney.

“I’m sorry that so many different people let you down, over and over again,” Mr. Wray said. “And I’m especially sorry that there were people at the FBI who had their own chance to stop this monster back in 2015 and failed.”

After a search, investigators said in 2016 that they had found images of child sex abuse and followed up with federal charges against Mr. Nassar.

Continue reading at the Epoch Times

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 23:05

"That's Concerning": US Indo-Pacific Commander Warns China Becoming More Aggressive As Economic Recovery "Failing" 

One of the biggest questions of our time is whether China and the United States can escape Thucydides's Trap. It seems that, in the short term, the US will likely avoid direct conflict with China, but in the long term, there will be a slow march toward conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. 

On Tuesday, Admiral John Aquilino, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), told reporters in Tokyo that China has become increasingly aggressive across Asia. 

"We all need to understand that it's moving very fast," Aquilino said, as quoted by Bloomberg. 

He said, "The buildup of military power despite a bad economy, the increased narrative of all things inside the 10-dash line are Chinese sovereign territory, then the actions that are going toward enforcement."

After serving three years as the head of INDOPACOM, Aquilino will step down. He oversees 380,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, guardians, Coast Guardsmen, and Department of Defense civilians. 

He warned about rising tensions near the Second Thomas Shoal, where the Philippines has held the line since World War II. A recent incident of Chinese vessels using water cannons to block Philippine military vessels has been an ominous sign for some military observers. 

Aquilino also spoke about China's economy, indicating the world's second-largest economy "has drastically been reduced" because of a "real-estate market crash."

"You go ask any economist if the Chinese are going to deliver 5.3% growth, and they will tell you, 'No way,'" Aquilino said.

Aquilino also called North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's regime "disgusting" for spending large sums of money on the military while a food shortage ripples through the country. 

Aquilino's comment comes days before US Secretary of State Antony Blinken travels to China. He is expected to convey Washington's "deep concerns" about Beijing's support for Russia's defense industrial base.

"We're prepared to take steps when we believe necessary against firms that ... severely undermine security in both Ukraine and Europe," Blinken told reporters ahead of Wednesday's trip. 

David Asher, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, commented on Aquilino's remarks by stating:

"Admiral Aquilino has been a forward-thinking, leaning, and acting US Combatant Commander in the Indo-Pacific. But the facts on the ground and sea have been allowed to strategically favor Communist China which has fortified coral reefs and atolls across the South China Sea and fan its naval forces across the region from the seas surrounding Japan to Taiwan to the Philippines and Vietnam. 

"China's relentless expansionism has been largely unopposed. Beijing cannot be allowed to continue its expansionist wave. It's time for the US, Japan, and Australia to link up and provide active protection to the Philippines and start to begin freedom of navigation missions to Taiwan. Incoming Commander Admiral Sam Paparo will have a lot on his plate." 

Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine and soaring turmoil in the Middle East, including Israel and Iran, with risks of conflicts flaring up in the Indo-Pacific region, are all confirmations that a multipolar world has emerged. 

That said, we have noted that defense spending worldwide has surged, pushing the defense industry into a bull market:

• World Stumbles Into "More Dangerous Decade" As Defense Spending Soars, Says Military Think Tank

• Germany Reportedly Goes On Military Spending Spree To Hit NATO Spending Minimums For First Time

• Lockheed Martin Wins $17BN Interceptor Contract To Protect US Homeland

• German Tank Builder Says "New Decade Of Security Policy Begins" As Defense Bull Market Roars

• SAAB CEO Says Rising War Risk Drives Defense Spending; Missile Stocks In Bull Market

• Global Military Spending Hits All-Time High Of $2.4 Trillion

There's a bull market in global defense stocks. 

The multipolar world will only bring more chaos and destruction. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 22:45

Are The Mass Pro-Palestine Protests On College Campuses Just One Big Virtue Signal?

Submitted by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

As a general rule, rebels without a cause will eventually latch onto the nearest cause of opportunity.  It really doesn't matter what it is, for activists with ample time on their hands and plenty of trust fund money these protests fill the void and make them feel like they have meaning.

