Zero Hedge

Americans Spent $2.6 Billion On OnlyFans In 2025

Americans Spent $2.6 Billion On OnlyFans In 2025

The United States is now the most OnlyFans-obsessed country on the planet, according to a new global rankings study that is almost certain to fuel debate online. The “OnlyFans Wrapped 2025” report, published by platform search engine OnlyGuider, names the U.S. as both the biggest market overall and home to the most intensely engaged cities anywhere in the world.

While Americans spent an estimated $2.6 billion on OnlyFans in 2025, the report says the country’s dominance is most striking at the city level. Fifteen of the top 20 global cities for per-capita spending are in the U.S., led by Atlanta and Orlando. The report comes days after OnlyFans and TikToker Sophie Rain said she has now earned over $50 million from her content.

Atlanta ranks #1 worldwide, spending $525,476 per 10,000 residents—almost double the national average. In total, the city’s users spent just over $26 million last year. Orlando follows at #2, while Miami, Washington, D.C., Minneapolis, Denver, Seattle and Las Vegas all rank within the global top ten.

Even the country’s most populous city stands out. New York City alone spent $87.2 million, an amount higher than the annual totals of entire small nations measured in the report.

Sam Pierce, CEO of OnlyGuider, said the data leaves no doubt that the U.S. dominates the platform: “If you look at per-capita spend, the global OnlyFans map is basically a cluster of American cities. Atlanta, Orlando, Miami, DC — they’re not just high, they’re world-leading outliers.”

However, the U.S. is no longer the fastest-growing market. U.S. spending growth rose just 2% year over year, compared to 19% in Mexico, 15% across Europe, and 28–32% in emerging markets like parts of Asia and Latin America, suggesting the platform’s next wave of expansion may come from abroad.

The full data set also includes breakdowns for North and South America, along with state, county and city-level numbers. The complete 2025 OnlyFans Wrapped report can be accessed via OnlyGuider’s website. 

To determine where the $7.2 Billion OnlyFans economy actually lives, OnlyGuider built a proprietary financial model that triangulates search intent, traffic quality, and audited revenue.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 19:40

Saudi Arabia Didn't Learn Anything From China's 'Ghost Cities'

Saudi Arabia Didn't Learn Anything From China's 'Ghost Cities'

Authored by Stefan Barti via TheDailyEconomy.org,

You can’t build a castle on sand, and you can’t build a city on assumptions. Saudi Arabia unveiled The Line in January 2021 as a perfect, linear utopia stretching 170 kilometers across the desert. Three years later, the castle is already sinking.

When Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced The Line on January 10, 2021, he promised a radical reimagining of urban life. “We need to transform the concept of a conventional city into that of a futuristic one.” 

Tucked into the upper corner of the kingdom’s Tabuk province, the city would run like a ruler through the Neom region, housing nine million people, the population of Austria, within just 34 square kilometers, all powered by renewable energy. It imagines a world where every need sits within a five-minute walk, yet one can cross the entire city in twenty minutes. But even in a country wealthy enough to seed rain clouds and bankroll vast infrastructure, reality is colliding with ambition. The city that promised to “deliver new wonders for the world” is struggling to deliver its own foundation.

By 2030, only 2.4 kilometers of the 170-kilometer project will be completed, with the rest delayed as the government prioritizes energy infrastructure and scrambles for funding. The project’s leadership has been reshuffled, with the head of the sovereign wealth fund, The Public Investment Fund, now steering the effort amid deepening financial uncertainty. This is unsurprising. The Line was imagined as an engineering object, an architectural marvel, rather than a city that must grow from real human demand. The economic foundation beneath that vision is equally unstable. Saudi Arabia’s fiscal fortunes depend on oil, a commodity that swung from over $110 a barrel in 2012 to $42 in 2020 and now hovers near $70. The financial bedrock for this trillion-dollar city is, like the desert beneath it, shifting.

As urban planner and George Mason scholar Alain Bertaud reminds us, cities are foremost labor markets, not works of art. “Planning,” he argues, “is based on the illusion that a city is a complex building that needs to be designed in advance by competent professionals.” 

While the glossy Neom videos present a pristine, drone-filled future, they do so without answering the most basic question: who will live here? There is no target population beyond the slogan of “nine million,” no industries identified, no international firms committed to office space. The Line sells a vision of technological abundance while omitting the people needed to make a city function. Additionally, the BBC reports that construction has already displaced local communities, some labeled as rebels, and that Saudi authorities justified lethal force against those resisting eviction. The Line lacks the basics, let alone the advanced futurism it advertises: no jobs lined up, no residents committed, and human rights violations overshadowing its image.

For years, Saudi Arabia has attracted foreign workers with the promise of zero income tax and a reputation for safety. But these incentives, however appealing, are not in and of themselves a foundation for long-term economic growth. As Nobel laureate Daron Acemoglu argues, it is institutions, not tax perks or security guarantees, that sustain prosperity. On this front, Saudi Arabia functions less like an open society and more like a modern caste system, granting its citizens far broader rights and protections than the millions of residents, roughly 40 percent of the population, who live and work there. Citizens benefit from public goods such as public schools, where non-Saudis are capped at just 15 percent of enrollment, as well as welfare programs universally free for nationals. Foreigners, by contrast, are routed into private institutions and face sharply limited paths to citizenship waiting 10 years to apply, and even then nothing is guaranteed. This is a separation not only of services, but of ideas and talents. Even the labor market reflects this hierarchy. 

Saudization quotas ensure that nationals are favored for desirable jobs: in many sectors, at least 30 percent of employees must be Saudi, and entire professions are reserved exclusively for citizens. A system built on quotas and exclusion cannot produce genuine meritocracy; talent competes at a disadvantage when citizenship, not ability, is the deciding factor. But the clearest institutional divide is not economic, it is political. Freedom of speech, the most fundamental inclusive right, remains unavailable to citizens and residents alike. The fate of journalist Jamal Khashoggi underlines the risks of dissent in a system built not on participation, but on silence. 

History has shown that governments cannot simply erect structures and call them cities. In China alone, dozens of newly built towns stand largely empty. Anticipating rapid growth, the country produced more cement between 2011 and 2013 than the United States did during the entire twentieth century. One showcase city in China’s interior was designed to house more than one million people, but “currently houses less than 100,000, and it is still less than halfway toward the district’s goal of housing 300,000 people by 2020.” Government planning and reality rarely align.

Yet China’s ghost cities illustrate only the surface of the problem. The deeper issue lies in what a city fundamentally is. 

Aristotle taught that a city requires three things: a functioning politeia, citizens capable of ruling and being ruled; autarkeia, an economic base that allows people to sustain themselves; and koinōnia, a shared conception of the good life that binds people into a community. The Line satisfies none of these conditions. Its residents will not form a politeia, because most will be non-citizens without political rights. It lacks autarkeia, with no industries, no labor market, and no economic ecosystem. Furthermore it cannot produce koinōnia, a communal life, in a system where people remain transient workers rather than members of a civic community. The Line attempts to design a polis without the very ingredients Aristotle believed made a city possible.

Aristotle reminds us that “the city exists by nature,” and that “man is by nature a political animal.” A city, polis, he taught, may come into being for the sake of living, but it endures for the sake of living well. Yet there can be no such good life in The Line without a community capable of shaping its own future, deliberating, dissenting, and holding its leaders accountable. 

Cities grow from freedom, choice, and bottom-up demand, not from architectural decree. Saudi Arabia confronts an irony of its own making. A nation whose modern borders were once drawn from afar now seeks to draw a perfect line of its own. Yet it overlooks the oldest lesson in the desert: drawing lines is easy; living within them is not. Steel and glass can build walls, but they cannot build a city where the foundations of civic life are forbidden to take root.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 19:15

Hypersonics, AI, Space Weapons, & Directed Energy: Lawmakers Release Defense Bill As Expiring Obamacare Subsidies Marinate On Back-Burner

Hypersonics, AI, Space Weapons, & Directed Energy: Lawmakers Release Defense Bill As Expiring Obamacare Subsidies Marinate On Back-Burner

With Congress in its second-to-last week in session for this year, lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee released the final bill text of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Sunday night, which allocates a topline of roughly $8 billion over the $892.6 billion the Department of Defense had requested, and what the House version of the NDAA provided which stuck to the Pentagon's request. 

The NDAA is the annual law passed by Congress that sets the budget, policies, and legal authorities for the U.S. military and national defense programs. It shapes everything from troop pay to weapons development and foreign military aid.

"This year’s National Defense Authorization Act helps advance President Trump and Republicans’ Peace Through Strength Agenda by codifying 15 of President Trump’s executive orders, ending woke ideology at the Pentagon, securing the border, revitalizing the defense industrial base, and restoring the warrior ethos," House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said in a Sunday statement. 

The $8B increase is a 'compromise' - as the Senate tried to jack the budget up by $32 billion over the department's request. According to Breaking Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, noted that appropriators would have the last word on the final budget, but was optimistic that the $8 bullion figure was in the ballpark.

Close up of the Lockheed Martin Airborne Laser Turret in a clean room. Photo: Lockheed Martin.

 "We’re going to put a marker out there that’s like $8 billion above the president’s budget, but we’ll see. It’ll depend on what the appropriators work out," the DC Democrat told the outlet. 

According to a House Armed Services Committee fact sheet, the NDAA procurement plan includes: 

  • $26 billion for shipbuilding
  • $38 billion for aircraft, including "full funding" for the Navy's F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter
  • $4 billion for ground vehicles
  • $25 billion for munitions
  • $145.7 billion for hypersonics, AI, quantum, directed energy and autonomy
  • An estimated $685 million for Israel-specific missile defense (Iron Dome, Arrow, David's Sling) which is separate of ~$3.3 billion in non-NDAA aid
  • $400 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative for both FY26 and FY27. Congrats to all involved.
The F/A-XX placeholder design as shown by the U.S. Navy in its vision for 2030-2035, together with a better image of the original fictional design. (Image credit: U.S. Navy and Tapatalk) Also included are: 

Servicemember Pay and Quality of Life: Provides a **3.8% pay raise**, expands bonuses and special pays, increases family separation allowances, and invests heavily in barracks/housing ($1.5B), childcare ($491M), dining facilities, healthcare improvements, and schools/Impact Aid.

Elimination of DEI and "Woke" Policies: Permanently repeals all DoD DEI offices, programs, training, and activities; prohibits new ones; ensures merit-based promotions, accessions, and command selections (no consideration of race/ethnicity/gender); bans men from women's sports at military academies; cuts funding for related initiatives.

Border Security Support: Fully funds DoD assistance to border security, including National Guard/active-duty deployments, establishment of National Defense Areas, contractor support to CBP, and over $1B for counter-drug/trafficking efforts.

Acquisition and Bureaucracy Reforms (SPEED Act): Implements major reforms to accelerate procurement, prioritize commercial solutions, reduce regulatory burdens, centralize management, empower the acquisition workforce, and streamline processes for faster delivery of innovative technologies.

Defense Industrial Base Revitalization: Establishes funds and programs for capacity investments (including critical minerals), multi-year munitions contracts, supply chain transparency (especially vs. China risks), advanced manufacturing (e.g., 3D printing, robotics), and small business/unmanned systems support.

Missile Defense and "Golden Dome": Updates policy and funds development of the Golden Dome integrated missile defense system; additional funding for THAAD, SM-3, Patriot; codifies related executive orders.

Nuclear Modernization and Deterrence: Fully funds nuclear triad (Sentinel ICBM, Columbia-class, SLCM-N); accelerates programs; codifies advanced nuclear reactor deployment and energy independence initiatives.

Deterring China/Indo-Pacific Focus: Extends and increases funding for Pacific Deterrence Initiative; prohibits acquisitions from China-linked entities (biotech, minerals, drones, solar, etc.); $2.7B+ for regional MILCON/logistics; full funding for Taiwan cooperation, Philippines assistance, and exercises.

Innovation and Technology: Advances AI, biotechnology, quantum, cyber, and software acquisition; establishes new offices/programs for rapid adoption; protects against foreign threats to infrastructure/cloud.

According to the DoD, they found nearly $20B in savings through cuts to climate programs ($1.6B), DEI ($40M+), obsolete assets, bureaucracy, consulting, and inefficient programs, while aligning civilian workforce reforms with broader civil service changes. The NDAA's stated goals are "peace through strength," restoring lethality and meritocracy, revitalizing industry, countering China, and implementing conservative policy priorities while delivering significant troop support and procurement investments.

As Breaking Defense notes further; 

  • Section 1249 attempts to places a brake on the withdrawal of US forces from Europe by requiring specific certifications be handed into Congress for 60 days before forces drop below 76,000 in European Command’s area of responsibility. That same prohibition covers any attempts to “divest, consolidate or otherwise return to a host country any parcel of land or facility” currently under control of EUCOM, or to attempt to relinquish the role of NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander. 
  • The NDAA extends the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative by $400 million for both FY26 and FY27.
  • It also repeals the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) for Iraq.
  • Not included: any language renaming the Department of Defense as the “Department of War.” While President Donald Trump has authorized the use of Department of War as a nickname and it has been taken up by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, that title cannot be made official without congressional action.
Obama-What?

As Punchbowl News observes, lawmakers are not that motivated to deal with the expiring Obamacare subsidies - though apparently "GOP senators who represent dueling ideological factions in the Republican Conference are teaming up on a plan to extend the Obamacare subsidies for two years with income caps and other reforms."

The new proposal from Republican Sens. Bernie Moreno (Ohio) and Susan Collins (Maine), outlined in this one-pager, would cap income eligibility and eliminate zero-premium plans by requiring a $25 minimum monthly payment.

Under the Moreno-led plan, the full tax credit would be available for households with income of up to 400% of the poverty level, and then gradually phase out so that households making over $200,000 would no longer benefit.

It comes as the Senate is set to vote this week — likely Thursday — on Democratic legislation that extends the tax credits for three years, a promise Senate Majority Leader John Thune made to end the recent government shutdown. This won’t get anywhere close to 60 votes.

But Senate Republicans aren’t expected to hold a separate vote on a unified proposal of their own, a dynamic that’s fueling some GOP frustration with Thune, as we reported Friday. -Punchbowl

That said, the reality is that there isn't yet an alternative to the Democrats' legislation that unites Republicans, while Senate GOP leaders wouldn't want to promote Democrat messaging on a bill with a vote that splinters the GOP. So, expect more wheel spinning.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 18:50

Trump Envoy Says 'Benevolent Monarchies' Work Best In Mideast While Hailing Syria's Sharaa

Trump Envoy Says 'Benevolent Monarchies' Work Best In Mideast While Hailing Syria's Sharaa

Via Middle East Eye

The US special envoy for Syria, Tom Barrack, has stated that a "benevolent monarchy" has "worked best" in the Middle East.

Speaking at a panel on Syria during the Doha Forum on Sunday, Barrack praised the Syrian administration of President Ahmad al-Sharaa’s "epic" and "heroic" achievements following the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. The US envoy warned against western efforts to impose democratic models on the Middle East, arguing that such initiatives "have not been successful".

via Tom Barrack/X

"Almost every decision that the West has imposed on the region, rather than allowing it to evolve on its own, has been a mistake," Barrack said.

"Every time we intervene, whether it's in Libya, Iraq, or any of the other places where we've tried to create a colonized mandate, it has not been successful. We end up with paralysis," he added.

Barrack urged the international community to allow Syria to build its own sovereignty, rather than impose external solutions.

"What we all need to do is help them, empower them, and encourage them, and allow them to form the kind of government and inclusive regime that they, the Syrians, wish to establish," he said.

Turning to tensions along the Syrian-Israeli border, the US envoy suggested that these could be resolved through taking "baby steps". He stressed that Syria must define its own trajectory "without the imposition of western expectations such as, ‘we want a democracy in 12 months.'"

Barrack also seemed to question Israel’s claims to democracy, stating: "I don’t see a democracy anywhere. Israel can claim to be a democracy, but in this region, whether you like it or not, what has worked best is, in fact, a benevolent monarchy."

Barrack, a billionaire real estate investor, has made similar unorthodox comments since being appointed to his post by President Donald Trump.

In August, he referred to himself as an "events-driven mercenary" during an interview with online personality Mario Nawfal. In the same interview, he said that "in Israel’s mind," the modern borders in the Middle East, drawn up by the Sykes-Picot agreement, "are meaningless":

"They will go where they want, when they want, and do what they want to protect the Israelis and their borders."

In September, Barrack made a number of candid remarks about Israel, Lebanon, and Qatar, among other issues, in an interview with The National.

The self-envisioned "Emir of Damascus" has allowed his forces to slaughter non-Sunnis, including Christians, Alawites and Druze...

He described peace in the region as "an illusion". He also stated that the US was arming the Lebanese army "so they can fight their own people".

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 18:25

NJ Governor Murphy Using Last Months In Office To Free 31 Convicted Killers...And Promises Even More

NJ Governor Murphy Using Last Months In Office To Free 31 Convicted Killers...And Promises Even More

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy is using his last months in office to release dozens of inmates convicted of homicide — and says many more are coming, according to NJ 101.5.

Since December 2024, Murphy has granted clemency to 283 offenders, including 31 people convicted of murder, felony murder, or aggravated manslaughter, according to NJ 101.5. Some had been serving life sentences or faced decades before being eligible for parole. All will now walk free with five years of supervision.

The governor fast-tracked the releases after creating a new Clemency Advisory Board. In November alone, he freed 23 convicted killers. Murphy has defended the move by highlighting a few cases involving women he says were victims of abuse and “received excessive sentences.”

The glasses are always the tell

NJ 101.5 reported that many of the other newly freed inmates were convicted of brutal crimes unrelated to domestic violence. For example:

  • Sammy Moore received life with 40 years before parole for murder, attempted murder and armed robbery.

  • Anthony Leahey was convicted of three murders in a fatal stabbing case.

  • Lamar Alford was sentenced to at least 63 years for shooting a drug dealer over money.

  • Jamal Muhammad helped plan multiple shootings and was convicted of felony murder.

All are now out early due to Murphy’s clemency.

Tieheen Fletcher, Convicted of murder and weapons offenses.

Advocacy groups tied to the governor’s decisions are applauding the releases. Several of the offenders were clients of the ACLU of New Jersey, whose executive director Amol Sinha called Murphy’s actions “historic” and praised “the power of compassion.” The relationship with advocacy groups has raised questions about who has access to the governor’s clemency pipeline — and who does not.

Families of victims and public-safety critics argue the state is freeing violent offenders without transparency, uniform standards, or a public safety review process. Murphy has not responded to broader concerns about risk to communities or why dozens of homicide offenders — not just a handful — were chosen.