Such is the case with the political left and their infatuation with Gaza (or any movement rooted in Islam).  It's been noted by many commentators that the relationship between Islamic fundamentalists and the far-left is a bizarre one.  After all, almost every element of Sharia Law is completely antithetical to the proclaimed values of progressives including equal rights for women, equal rights for gays and the leftist penchant for atheism.  All of these beliefs might get a person executed in a host of Muslim governed countries, but for some reason the leftist mob wants in on the Islamic bandwagon.  

Whatever your opinion is on the war or the governments involved it's clear that it has nothing to do with woke activists in the western world.  The war is simply a vehicle which they hope they can hijack and attach their own agendas to.  Primarily, progressives view Israel as a symbol of western "colonialism" and in their minds anything colonial must be destroyed.  Their concerns for Palestinians are peripheral, if their concerns exist at all.  This is about visibility and a chance to create chaos.

If you believe in "karma" then you might suggest that the Israelis have been setting themselves up for this reaction for a long time.  Israeli tied propaganda organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have been fomenting leftist insanity for decades and defending every aspect of the social justice religion.  They helped create a golem that they can't control and now it's turning on them.

Of course, it's not the Israeli government that's suffering any real consequences; rather, it's conservatives abroad as well as Jewish students attending western universities.  After many years of the ADL crying wolf (racism and antisemitism) over secret Nazis that didn't really exist, now they finally have something legitimate to complain about.

Woke protesters marched out in tandem within multiple universities across the US in a relatively well coordinated disruption action.  New York University, Columbia, Yale and Berkeley were all involved but much of the media focus was on NYU and Columbia.  Activists linked arms and allegedly blocked Jewish students from entering campus facilities.  The atmosphere has become so volatile that Jewish religious leaders are calling on students to leave such institutions for their own safety.   

The NYPD has responded with a blitz on the protests.  Encampments have been torn down and mass arrests have ensued.  Police could not immediately share how many people had been arrested or issued with summonses because the situation was ongoing.  Faculty members were among those arrested, an NYPD spokesperson told CNN.  

NYPD have torn down the encampments and made mass arrests at Columbia. pic.twitter.com/TRR68DU2ry

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) April 23, 2024

These developments have some interesting implications for the US going forward.  In particular, polls show that Joe Biden is gradually losing favor among young voters because of his continued military and monetary support of Israel.  His most rabid base is turning on him, which means the November election is looking better and better for Donald Trump.  

That said, there is the continuing problem of fabricated rationales.  Just as the death of George Floyd was shamelessly exploited by the left and Democrats as a radicalization moment, Gaza is also being used erroneously as a foil for increasingly aggressive mobilizations of people that, frankly, just want a reason to burn stuff. It's likely that as the conflict continues to escalate western countries will see larger and more violent protests in major cities.

Does anyone in the Middle East care what a bunch of college kids in the US have to say about Gaza?  No, why would they?  Can the US government influence the developing war for the better?  Maybe, but they aren't going to.  But stopping the war is not necessarily the goal of US based activists.    

Donald Trump has loudly voiced his own political support for Israel on a number of occasions so a change in White House leadership probably won't lead to the economic or strategic isolation of Israel.  Unless the war ends soon, which is improbable now that Iran is involved, we may be seeing nationwide protests and riots yet again.  Different excuse, same results. 

*  *  *

The views expressed above do not necessarily represent those of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 22:25

These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024

Does your state support your 2nd Amendment rights or make it exceedingly difficult to keep and bear arms?

Ammo.com has ranked the worst states to be a gun owner below...

How?

By analyzing each state’s current laws, upcoming laws, concealed carry guidelines, self-defense statutes, and 2A-centric taxes in order to identify the worst states for gun owners in 2024.

Report Highlights

• Hawaii is the #1 worst state for gun owners due to strict purchasing and carry laws, as well as defying the Supreme Court on the individual’s right to carry.

• California is the #2 worst state for gun owners due to its permit-to-purchase and reciprocity laws.

• New York, Illinois, and New Jersey take the #3, #4, and #5 spot in our list of worst states for gun ownership due to strict purchasing and carrying requirements.

• North Carolina, Maine, and Ohio fall into spots #25, #24, and #23 due to new restrictive legislation with some relaxed carry laws.

• Some states rank lower than others due to excessive infringements, additional taxes, and the current Governor’s 2A statements.