Even so, the outgoing governor has made clear he’s not done. He says more pardons and sentence commutations will be issued before he leaves office on Jan. 20, 2026 — meaning additional convicted killers could soon walk free with no legislative oversight and little public input.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 18:00

Greed, Centralization, Monopoly, Ruin

Greed, Centralization, Monopoly, Ruin

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Greed is good up to the point that it delivers ruin.

The primary characteristic of this era is the purposeful confusion of profit and greed, as if they are the same thing. Greed is good because profit is good, and profit is good because the profit motive is the engine of Capitalism which is the engine of global prosperity.

The problem with this logic is greed is not the same as profit. In the sanitized version of the story, the profit motive of each individual magically generates the best possible socio-economic outcome for all via the secret powers of The Invisible Hand of market forces.

This is a fairy tale, of course, for the most profitable arrangement isn't a competitive free-for-all, it's a monopoly that controls the market to its own advantage. Monopolies are by their nature centralized; monopolies snap up or steamroll competitors until they exert centralized power--if not in a single entity then in a cartel that centralizes control of the market.

In the fairy tale about the magic of The Invisible Hand, individuals seek to maximize their private gains by increasing productivity and producing goods and services with more utility-value: higher quality, increased durability, etc. This narrative is core to The Mythology of Progress, which is the belief that Progress is 1) unstoppable and 2) a permanent force that advances as the natural order of things.

In the real world, entities maximize their gains by increasing the price while diminishing the utility-value of the goods and services: profits are maximized by reducing durability (planned obsolescence), reducing quality / quantity and manipulating a monopoly on information to modify the price to extract the maximum profit from each transaction--dynamic pricing is the seemingly harmless cover-term for this exploitation of information asymmetry: the buyer knows little or nothing, the seller knows everything.

This use of cover-stories and terminology is the foundational dynamic of Anti-Progress and Ultra-Processed Life: the authentic term (profit motive) is now the cover story for exploitation-driven greed, and Progress is now the cover story for Anti-Progress--the degradation of quality, durability, transparency and agency.

Greed is not the same as profit. Greed maximizes gains by exploitation, not increasing value. Greed is the operative driver of the current era. The socio-political-economic system is dominated by greed-driven concentrations of power: monopolies, cartels and states.

There are three mechanisms that greatly expand the potential for assembling monopoly / cartel centralization of power:

1) Technology by its very nature leads to centralized ubiquity due to the network effect--the technology that recruits the most users becomes the default access to participate in the economy--participation that is essential to function in a technology-dominated economy. This ubiquity generates monopoly (or quasi-monopoly) which then generates high stock valuations which then provide the money needed to maintain and extend the monopoly.

Technology companies' access to the stock market via initial public offerings (IPOs) offers unique access to a nearly limitless source of "free money" to buy up competitors via issuing more shares of the company's stock.

This immense pool of wealth enables technology companies to buy control of narratives and political power.

2) Credit. If an entity cannot create "free money" by issuing more shares of its stock, if it has access to nearly limitless credit, it can use this credit top buy up competitiors and buy political protection of its monopoly. This is why John D. Rockefeller was obsessed with gaining access to more credit: that was his pathway to establishing a monopoly in the oil industry.

3. The state. Those who buy (or gain by other means) political influence can then create monopolies or cartels via state regulations. To the degree that the state has a monopoly on centralized power, all monopolies and cartels are private-sector / state entities, as centralized privately controlled power can only exist if the centralized state allows it.

As I explain in my new book Investing In Revolution, we inhabit a world in which authenticity has been replaced by self-serving artifice, artifice which enriches those who own or reap gains from centralized, monopolistic, extractive, exploitive entities created by technology, credit/issuance of stock and the state.

Orwell called this substitution double-speak: greed is positive profit, Anti-Progress is positive Progress, extraction that enriches the few at the expense of the many is just good old profit driving Progress, and so on, a hall of mirrors that spins 24/7 in a digital carnival intentionally designed to be addictive.

Greed is good up to the point that it delivers ruin. We are closer to that phase-change than we imagine--if we can imagine such a phase-change at all.

*  *  *

My new book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free)

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.comSubscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 17:40

"Things Are About To Snap": China's Trade Surplus Tops $1 Trillion For The First Time, Sparking Global Howls Of Outrage

"Things Are About To Snap": China's Trade Surplus Tops $1 Trillion For The First Time, Sparking Global Howls Of Outrage

With Europe finally realizing - very belatedly, as usual - that Trump was right all along in his crusade to hammer Beijing's relentless dumping of exports to flood foreign markets with its below-cost wares as China no longer has nearly the required demand for goods and services and so has to crush and dominate foreign markets by selling at far below market prices, overnight we learned that China’s trade surplus in goods surpassed $1 trillion for the first time, highlighting the ongoing boom in the country’s exports despite US President Donald Trump’s tariff war.

Exports rose 5.9% in November on a year earlier, reversing October's rare decline, while imports rose by 1.9% according to data released by China’s customs administration, which covers goods but not services. 

The November surplus came in at $112 billion, the third-largest ever accumulated by China in a single month and far more than forecast by economists.

For the first 11 months of the year, China’s exports increased 5.4% from the year-earlier period to $3.4 trillion, while the country’s imports declined 0.6% over that same stretch to $2.3 trillion. That brought the country’s trade surplus this year to $1.08 trillion, China’s General Administration of Customs said Monday. The equivalent figure for the full year last year was just shy of $1 trillion. The record surplus comes in the wake of a de-escalation in trade tensions between Washington and Beijing, which agreed a year-long truce in October.

That remarkable surplus, never before seen in recorded economic history, is the culmination of decades of industrial policies and human industriousness that helped China emerge from a poor agrarian economy in the late 1970s to become the world’s second-largest economy.

What is remarkable is that China navigated the trade war and growing economic protectionism around the world, and needed just 11 months to catapult it past the full-year record set in 2024. While shipments to the US plummeted 29% in November...

.... the eighth month of double-digit declines and the biggest since August, strong growth in sales to regions like the European Union and Africa more than offset the slump. 

Lynn Song, chief Greater China economist at ING Bank NV, said the rebounds in shipments to the EU and Japan were “perhaps a little surprising.”

“The November export data came in a little stronger than expected, despite a further deceleration of exports to the US,” Song said.

Shipments overseas - in many cases to regions such as Vietnam which then transship to the US - have boomed for much of this year, in spite of Trump’s launch of a trade war early in 2025. The world’s second-biggest economy has emerged largely unscathed from the standoff, as it delivered more goods to markets other than the US, which have then proceeded to ship Chinese imports onward to the US.

The display of export dominance is stirring waves of resentment abroad, especially among countries which are forced to shutter domestic industries as they fail to compete with much cheaper Chinese imports.

China’s industrial heft has long been well-known to its trading partners, becoming a central point of contention in its relations with the world. Last year, its trade surplus rose to a record $993 billion. Topping the $1 trillion milestone throws the magnitude of China’s export dominance into even starker relief and is likely to draw more attention to the growing imbalances.

“It is so big that it’s obvious that it’s not just the United States or Europe but the whole world that will have to fund that gap,” Jens Eskelund, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, told the WSJ.

On Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron, who just returned home after an otherwise cordial three-day summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing and Chengdu, warned that the EU may take “strong measures” including by imposing tariffs, should Beijing fail to address the imbalance.

French President Emmanuel Macron in China

“I told them that if they didn’t react, we Europeans would be forced, in the very near future, to take strong measures and withdraw from cooperation, like the United States, such as imposing tariffs on Chinese products,” Macron said in an interview with French daily Les Echos.

“China is hitting the heart of the European industrial and innovation model,” he said. French officials have been particularly upset about the Chinese yuan, which has fallen by around 10% against the euro this year.

During a joint appearance with Xi in Beijing last Thursday, Macron said that these trade "imbalances are becoming unbearable."

It was a remark that reflected sharpening French demands on Beijing to spur consumption and curb exports, and one Macron repeated to rapt Sichuan students and at a gathering with French and Chinese business leaders during his fourth trip to the country as president.

ING's Song added that if "the EU indeed does follow suit with tariffs, it would represent a significant risk to the external demand outlook for China."

France’s goods trade deficit with China has doubled in the past decade to €47bn in 2024. French investment in China over the same period is nearly quadruple China’s into France.

Paris is demanding Beijing recalibrate its trade and investment relationship with the EU, according to the FT.

We are at the last stop before a crisis,” a French official warned. “If we don’t change course, we will worsen global fragmentation,” they added, suggesting Paris would have to consider “protective measures”. 

Macron, who was accompanied on his trip by about 40 French business leaders, called for China to transfer technology to France in areas such as clean tech and batteries — a stark reminder of the shifting balance of power in crucial industrial sectors. The French president also defended EU trade investigations into Chinese electric vehicles, saying the bloc was taking a company-by-company approach. 

“We need more tech neutrality and a European preference” for domestic industries such as automobiles, Macron said in Chengdu, capital of China’s south-western Sichuan province.

“This is not at all aggressive or protectionist. The Americans and other players in the North American market do it, the Chinese do it,” the president said. “The major risk for Europeans is accelerated deindustrialisation.”

But it’s not just France, says Eskelund of the European chamber, who points to a raft of bilateral trade complaints and actions leveled against China in recent months, including from not just the U.S. and its Western allies, but also from countries in Southeast Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

“I have no doubt that we’ll see more, not less, in terms of all of these trade defense initiatives all over the world,” he said.

Eskelund says that China’s trade imbalance with the world is even more pronounced than the $1 trillion figure suggests, given the relative weakness of the Chinese yuan.

When calculated by value, China accounts for roughly 15% of global goods exports. But in volume terms, Eskelund estimates that every shipping container being sent from Europe to China is outnumbered by the four containers heading in the other direction. In volume terms, he estimates that China accounts for some 37% of everything being exported in shipping containers.

“Concern is growing,” he said, warning that, in the near future, we may “get to a point where things snap.”

The EU is considering setting “made in Europe” targets of up to 70% for certain products such as cars as it pushes to prioritise domestic goods and cut reliance on China. Brussels is also planning to tighten foreign investment rules to ensure Chinese companies do not gain advantage from the bloc’s open market without generating benefits for local workers and sharing technology.

For its part, China continues to make promises and deliver nothing. China’s commerce ministry on Friday repeated promises to eliminate restrictive measures in the domestic market and to spur consumption. But experts told the FT that Beijing has little intention of drastically altering its economic model. As a result, trade tensions between China and the bloc have sparked anti-dumping investigations in both directions.

The EU dairy sector is awaiting a ruling on a probe Beijing launched last year in retaliation against Brussels’ imposition of additional levies on Chinese EV imports. China could impose tariffs of as much as 40 per cent on dairy products on top of existing duties. 

As Bloomberg notes, the trillion dollar milestone reached by China follows the recent de-escalation of tensions with the Trump administration. The huge surplus also underscores how Beijing is "struggling" to rebalance (as in it hasn't even bothered to start) the economy away from its dependence on demand abroad, with net exports accounting for almost a third of economic growth this year.

“It does look like China’s export competitiveness is still standing firm against US tariffs,” said Michelle Lam, Greater China economist at Societe Generale, referring to robust shipments to other markets than America. Rising trade tensions with the EU are “a source of downside risk to watch out for,” she said.

After Macron failed to make any impression on Xi's export aspirations, on Monday, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul arrived in China for a two-day trip, becoming the latest senior European official to visit for talks. China’s exports to the EU expanded almost 15% last month - the fastest since July 2022 - with sales to France, Germany and Italy all seeing double-digit growth as Chinese exporters grab market shares from domestic producers. Meanwhile, European domestic industries are being snuffed out in one brutal, manufacturing depression as they fail to compete with Chinese substitutes. 

Wadephul said before the trip that he’d raise trade curbs, especially on rare earths, and “overcapacities” in electric vehicles and steel with his Chinese counterparts. China’s auto imports are down almost 39% in the year to date.

Shipments overseas have boomed for much of this year, in spite of Trump’s launch of a trade war early in 2025. The world’s second-biggest economy has emerged largely unscathed from the standoff, as it delivered more goods to markets other than the US.

The year-on-year increase in exports of electronic and machinery products rebounded to almost 10% last month, versus October’s rise of just over 1%, according to Bloomberg calculations based on China’s customs data. Declines in shipments of consumer goods narrowed. 

Exports to Africa surged nearly 28% in November, while those to the Southeast Asian trading bloc gained only 8.4%, the least since February. Despite escalating tensions over the self-governing island of Taiwan, imports from Japan rose faster in November than exports to there, resulting in a $1.3 billion deficit for China.

The historic trade surplus will help boost growth in China's GDP after months of deterioration in the economy. Retail sales are coming off their longest stretch of slowdowns since 2021 while investment just shrank by a record amount. Although the Chinese economy is expanding at a slower pace in the last quarter of the year, its strong performance earlier in 2025 means the official growth target of around 5% is likely within reach.

As Bloomberg notes, foreign demand has been the one consistent driver of Chinese growth, helping compensate for lackluster private consumption at home and the prolonged slump in the housing market. But the trade picture has become increasingly unbalanced, with China’s weak demand and increasingly innovative firms slashing demand for imports.

While it’s “ultimately essential” for China to embrace a growth model driven more by domestic demand, such a pivot will take time, according to ING’s Song. In reality it will likely take years, and by then Europe's domestic production will be decimated. 

“We need to see what sort of concrete measures are put into place to boost domestic consumption, and how those measures to increase win-win cooperation and establish international consumption centers play out,” he said. “It’s quite clear at this point that relying on external demand as the main growth engine is a risky bet.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 17:20

Trump Says He Has 'Other Methods' To Impose Tariffs If Supreme Court Limits Powers

Trump Says He Has 'Other Methods' To Impose Tariffs If Supreme Court Limits Powers

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump on Dec. 7 urged the Supreme Court to uphold his tariff program, saying a ruling against his use of emergency economic powers would weaken national security, while also saying there are alternative legal tools to keep the duties in place.

Trump said in a Dec. 7 post on Truth Social that the tariff regime currently before the Supreme Court is “far more direct, less cumbersome, and much faster” than other methods available under U.S. law.

“Speed, power, and certainty are, at all times, important factors in getting the job done in a lasting and victorious manner,” he wrote. “I have settled 8 Wars in 10 months because of the rights clearly given to the President of the United States.”

Trump noted “other methods of charging tariffs” exist but said that the approach challenged in the courts delivers a “strong and decisive national security result,” adding that “if countries didn’t think these rights existed, they would have said so, loud and clear!”

Speaking to reporters later that evening at the Kennedy Center in Washington, Trump again said that the case goes beyond trade policy.

“We have tremendous flexibility with the current system. It’s unbelievable for national security. I’ve ended eight wars largely because of trade, because of tariffs,” he said. “If we go the other tariff route—and there are other routes we can go—but it won’t give you the same pure national security as this one. This one is swift and very powerful.”

The Supreme Court heard arguments last month on whether Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that allows presidents to regulate imports after declaring a national emergency. A ruling is expected in the coming months.

Several lower courts have already found that Trump misapplied IEEPA when he imposed tariffs on nearly every country this year, prompting more than a dozen companies to sue.

Costco filed a complaint late last month seeking repayment of duties it says were illegally collected.

While Trump has been publicly urging the Supreme Court to uphold the program, senior administration officials have been working to reassure allies and markets that the tariff architecture will stay intact in one form or another regardless of the ruling.

Officials Say Tariffs Will Stand Regardless of Ruling

In a Dec. 5 appearance on Politico’s “The Conversation” podcast, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the administration has spent years preparing fallback options.

“We’ve been thinking about this plan for five years or longer,” Greer said, adding that “tariffs are going to be a part of the policy landscape going forward.”

When asked whether the White House has alternate authorities ready if IEEPA is narrowed, he replied: “Of course.”

Greer also pushed back on claims that litigation threatens the overall strategy.

“First of all, you don’t change 70 years of trade policy overnight,” he said.

“And second of all, when some people say, ‘Oh, well, this is chaos. What’s your strategy?’, what they really want to know is, can we go back to how it was before? And that’s not going to happen.”

A cargo ship full of shipping containers is seen at the port of Oakland, California, on Aug. 4, 2025. Carlos Barria/Reuters

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivered a similar message days earlier. In a Dec. 3 interview with The New York Times, Bessent said the government could “recreate the exact tariff structure with [sections] 301, with 232, with 122,” referring to authorities under the 1962 Trade Expansion Act and the 1974 Trade Act. He said the administration can also impose tariffs permanently and urged countries that negotiated tariff-reduction deals with Trump to “stick with it.”

Broader Toolkit for Tariffs

The administration has already deployed multiple legal pathways for recent duties, including Section 232 tariffs on strategic industries such as autos, copper, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and aircraft, and Section 301 tariffs following investigations into unfair trade practices.

Bessent also cited Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which allows tariffs up to 50 percent against countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce, and Section 122 of the 1974 Act, which allows temporary tariffs of up to 15 percent for 150 days in response to perceived trade imbalances.

Greer said the tariff system now functions as a tiered map of U.S. strategic priorities, with China facing the highest rates, Southeast Asia and India next, allies in the middle, and the lowest duties in the Western Hemisphere, “almost like concentric rings,” he said.

Trump has repeatedly touted tariff revenue in recent days and weeks, saying it could reduce the need for federal income taxes, help pay down the national debt, and fund $2,000 payments to some Americans.

Speaking to reporters at the Kennedy Center on Dec. 7, Trump was asked about his thoughts on tariff revenues being used to pay down the national debt rather than funding dividends.

Trump agreed in principle but said extra income from the duties could still be used for payments to households.

“We will. I agree with them on that,” Trump said. “But I also think that we’re making so much money with tariffs that we'll also be able to make a nice dividend to middle-income people ... and lower-income people.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 17:00

"Xi Responded Positively": NVDA Spikes After Trump Allows H200 Chip Exports To China

"Xi Responded Positively": NVDA Spikes After Trump Allows H200 Chip Exports To China

Having pumped (and dumped) earlier today on reports that the Trump administration will allow H200 chip exports to China, NVDA shares extending gains the after-hours (to the highs of the day) after President issued a statement on X, confirming he will allow Nvidia to ship its chips to China and noting that "President Xi respondedly positively."

NVDA spiked...

Trump wrote that "I have informed President Xi, of China, that the United States will allow NVIDIA to ship its H200 products to approved customers in China, and other Countries, under conditions that allow for continued strong National Security."

He added that:

"President Xi responded positively!"

At a cost:

"25% will be paid to the United States of America. This policy will support American Jobs, strengthen U.S. Manufacturing, and benefit American Taxpayers."

Trump continued:

"The Biden Administration forced our Great Companies to spend BILLIONS OF DOLLARS building “degraded" products that nobody wanted, a terrible idea that slowed Innovation, and hurt the American Worker. That Era is OVER!