• State and local laws defining Stand Your Ground vs. Duty to Retreat vary and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Jump to a state: AL | AK | AZ | AR | CA | CO | CT | DE | FL | GA | HI | ID | IL | IN | IA | KS | KY | LA | ME | MD | MA | MI | MN | MS | MO | MT | NE | NV | NH | NJ | NM | NY | NC | ND | OH | OK | OR | PA | RI | SC | SD | TN | TX | UT | VT | VA | WA | WV | WI | WY

Read the full report on the worst states to be a gun owner in 2024 at Ammo.com.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 22:05

Kim Jong Un Oversees "Nuclear Counterattack" Drill

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw salvo launches of the country’s "super-large" multiple rocket launchers in what state media presented as simulation drills of a nuclear counterattack against enemy targets, state media revealed Tuesday.

The day prior, the South Korean and Japanese militaries reported suspected launches of artillery and ballistic missiles from the north. Pyongyang subsequently confirmed it tested new systems including 600mm multiple rocket launchers, said to be capable of delivering tactical nuclear warheads.

State media referred to the United States and South Korea, which have been conducting a series of joint military exercises over many months, as "warmongers" while describing the necessity of exercises focused on nuclear counterattack.

Kim has described that the north's new rocket launchers are as accurate as a "sniper's rifle". Kim observed the exercises from an observation post, a new set of photos released by KCNA shows.

According to a state media description, as cited in AP:

It said the rockets flew 352 kilometers (218 miles) before accurately hitting an island target and that the drill verified the reliability of the "system of command, management, control and operation of the whole nuclear force."

Part of the drill included a salvo of missiles sent toward "the potential enemy" which included targets on and outlying island with a range of just over 350km.

US officials have previously indicated the recent spate of more aggressive statements from Kim should be taken seriously.

"While the officials added that they did not see an imminent risk of a full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula, Mr. Kim could carry out strikes in a way that he thinks would avoid rapid escalation," a NY Times report issued early this year said.

Watch: Images released by the North Korean state media show what it says is the leader Kim Jon Un overseeing a “nuclear counterattack” drill.#NorthKorea

Read more: https://t.co/NZnJKkBPhN pic.twitter.com/bBIwoqwLg4

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) April 23, 2024

All of this is said to be part of Kim's new policy of "open hostility" in response to US provocations on the peninsula, including starting last summer the docking of a US nuclear submarine at a South Korean port.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 21:25

Wave Goodbye To Another Set Of Freedoms With The New Digital ID

Authored by Graham Young via The Epoch Times,

“Papers please” used to be the ostinato of totalitarian systems, at least in the movies.

With the passing of the government’s Digital ID bills, Australians will have to become used to the digital equivalent - so what does that say about present-day Australia?

A few things have surprised me over the last few years, not the least the way the famous Aussie spirit of insubordination has been subsumed into a goody-two-shoes compliance with whatever capricious orders the authorities made.

I can’t imagine our forebears accepting lockdowns and forced vaccinations, and I certainly couldn’t see them accepting an identity card linking not just government accounts but private sector ones as well.

While the first proposition is an assertion based on a gut feeling, the second is very much based on fact.

Remember the Australia Card?

In 1984, the Hawke Labor government introduced the Australia Card, and for the next three years, the government and opposition parties tussled over it to the extent that it triggered a double-dissolution election in 1987.

Objections didn’t just come from the federal Opposition either.

Queensland Labor Senator George Georges resigned from the governing party in 1986 over the issue, and in the lower house, Labor backbencher Lewis Kent said:

“Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitlercard or Stalin-card.”

As a result, while the government won the 1987 election, and had the numbers to push the card through, instead, it withdrew the card when a technicality was found that could have affected its operation. One senses this was a relief.

Individual Freedom Chipped Away, One Law at a Time

Yet, apart from a few senators this time there has been little outcry in response to the Albanese government’s Digital ID, although the Liberal-National Opposition did vote against it.

A form of this ID was recommended by the Murray Inquiry into the Financial System in 2014, but the committee was careful to avoid recommending a full-blown government-issued identity card because of the Australia Card debacle.

The then-Liberal-National government acted on these recommendations, but its version of the bill was to facilitate private organisations to issue their own digital identity cards, rather than the government.

Why has the government now decided to make the card a government-issued one, when the recommendation and the draft legislation was for a competitive system?