We will protect National Security, create American Jobs, and keep America’s lead in Al. NVIDIA’s U.S. Customers are already moving forward with their incredible, highly advanced Blackwell chips, and soon, Rubin, neither of which are part of this deal. My Administration will always put America FIRST.

The Department of Commerce is finalizing the details, and the same approach will apply to AMD, Intel, and other GREAT American Companies. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

Permission for H200 exports is seen as a compromise from Nvidia’s earlier push to sell its more advanced Blackwell design chips to Chinese customers, a person familiar with the matter said prior to the announcement.

After meeting with Trump on Wednesday, Huang expressed uncertainty about whether China would accept Nvidia’s H200 chips should the US relax restrictions on sales of the processors.

“We don’t know. We have no clue,” Huang said, as he headed into a closed-door meeting with members of the Senate Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over export controls.

“We can’t degrade chips that we sell to China — they won’t accept that.”

So, Jensen gets his deal at a cost - if China wants the 'old chips' - and Trump gets to brag about more revenue for Washington and support the stock market.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 16:45

DC Police Chief Resigns As 'Massive Scandal' Over Crime Stats Heats Up

DC Police Chief Resigns As 'Massive Scandal' Over Crime Stats Heats Up

Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on Monday that Police Chief Pamela A. Smith will be stepping down, three months after we reported that the DOJ was investigating a "massive scandal" over manipulated crime data.

Smith, who also doesn't know what the term "chain of command" means, is out for unknown reasons - however she told Fox 5 that she resigned to spend more time with her family.

"After 28 years in law enforcement, I have been going nonstop," she said. 

"Serving alongside such dedicated professionals, both those on the front lines and those working tirelessly behind the scenes, has been one of the greatest honors of my career," Smith - who's been on the job just over two years, told the Washington Post

Crime Data Scandal

The DC Police are also under investigation in a pair of federal probes into alleged manipulation of crime statistics. In early September, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller revealed an ongoing Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into whether Washington D.C. officials manipulated crime statistics is in the process of uncovering a “massive scandal." 

Miller told reporters that when the results of the investigation are finally that, “It will stun you,” adding, “Even though D.C. had the worst crime in America–honestly measured–it dramatically understated how bad it was.”

Miller said that DOJ investigators have uncovered evidence that crime data was manipulated to the point that some murders and homicides were falsely reported as accidents.

The White House Deputy Chief of Staff also assured reporters that the full extent of the manipulation “will be uncovered and it will all be brought to light.”

In Octoberthe Washington Post reported that there was an internal scandal in the DC Police Department- which has been run by Democrats for decades - in which frustrated cops have been talking to the DOJ and have receipts, presented with a bow by D.C. Police Union Chairman Greggory Pemberton. 

WaPo detailed internal accusations that "managers were recording serious crimes as more minor ones to make their police districts appear safer or avoid the ire of top department brass" - and that officers and supervisors 'clashed' over "whether an offense was a robbery or a theft, or whether a weapon used in an assault qualified as potentially deadly."

The frustrated officers "kept lists, documenting cases where they believed a higher-up improperly classified a crime as a lesser offense," with one noting 150 such instances in March of 2024 alone in which staff in the Southeast D.C. police district believed offenses were in appropriately classified. 

"The police department is playing fast and loose with how they report their data so that they can report favorably to the citizens about crime, and I don’t think it’s fair to the city," said Pemberton - who's been assisting the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans with 'information compiled by officers.'

So, a group of pissed off cops within the DC police department have been fighting with superiors and keeping notes over misclassified crimes, and kept notes. Now they're working with the feds to blow the lid. Or as WaPo puts it - "found a receptive audience."

The other investigation is being headed up by the House Oversight Committee with a report expected to be finalized in the coming weeks, according to a committee aide who told WaPo on the condition of anonymity. 

*  *  *

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 16:40

When They Say "Democracy", They Don't Mean Democracy

When They Say "Democracy", They Don't Mean Democracy

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

"Imagine if the US and EU were still aligned on the censorship-by-proxy strategy. Few people realize how close we were to global totalitarianism."

- Michael Shellenberger

Western Civ is choking itself to death with lawfare in the name of “democracy.” If you think just a little bit past the sale, you will realize that few will say what they mean by “democracy,” including the most ardent “democracy” cultists. What it supposedly means is legal outcomes that the political left wants, not what the law, or the truth, or justice requires.

On the surface, the left pretends to want outcomes that favor their roster of designated victim groups: women, dark-skinned people, and sexual outliers, the familiar cast of characters with its tiresome scripts.

But that’s not what they really want.

They don’t really care about the “marginalized.”

What they really want is power.

The “marginalized” are just their clients and shock troops. They want to push everybody around, tell them how to live, and what to think, including the marginalized. If society has to get wrecked in the process, that’s okay — that will just make it easier to “build back better” to their advantage, or so their operating algorithm dictates. The left does not think past its own algorithms.

The “democracy” cultists are foremost against freedom of speech, because speech is what distinguishes human beings among the rest of the animal kingdom, and if you allow it, human beings are liable to develop ideas — ideas being the product of language — and especially ideas that make the “democracy” cultists uncomfortable. For instance, the idea that the “democracy” cultists don’t deserve the power they crave because they are dishonest, unscrupulous, and sadistic. Can’t have people thinking that, or saying it out-loud.

Censorship, the outright suppression of expressed thought, is the primary device for enforcing their version of “democracy.” The “democracy” cultists of the USA were especially avid for it the past decade after Mr. Trump came on the scene and offered to oppose the “democracy” cult’s plans to aggregate power. So, under the catspaw president “Joe Biden,” the FBI, CIA, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, Stanford University’s Internet Observatory, the social media companies, and the White House itself worked sedulously to suppress the free expression of ideas, including the idea that they were all working to suppress free expression.

When Mr. Trump miraculously survived manifold attempts to stuff him in prison via lawfare and then, attempted murder, and managed to get re-elected, he put an end to the censorship shenanigans in government. That, in turn, became inconvenient to the “democracy” cultists in Europe who were, apparently, not busy enough destroying their own countries’ cultures and their economies. They put extra effort into suppressing free expression among their citizen-subjects: serious jail time for mean texts and mere casual statements on the street.

Now they are coming after the international speech platform “X,” liberated by Elon Musk three years ago at a $44-billion price. The European Commission, a body of unelected bureaucrats under the EU, created a so-called Digital Services Act to deal with the threat of free speech. After a two-year-investigation, the commission has leveled a $140-million fine against “X” for a series of specious offenses, such as not meaningfully verifying account authenticity [blue check marks] eroding trust in verified content. Mr. Musk objected, naturally. Veep JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, called it an “attack on American tech.” It’s more than that, of course. It’s an effort to wreck the company, which would eliminate the chief remaining public arena for free speech and genuine news worldwide.

I would expect Mr. Trump to respond shortly, perhaps with tariffs that make it impossible for the Europeans to sell their cars in the USA, or their wine, or whatever else is on offer. He will squeeze them until they drop this stupid crusade to destroy an American company. And then stand by and watch as “democracy” cultists in the USA complain about him defending free speech.

We have enough trouble with the “democracy” cult here at home.

The Norm Eisen Axis-of-Evil has enjoyed endless “funding” from the dark money spigots of George Soros, British hedge fund billionaire Christopher Hohn, and Shanghai-based American billionaire Neville Roy Singham.

Norm Eisen, Lawfare Ninja Supreme

Once the money-flows are turned off, you will see a lot less nuisance litigation aimed at perverting the rule of law and destroying the country. Norm Eisen and his colleagues operate out of a set of foundations and NGOs, chiefly Brookings and the outfit Eisen founded called the States United Democracy Center. They are mere money-launderers.

The federal judiciary is the “democracy” cult’s remaining praetorian guard. The federal judges, especially the Obama and Biden appointed ones, are making sure that Lawfare ninjas won’t be prosecuted for any crimes. The two latest examples: James Comey, case dismissed on procedural issues (for now) on his charge of lying to Congress. And New York AG Leticia James, let off the hook on a mortgage fraud rap by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, probably a case of “jury nullification” and probably due to race — after the fashion of OJ Simpson skating on murder in 1995.

Unfortunately, the remedy of impeaching federal judges is unavailable due to the 60-vote majority required for removal in the Senate. It’s getting to the point where Mr. Trump might have to go medieval on the whole lot of them, declare the Insurrection Act, and move the action into military courts.

Then maybe we’ll see who can handle the truth.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 16:20

Offer Royale: Paramount-Netflix Bidding War For Warner Bros Heats Up In A Blockbuster Showdown

Offer Royale: Paramount-Netflix Bidding War For Warner Bros Heats Up In A Blockbuster Showdown

Update (1324ET): 

Here's the side-by-side comparison of the Netflix versus Paramount-Skydance offers as the bidding war for Warner Bros.' assets goes into overdrive.

In markets, Netflix shares were down about 4% in early afternoon trading in New York, while Paramount shares were up nearly 10%.

Fox Business reporter Charles Gasparino noted that "shares are getting slammed, and with the investor selling, it's unclear if the collar on the stock portion of its WBD bid is being compromised - meaning it might have to come up with more money."

*  *  * 

Update (0950ET): The bidding war between Netflix and Paramount Skydance for Warner Bros.' film and television studios, including HBO and HBO Max, is intensifying heading into the US cash session on Monday morning.

Paramount has raised its bid with a $30-per-share, all-cash tender offer for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, stating in a press release that its proposal is a "superior alternative" to Netflix's deal announced last Friday.

Deal highlights:

Price: An all-cash offer at $30.00 per share, equating to an enterprise value of $108.4 billion, which represents a 139% premium to the undisturbed WBD stock price of $12.54 as of September 10, 2025. In contrast, the Netflix proposal entails a volatile and complex structure valued at $27.75 mix of cash ($23.25) and stock ($4.50), subject to collar and the future performance of Netflix, equating to an enterprise value of $82.7 billion (excluding SpinCo).

Structure: Paramount proposal is for all of WBD, without leaving WBD shareholders with a sub-scale and highly leveraged stub in Global Networks, as the Netflix agreement assumes.

"Paramount's strategically and financially compelling offer to WBD shareholders provides a superior alternative to the Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX) transaction, which offers inferior and uncertain value and exposes WBD shareholders to a protracted multi-jurisdictional regulatory clearance process with an uncertain outcome along with a complex and volatile mix of equity and cash," Paramount wrote in a press release.

Additional facts about the deal:

  • Fully backstopped equity (Ellison family + RedBird) and committed debt financing (Bank of America, Citi, Apollo).

  • Cleaner structure: Paramount buys all of WBD rather than leaving investors holding a Global Networks spinout.

  • Regulatory path: Paramount argues its deal is simpler, while noting that Netflix-WBD would likely face lengthy global antitrust fights.

David Ellison (son of Oracle's Larry Ellison), Chairman and CEO of Paramount, stated: "WBD shareholders deserve an opportunity to consider our superior all-cash offer for their shares in the entire company. Our public offer, which is on the same terms we provided to the Warner Bros. Discovery Board of Directors in private, provides superior value, and a more certain and quicker path to completion. We believe the WBD Board of Directors is pursuing an inferior proposal which exposes shareholders to a mix of cash and stock, an uncertain future trading value of the Global Networks linear cable business and a challenging regulatory approval process. We are taking our offer directly to shareholders to give them the opportunity to act in their own best interests and maximize the value of their shares."

Ellison continued, "We believe our offer will create a stronger Hollywood. It is in the best interests of the creative community, consumers and the movie theater industry. We believe they will benefit from the enhanced competition, higher content spend and theatrical release output, and a greater number of movies in theaters as a result of our proposed transaction. We look forward to working to expeditiously deliver this opportunity so that all stakeholders can begin to capitalize on the benefits of the combined company."

Paramount listed why the Paramount-WBD would be strategic for Hollywood:

  • Creates a scaled Hollywood studio champion with larger content budgets

  • Stronger theatrical footprint and support for movie theaters

  • Bigger, more profitable direct-to-consumer platform (Paramount+ + HBO Max)

  • More competitive vs Netflix, Amazon, Disney

  • Tech boost via Oracle partnership

  • Major global sports rights portfolio

  • Stronger linear networks and ad business

  • Over $6 billion in cost synergies plus existing Paramount transformation savings

Polymarket odds for a Netflix-WBD deal fell from about 20% to 16% following Paramount's news.

pic

The Trump administration is likely aware that Netflix remains heavily influenced by the Obama era, while the Ellison family (major backers of Paramount) is in Trump's orbit. Trump has already signaled he intends to play an active role in antitrust scrutiny, warning earlier that a Netflix-WBD tie-up "could be a problem."

*   *   *   

 

Beyond President Trump's walk down the red carpet at the Kennedy Center Opera House in Washington, D.C., where he greeted actors, musicians, and entertainment industry legends on Sunday evening, he also spoke with reporters about one of the biggest developments in Hollywood: Netflix's plan to acquire Warner Bros., including its film and television studios as well as HBO and HBO Max, in a $72 billion deal.

Trump told reporters on the red carpet that he had some skepticism about the prospects of the Netflix-WBD getting approval. He suggested that regulators could push back, noting Netflix already has a large market share that would "go up a lot" if it acquires WBD.

"Well, that's got to go through a process, and we'll see what happens," the president said, adding, "They have a very big market share ... when they have Warner Bros., that share goes up a lot."

Trump said he plans to discuss the mechanics of the deal with "some economists" before giving it his approval.

"I'll be involved in that decision, too," he said. Normally, presidents don't intervene directly in antitrust reviews of corporate mergers, which makes his comments stand out. It also reinforces the growing panic across Hollywood about what this deal could mean.

"But it is a big market share, there's no question about that. It could be a problem," he added.

No other than the former WBD CEO summed things up succinctly:

If I was tasked with doing so, I could not think of a more effective way to reduce competition in Hollywood than selling WBD to Netflix.

And as we pointed out:

Besides consolidation, Benny Johnson pointed out the marriage between the two companies may only suggest a more sinister plot: Netflix's plan to "own a monopoly on children's entertainment."

Over the weekend, Barclays analysts led by Kannan Venkateshwar questioned Netflix's deal, asking why it would spend nearly $80 billion for a studio company it already disrupted, especially with only $2 to $3 billion in expected synergies and a slow integration due to existing WBD distribution and content-licensing agreements (read the report).

Also, Trump added that Netflix's CEO, Ted Sarandos, joined him at the White House last week. He said Sarandos was a "great person" who has done "one of the greatest jobs in the history of movies."

The latest Polymarket odds of whether the Netflix-WBD closes by the end of 2026 stand at 19%.

Merger approvals are typically handled by independent regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, rather than by the president directly. That makes Trump's stated involvement highly unusual. It's also worth noting that Paramount–Skydance, backed by the Ellison family, recently made a bid for WBD.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 16:15

"Do Not Mistake Compliance For Surrender" - Alina Habba Steps Down As Acting US Attorney For New Jersey

"Do Not Mistake Compliance For Surrender" - Alina Habba Steps Down As Acting US Attorney For New Jersey

Alina Habba, the former personal attorney to President Trump, is stepping down from her contested position atop the federal prosecuting office in New Jersey.

"As a result of the Third Circuit's ruling, and to protect the stability and integrity of the office which I love, I have decided to step down in my role," she said in a statement posted on X on Monday.

Habba’s resignation came after district and appellate court rulings which found she was unlawfully serving in the role, a powerful post charged with enforcing federal criminal and civil law.

The Trump administration had been attempting to keep Habba in place after her interim appointment expired and she had not received US Senate confirmation.

Habba’s statement Monday said “do not mistake compliance for surrender”.

“Make no mistake, you can take the girl out of New Jersey, but you cannot take New Jersey out of the girl,” Habba’s statement said.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said that Habba would remain at the Department of Justice as senior advisor to the attorney general for U.S. Attorneys.

“I am saddened to accept Alina’s resignation,” Bondi said, calling the appellate court's decision "flawed".

Bondi credited Habba with helping to reduce crime in Camden and Newark, New Jersey, and said the DOJ would continue “to review” the appeals court ruling.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 15:00

Border Czar Says 62,000 Illegally Smuggled Children Rescued So Far

Border Czar Says 62,000 Illegally Smuggled Children Rescued So Far

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

White House border czar Tom Homan on Dec. 7 said more than 60,000 children who were illegally smuggled into the United States have been located by the Trump administration and that some were rescued from dire situations, including sex trafficking and forced labor.

In an interview with the Fox News show “Fox & Friends” on Dec. 7, Homan said that the previous administration “lost track of 300,000” children who were “smuggled into” the United States, saying some of those children were released to ”unvetted sponsors.”

Since President Donald Trump took office in January, 62,000 children who were taken into the United States had been found as of Dec. 5, he said.

Homan said that “many of them are in sex trafficking,” “are in forced labor,” or are being abused.

He also said, “[I] can’t discuss some of the mistreatment we found out about.”

Homan said that Trump committed to doing everything possible “to find every one of these children.” He did not provide more details about the rescued children but said that the administration “saved over 62,000 children’s lives.”

A statement released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on Dec. 5 stated that the number of border encounters is continuing to decline; 30,367 total encounters were reported to the agency nationwide in November. That’s down slightly from the 30,573 encounters nationwide in October, it said.

Border Patrol also said that it has released “zero illegal aliens” into the country for seven consecutive months.

In December 2024, the final month of President Joe Biden’s administration, there were more than 301,981 encounters at the southwest border sector by Border Patrol agents, according to data from the agency. There were about 11,600 such encounters in September 2025, the most recent month for which data are available.

“Our focus is unwavering: secure the border, enforce the law, and protect this nation,” CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott said in the Dec. 5 statement. “These numbers reflect the tireless efforts of our agents and officers who are delivering results that redefine border security. We’re not slowing down. We’re setting the pace for the future.”

The Border Patrol efforts and the mass deportation of illegal immigrants are in line with campaign promises made by Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign. And since taking office, he has signed multiple executive orders and memorandums, including declaring an emergency at the U.S.–Mexico border, designating several criminal gangs as terrorist organizations, and launching federal operations targeting illegal immigrants in Chicago, Los Angeles, and other cities.

The Supreme Court agreed on Dec. 5 to hear a case challenging the legality of an executive order issued by Trump that sought to end birthright citizenship. Multiple lower courts have ruled against the January order, which would bar children born in the United States to parents who are in the country illegally from automatically becoming citizens.

Democrats have been broadly critical of the Trump administration’s immigration policies. A House lawmaker introduced a bill in May that would prohibit the use of federal funds to enforce any order barring birthright citizenship. At the state level, multiple governors and mayors have also been opposed the federal deportation operations.