At one level one might say it is symptomatic of this Labor government that it wants to control everything and is suspicious of both private enterprise and competition.

At another level, it has been gnawing away at the independence of the citizenry, particularly the independence of thought, so maybe there is a long-term agenda of control here.

Two pieces of draft legislation, and one draft regulation, exemplify this tendency—the proposed draft Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, the Online Safety (Relevant Electronic Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024, as well as the Religious Discrimination Bill.

The combination of these is to restrict what citizens can say, teach, and whom they associate with, depending on what is approved by the government, or worse, regulators.

Recent Tragedies Reveal How Eager Authorities Are to ‘Protect’ Us

Almost as though to prove the dangers of these proposed laws, the Commonwealth “censor” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant just days ago ordered Meta and X to remove videos showing footage from the stabbing incidents at Westfield Bondi Junction shopping centre, and the Christ the Good Shepherd church at Wakely.

I’ve seen this footage, as have many other Australians, and suffice it to say, were I the eSafety commissioner, they would still be up.

When it comes to horror, the footage I have seen from Gaza and Ukraine, and reproduced in the pages and on the websites of the major news sites, is more horrific than any of this footage.

And where is the justification for censoring the information that individuals can now access for themselves?

For a moment there, we all became citizen journalists, able to view events and make our own decisions, and now the government is trying to take our accreditation away from us.

Indeed, some of these clips are uplifting as they show acts of heroism as men throw themselves between attackers and victims, or tend to the wounded.

Ms. Grant only has powers over commercial entities, so I can still, for the moment, show the videos on my blog.

But should we all have a unique identifier, known to the government and cross-referenced to every other activity that we are involved in, who knows what petty bureaucrat will hold my free will in their hands? And what else might the government interfere with?

Voluntary? Not Really

In Canada, a country that shares our democratic norms, we saw the Trudeau government bar protestors, and any supporters who donated money to their cause, from using their bank accounts.

Imagine what an interlinking record could allow them to have done.

Is it too far-fetched to think that could happen in Australia?

The government says these concerns are absurd.

The digital ID card is “voluntary” and will only link records to the person, not link them together, and records will be encrypted. It also claims that it will protect against cyber-attacks.

The voluntary aspect is laughable.

You may be able to access your Centrelink welfare benefits without it, but you will need to physically go down to the Centrelink office, even if you live in Oodnadatta—a remote outback town in South Australia—and if the office is in Perth, Western Australia.

And if you are a company director, you will need one, full-stop, because of the now-mandatory “director IDs” introduced by the Morrison government in 2021.

If “voluntary” doesn’t mean voluntary for all people and all activities, then it doesn’t mean voluntary at all.

Believe It or Not, the Slippery Slope Is Real

So why are we acquiescing to this scheme?

Perhaps it is because we’ve become too compliant—that the irreverent generation were the original immigrants and their sons and daughters, and now we are onto third, fourth, fifth generations and more, the spirit of adventure that brought people here has dissipated.

Or maybe it’s the case that the frog has been swimming in digital waters that have gradually risen in temperature.

First, we allowed social media companies to monetise us in return for the free use of their platforms, and then we allowed them to cross-reference our online activities to create profiles to then be used for other unrelated sites.

And how is that working out? They abuse their power.

We know that, come election time, they will be putting their thumbs on our scales and showing us material that they deem suitable, rather than allowing us to make our own decisions.

We also know that they work hand-in-glove with unscrupulous administrations to sell us lies like “safe and effective” and to suppress embarrassing facts, such as the high probability that viruses escape from laboratories more regularly than from pangolins in a market (particularly when the market didn’t have any pangolins for sale).

I don’t believe that governments are any more trustworthy than social media, especially if they are staffed with Bruce Lehrmanns and Brittany Higgins’s.

Democracy is meant to be government by the people, for the people. And Google’s motto was “Don’t be evil.”

But one seems to be converging on government by anyone but the people, and the other seems to have dropped the motto, maybe ashamed of their hypocrisy.

Either way, human institutions seem inexorably to head towards dissolution, so the less they know about you and can link together, the better.

So I’ll probably pass on my Digital ID.

Whoops, I’m a company director. Looks like they are closing in on me already.

Looks like I’ve already learned the true, government-approved, meaning of “voluntary.”

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 19:45