Meanwhile, in the past week, the Trump administration paused all immigration applications, including applications for green cards, for people from 19 countries that are also subject to a travel ban imposed earlier this year, as part of sweeping immigration changes in the wake of the shooting of two National Guard troops.

A policy memo issued on the website of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency tasked with processing and approving all requests for immigration benefits, said the policy applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.

The Epoch Times contacted the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border- and immigration-related matters, for additional comment but did not hear back by publication time.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 14:40

India Plans Coal Expansion Through 2047 Despite Supposed "Climate Goals"

India Plans Coal Expansion Through 2047 Despite Supposed "Climate Goals"

It's funny how no one actually seems to care about climate change malarky when there isn't an environmentalist Democrat in the White House to try and impress...

Along that vein, India is weighing a major expansion of coal power that could extend new plant construction until at least 2047, according to people familiar with ongoing discussions between the power ministry and the government policy think tank NITI Aayog. The move would represent a sharp departure from earlier projections that expected additions to peak around 2035, Bloomberg reported this week.

The talks align with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s push to make the country energy independent and reclassify it as a developed nation by its 100th year of independence. With domestic reserves expected to last a century, officials see coal as the most reliable option to support that goal. Total capacity could reach 420 gigawatts by 2047 — roughly an 87% increase from today, the people said.

Bloomberg writes that the people added that the government still plans to expand renewable energy and battery storage, but warns that solar and battery supply chains remain vulnerable, especially because “China…dominates much of the supply chain for batteries and solar panels.” Some of the planned coal units would be geared toward balancing intermittent renewable generation, with the ministry offering incentives for plants that operate more flexibly.

Such a move risks complicating India’s climate commitments. NITI Aayog projections indicate that emissions must peak by 2045 to meet Modi’s target of becoming net zero by 2070. India, the world’s third-largest emitter, has yet to submit updated emissions-reduction strategies for 2035 under the Paris Agreement, arguing that richer nations should shoulder a bigger share of decarbonization to allow developing economies to grow.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 14:25

Rickards: 8 Events Driving The Gold Frenzy

Rickards: 8 Events Driving The Gold Frenzy

Authored by James Rickards via Investors Daily,

Events are moving quickly in the gold market. You know about the run-up in the price of gold; it has become a mainstream media story. But the gold situation is bigger than that. There are important developments almost daily that will sustain the gold bull market for years to come. Let’s look briefly at the gold price action and then turn to these breaking developments.

Gold is in its third great bull market. There really were no bull or bear markets from 1870 to 1971 because the world was on a gold standard at a fixed price. The global gold standard had flaws. Some countries joined earlier than others. The U.S. did not formally adhere to a gold standard until 1900, but the UK and the London gold market maintained a steady price from 1815 after the Napoleonic Wars until 1914 after which the U.S. maintained a world price.

There were breaks in the system in 1931-1934 when the UK and U.S. devalued their currencies against gold, but a new fixed priced was established. A true floating rate market in gold did not emerge until Richard Nixon closed the gold window in 1971.

The first bull market (1971 – 1980) saw gold soar 2,200% in eight years. The second bull market (1991 – 2011) witnessed a gold price rally of 670% in twelve years.

The third bull market (which we are in today) can be more difficult to date. If one begins at the interim low of $1,050 per ounce in December 2015 until today’s price of $4,220 per ounce, then the gain is 300% over ten years, which is less than the two prior bull markets. Of course, this bull market is far from over and material gains in the near future should be expected.

However, gold moved in a range of $1,000 per ounce to $2,000 per ounce during almost all of the 2015 – 2025 period until July 1, 2023, when a breakout above $2,000 per ounce began. If we date the bull market from that point, we see a rally of 110% in just over two years.

10k Per Ounce or Higher

If we take the average gain for the first and second bull markets, which is over 1,400%, and take an average duration of ten years and apply those metrics to a baseline of $2,000 per ounce in 2023, that suggests gold will reach $28,000 per ounce by 2033. Of course, this method is arbitrary. Gains could be much larger and come much faster. A replay of the 1971 – 1980 scenario would put gold close to $100,000 per ounce by 2032.

  • From $1,000 to $2,000 = 100% gain

  • From $2,000 to $3,000 = 50% gain

  • From $3,000 to $4,000 = 33% gain

  • From $4,000 to $5,000 = 25% gain

  • From $9,000 to $10,000 = 11% gain

With this as background, it’s entirely reasonable to suggest gold could reach $10,000 per ounce by late 2026 on its way much higher. What few investors may realize is that each $1,000 increase in the price of gold is easier than the one before. The price gain is the same at each milestone, but the percentage increase is smaller because each increase is working from a higher base. Going from $4,000 to $5,000 per ounce is a 25% gain. But going from $9,000 to $10,000 per ounce is only an 11% gain. This is why the push to $10,000 per ounce will go slowly at first and then quickly.

Underreported Events to Consider

That much is widely known.

What is less well known is series of underreported events that will turbocharge the price gains ahead.

Here is a summary of those events:

  1. Central banks remain net buyers of gold as they have been since 2010. This puts an informal floor under the price of gold while still allowing unlimited upside.

  2. Mining output has been flat for last six years. This does not mean “peak gold”, but it shows that gold is getting harder to find and more expensive to mine. Supply constraints + expanding demand = higher prices.

  3. The copper-to-gold price ratio is at an all-time low. This speaks to the relative role of industrial metals versus precious metals. The gold price can rise in recessionary scenarios and depressions. Gains are not limited to periods of inflation and hot economies.

  4. Russia has demonstrated that it can survive Western dollar-based financial sanctions by holding over 25% of its reserves in physical gold. That’s a lesson the world and especially the BRICS are internalizing.

  5. Digitally tokenized gold has become a huge new source of demand. Tether is leading the way with its XAUt token that has a current market cap (tied to the price of gold) of $2.2 trillion. The gold held in vaults to support the token now exceeds 16.2 metric tonnes, more than some countries. This gold is not traded, and the token is only redeemable for cash, not physical gold. This means Tether is the ultimate buy-and-hold gold investor and their gold is effectively off the market.

  6. Italy has recently taken steps to asset that Italian gold (2,452 metric tonnes; the third largest gold reserve in the world after the U.S. and Germany) belongs to the Italian people and not to the Bank of Italy. That dispute has cooled down, but its mere existence shows that a global struggle for possession of physical gold is underway.

  7. Television and media personality Tucker Carlson has launched an online gold dealing operation. That’s only one among many online dealers, but it shows that gold ownership is reaching a wider audience and we are getting closer to the retail frenzy stage of price appreciation.

  8. The U.S. Treasury is giving serious consideration to revaluing its gold reserves by causing the Federal Reserve to restate the value of its gold certificate given when the Treasury took the Fed’s gold in 1934. The current value of the certificate is $42.22 per ounce. If revalued to $4,200 per ounce, this would not change the world price of gold (it’s just an accounting entry), but it would add about $1 trillion to the Treasury’s account at the Fed and it would show that the U.S. respects gold as a legitimate monetary asset.

Other material developments in the gold markets are occurring almost daily. We expect this to continue. If you have not invested in gold yet or if your allocation is small, it’s not too late to invest. The biggest gains are still ahead and will happen sooner than later.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 14:05

Ukraine Claims It Can Intercept Conversations Of Kremlin Officials

Ukraine Claims It Can Intercept Conversations Of Kremlin Officials

The head of Ukraine's military intelligence agency has boasted of being capable of intercepting conversations of senior Russian officials. He made the big claim in a fresh local media interview, but didn't back it up by proof or any specifics.

"Yes, we can. We get paid for this," stated the agency's chief, Kyrylo Budanov, to RBC-Ukraine on Sunday. He had specifically been asked whether Ukrainian intelligence can eavesdrop on Kremlin officials.

AFP via Getty Images

The remarks come after recent leaks hit Western press related to Trump officials negotiating with Kremlin officials over the future of the Ukraine war and Trump's peace plan.

But Kiev has obviously not been happy with the White House plan, which offers Russia significant territorial concessions in the Donbas and Crimea, and along with European leaders has been actively trying to thwart it. Thus Ukraine has motive to try and leak as much as possible of interactions between the US and Russia.

In late November, Bloomberg reported that the 28-point peace proposal was drafted by Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff together with Russian lawmaker Kirill Dmitriev during a meeting in Miami in October. As a result, Ukrainian and EU officials tried to smear it as ultimately a 'Russian-desired plan'.

The outlet later released two transcripts of conversations involving Russian and US officials. They purported to reveal Witkoff advising the Russian side on how to best pitch the Kremlin’s ideas to Trump.

Spy chief Budanov in touting Ukraine's eavesdropping capabilities seems to be hinting at involvement; however, these leaks could have just as easily come from the Russian side, or even someone within the a delegation.

After all, the Kremlin has benefited from courting Witkoff and Kushner, while being in the driver's seat militarily on the battlefield. It is enjoying projecting to the world it is not so 'isolated', and is calling many of the shots with Washington because it has real leverage.

On Monday, President Zelensky is in London meeting with Europeans, where they are working on what they call a more 'fair' and 'just' ceasefire plan.

The European outline so far makes no mention of giving up territory, and even leaves the door open for Ukraine's future path to NATO membership. These things are of course a non-starter for Moscow, and that might be the point.

President Putin has already long said that any plan which refuses territorial concessions or to rule out NATO membership would be dead on arrival, and could never be accepted by Russia.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 13:40

Solid, Stopping-Through 3Y Auction Boosted By Surge In Foreign Demand

Solid, Stopping-Through 3Y Auction Boosted By Surge In Foreign Demand

Due to the FOMC meeting falling on a Wednesday, the Treasury is scrambling to issue this week's coupon auctions, starting with a $58BN 3Y auction which saw solid demand when it was offered at 1pm ET.

The sale of $58BN in 3 year paper priced at a high yield of 3.614%, up from 3.579% in November, and the highest since August. The auction also stopped through the 3.622% When Issued by 0.8bps, the 4th consecutive stopping through 3Y auction.

The bid to cover was dropped to 2.641 from 3.850 but was still just above the 2.632 six-auction average.

The internals were more solid, with Indirects awarded 72.0%, up sharply from 63.0% in November and the highest since September. It was also one of the highest foreign awards on record.

And with Directs taking down 19.0%, down from 27.32 last month, Dealers were left holding just 9.03%, the lowest since September, and below the 13.1% recent average.

Overall, this was a very solid auction, one which came at just the right time: with 10Y yields surging today just shy of 4.20% before retracing the move and dipping by about 1bp on the solid 3Y auction results. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 13:25

The DPI Link To Margin Debt

The DPI Link To Margin Debt

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

A recent article by Simon White, via Bloomberg, discussed the rising cost of margin debt for investors. While his analysis below compares the cost of debt to GDP, we will also consider a more critical comparison to disposable personal income (DPI). Here is Simon’s point.

Yet, where history does raise a red flag is if we look at the cost of carrying the margin debt. Based on an idea from Investec Research, we can estimate the total cost of carrying margin debt versus GDP (I also adjust margin debt for credit balances). This net margin debt has only been higher in the pandemic, when savings went through the roof. As we can see, cost-of-carry peaks for net margin debt have preceded significant downward moves in stocks: the tech bust in 2000, the GFC bear market in 2008, the near 20% correction in 2018 and the 2022 bear market.

Before we proceed with our discussion, margin debt now stands at a record of more than $1.1 trillion, up nearly 40% on an annual basis.

Why is that important? It is essential to reiterate a crucial point about margin debt.

“Margin debt is not a technical indicator for trading markets. What it represents is the amount of speculation occurring in the market. In other words, margin debt is the “gasoline,” which drives markets higher as the leverage provides for the additional purchasing power of assets. However, leverage also works in reverse, as it supplies the accelerant for more significant declines as lenders “force” the sale of assets to cover credit lines without regard to the borrower’s position.

The last sentence is the most important. The issue with margin debt is that the unwinding of leverage is NOT at the investor’s discretion. That process is at the discretion of the broker-dealers that extended that leverage in the first place. (In other words, if you don’t sell to cover, the broker-dealer will do it for you.) When lenders fear they may not recoup their credit lines, they force the borrower to put in more cash or sell assets to cover the debt. The problem is that “margin calls” generally happen simultaneously, as falling asset prices impact all lenders simultaneously.

In other words, the risk with margin debt is:

“Margin debt is a double-edged sword, and the edge that cuts you, cuts the deepest.”

So, why are we discussing this? Because margin debt levels are reaching a point where forward market returns are substantially lower.

Which brings us back to Simon White and the cost of carrying margin debt.

The Link Between Disposable Personal Income and Margin Debt

Currently, household allocations to equities are at a record. Of course, such should be unsurprising given the strong market advances over the past few years.

There is more to this story than just rising asset prices. When investors are chasing a bull market, they initially invest their savings in the financial markets. If prices continue to rise, they then turn to margin debt to continue investing. However, as noted above, that is a “bullish benefit” to the market as the leverage increases investors’ “buying power.”

However, margin debt is not “free,” and generally carries an interest rate that is two percentage points above the bank’s “prime lending” rate. Currently, the bank’s prime lending rate is around 7%, which suggests that most margin debt is carrying an interest rate of 9%. Therefore, investors must consider the interest rate risk associated with the borrowed capital to generate a profit. Over the last three years, returns of 10% or more have been relatively easy, at least so far.

But that brings us to our warning. Understanding the link between disposable personal income (DPI) and margin debt is crucial for assessing market risk. DPI is the income households have after taxes, available for saving or investing. When DPI growth slows, households have fewer fresh savings to deploy. In this context, some investors turn to margin borrowing to maintain or increase exposure.

In the second quarter of 2025, U.S. Disposable Personal Income (DPI) stood at approximately $22.858 trillion on a seasonally adjusted annual rate basis. This figure represents a nominal increase from $22.564 trillion in Q1 2025. While that growth suggests income levels are still rising, further data paint a more nuanced picture of investor capacity and market risk. Real disposable personal income (adjusted for inflation) for Q2 2025 grew by about 3.1% year‑over‑year. This growth rate remains below the long‑term average of roughly 3.44%. In practical terms, households are seeing slower growth in their “money left over” after taxes and basic costs, reducing the flow of new savings that could be invested.

Margin debt as a percentage of real DPI has been reported at around 6.23 %, the highest on record. This ratio also suggests that for every $100 of real DPI, roughly $6 of margin debt is outstanding, a non‐trivial amount.

Naturally, when fresh savings are lacking and investors turn to margin to participate in markets, two risks emerge.

  1. The quality of the investor base weakens because borrowed money replaces savings.

  2. The carrying cost of that borrowing becomes more salient when interest rates are elevated. If the margin debt carries higher interest and investors’ income growth is weak, servicing the debt becomes harder, reducing the buffer against loss.

In summary, weak DPI growth, combined with elevated margin borrowing, creates a vulnerability. In such an environment, the investor base is much less resilient.

The “Cost Of Carry”

In recent years, not only has margin debt surged, but the “cost of carrying” that debt has also risen. As borrowing costs increase, the break‐even point for leveraged equity exposure rises. If an investor borrows at a higher interest rate and the market stagnates or declines, the drag from interest and margin loan costs erodes returns. Simon’s view of carrying costs as a percentage of GDP is correct. However, another salient perspective is to consider them as a function of DPI. In other words, if an investor account is fully invested, margin interest must be paid either by selling assets or from disposable income.

With margin debt expense as a percentage of DPI at the highest level on record, the risk of market reversal becomes elevated. Higher interest rates also mean that margin borrowing becomes less attractive relative to other uses of capital. If margin rates rise, investors holding prominent borrowed positions may face higher servicing costs and increased pressure in the event of a correction. In such an environment, as shown above, the historical outcome has been one of increased financial fragility.

Moreover, elevated rates can suppress earnings growth across the economy, reducing incentive returns and market momentum. For leveraged investors, slower earnings growth makes it harder to absorb the cost of borrowing. Therefore, from a market‑structure perspective, the combination of high margin debt and high borrowing costs creates a vulnerability:

  • Leverage is greater.

  • Investor income growth is weaker.

  • The carrying cost of debt is higher.

These three factors form a feedback loop: high costs and weak income reduce investor resilience; a market drawdown triggers margin calls, which in turn accelerate the decline through forced selling. Academic models of margin trading indicate that this type of feedback loop can transform a modest correction into a sharper decline.

Thus, rising carrying costs of margin debt amplify the risk embedded in the margin debt–DPI link.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 13:25

Judge Temporarily Blocks DOJ From Using Evidence Proving James Comey's Guilt

Judge Temporarily Blocks DOJ From Using Evidence Proving James Comey's Guilt

Via Headline USA,

A federal judge has dealt a setback to Justice Department efforts to seek a new indictment against former FBI Director James Comey, temporarily barring prosecutors from using evidence they had relied on when they initially secured criminal charges.

The ruling Saturday night from U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly does not preclude the department from trying again soon to indict Comey, but it does suggest prosecutors may have to do so without citing communications between Comey and a close friend, Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman.

Comey was charged in September with lying to Congress when he denied having authorized an associate to serve as an anonymous source for media coverage about the FBI.

In pursuing the case, prosecutors cited messages between Comey and Richman that they said showed Comey encouraging Richman to engage with the media for certain FBI-related coverage.

The case was dismissed last month after a different federal judge ruled that the prosecutor who filed the charges, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed by the Trump administration.

But that ruling left open the possibility that the government could try again to seek charges against Comey, a longtime foe of President Donald Trump.

After the case was thrown out, lawyers for Richman sought a court order that would bar prosecutors from continued access to his computer files, which the Justice Department obtained through search warrants in 2019 and 2020 as part of a media leak investigation that was later closed without charges.

But Richman and his lawyers say that in preparing the criminal case against Comey, prosecutors relied on data that exceeded the scope of the warrants, illegally held onto communications they should have destroyed or returned and conducted new, warrantless searches of the files.

Kollar-Kotelly on Saturday night granted Richman’s request for a temporary restraining, instructing the department “not to access the covered materials once they are identified, segregated, and secured, or to share, disseminate, or disclose the covered materials to any person, without first seeking and obtaining leave of this Court.”

“Given that the custody and control of this material is the central issue in this matter, uncertainty about its whereabouts weighs in favor of acting promptly to preserve the status quo,” the judge stated.

Kollar-Kotelly ordered the government to “identify, segregate, and secure” the image of Richman’s personal computer, along with his email accounts and other materials taken from his electronic devices, and barred prosecutors from accessing those files without the court’s permission.

She gave the Justice Department until Monday afternoon to certify that it is compliance with the order.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment Sunday on the ruling and what it meant for revived charges against Comey.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/08/2025 - 12:00

Pages