Full Market Cycles: Half Bull And Half Bear

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Last week, we discussed the importance of “math” as it relates to valuations and noted the importance of understanding “full market cycles.” To wit:

“The math on forward return expectations, given current valuation levels, does not hold up.  The assumption that valuations can fall without the price of the markets being negatively impacted is also grossly flawed. Historical data, as illustrated in the following chart, suggest that valuations do not decline without a significant impact on investment returns. Additionally, it is worth noting that “full market cycles,” which encompass both secular bull and bear periods, recur throughout history.”

What is a “Full Market Cycle”

Many readers asked what I meant by a full market cycle and why it matters today. The chart above showing inflation-adjusted S&P 500 prices since 1871 makes it clear: every bull market is eventually followed by a bear market. Together, these form a full cycle.

Throughout history, bull market cycles are only one-half of the “full market” cycle. This is because during every “bull market” cycle the markets and economy build up excesses that are then “reverted” during the following “bear market.” In the other words, as Sir Issac Newton once stated:

“What goes up, must come down.” 

The current cycle remains incomplete, but history suggests that the second half usually retraces much of the prior gains. Logical downside targets often align with past peaks, such as those in 2000 and 2008..

Note: I am not stating that I “believe” the markets are about to crash to the 2200 level on the S&P 500.  I am simply showing where the previous support intersects with the price. The longer that it takes for the markets to mean revert the higher the intersection point will be. Furthermore, the 2200 level is not out of the question either. Famed investor Jack Bogle stated that over the next decade we are likely to see two more 50% declines.  A 50% decline from current levels would put the market below 3400 which would be in the “ballpark” of completing the current full market cycle.

As I have often stated, I am not bullish or bearish. My job as a portfolio manager is simple; invest money in a manner that creates returns on a short-term basis, but reduces the possibility of catastrophic losses, which wipe out years of growth.

Nobody tends to believe that philosophy until the markets wipe about 40-50% of portfolio values over a relatively short period. But that is why it is crucial to understand that markets do cycle, and this time is likely “not different.”

4-Phases Of A Full Market Cycle

AlphaTrends previously put together an excellent diagram laying out the 4-phases of the full-market cycle. To wit:

“Is it possible to time the market cycle to capture big gains? Like many controversial topics in investing, there is no real professional consensus on market timing. Academics claim that it’s not possible, while traders and chartists swear by the idea.

The following infographic explains the four important phases of market trends, based on the methodology of the famous stock market authority Richard Wyckoff. The theory is that the better an investor can identify these phases of the market cycle, the more profits can be made on the ride upwards of a buying opportunity.”

So, the question to answer, obviously, is:

“Where are we now?”

Let’s take a look at the past two full-market cycles, using Wyckoff’s methodology, as compared to the current post-financial-crisis half-cycle. While actual market cycles will not exactly replicate the chart above, you can clearly see Wyckoff’s theory in action.

The Dot.Com Cycle

The accumulation phase, following the 1991 recessionary environment, was evident as it preceded the “internet trading boom” and the rise of the “dot.com” bubble from 1995-1999. As I noted previously:

“Following the recession of 1991, the Federal Reserve drastically lowered interest rates to spur economic growth. However, the two events which laid the foundation for the ‘dot.com’ crisis was the rule-change which allowed the nation’s pension funds to own equities and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which unleashed Wall Street upon a nation of unsuspecting investors.

The major banks could now use their massive balance sheet to engage in investment-banking, market-making, and proprietary trading. The markets exploded as money flooded the financial markets. Of course, since there were not enough ‘legitimate’ deals to fill demand and Wall Street bankers are paid to produce deals, Wall Street floated any offering it could despite the risk to investors.”

The distribution phase became evident in early-2000 as stocks began to struggle.

Names like Enron, WorldCom, Global Crossing, Lucent Technologies, Nortel, Sun Micro, and a host of others, are “ghosts of the past.” Importantly, they are the relics of an era the majority of investors in the market today are unaware of, but were the poster children for the “greed and excess” of the preceding bull market frenzy.

As the distribution phase gained traction, it is worth remembering the media and Wall Street were touting the continuation of the bull market indefinitely into the future. 

Then, came the decline.

The Housing Boom

Following the “dot.com” crash, investors had all learned their lessons about the value of managing risk in portfolios, not chasing returns, and focusing on capital preservation as the core for long-term investing.

Okay. Not really.

It took about 27-minutes for investors to completely forget about the previous pain of the bear market and jump headlong back into the creation of the next bubble leading to the “financial crisis.” 

During the mark-up phase, investors once again piled into leverage. This time not just into stocks, but real estate, as well as Wall Street, found a new way to extract capital from Main Street through the creation of exotic loan structures. Of course, everything was fine as long as interest rates remained low, but as with all things, the “party eventually ends.”

Once again, during the distribution phase of the market, the analysts, media, Wall Street, and rise of bloggers, all touted “this time was different.” There were “green shoots,” it was a “Goldilocks economy,” and there was “no recession in sight.” 

They were disastrously wrong.

If any of this sounds familiar, it should

The “Buy Everything” Market

So, here we are, a 15-years into one of the longest bull market cycles in history. Massive interventions by the Federal Reserve and the Government have created an era of “moral hazard” unlike anything in previous market history. Investors are scrambling to take on leverage, make the most speculative of investments, and chase whatever trend is currently in vogue regardless of economic or financial underpinnings. It’s a winner take all market, and investors are reveling in it under the belief that if anything goes wrong the “powers that be” will bail them out.

Once again, due to the length of the “mark up” phase, most investors today have once again forgotten the “ghosts of bear markets past.” Despite some bumps along the way, the same messages seen at previous market peaks are steadily hitting the headlines: “there is no recession in sight,” “the bull market is cheap” and “this time is different because of Central Banking.”

However, the risk to investors in the current “buy everything” market, is an “unexpected, exogenous event” that sparks a revaluation of expectations in an overly leveraged, overly extended, and overly bullish market. That the event will be is unknown, but when the markets begin the “distribution phase,” investors should become exceedingly cautious about the risks they are taking.

Lost And Found

There is a sizable contingent of investors, and advisors, today who have never been through a real bear market. After a 15-year long bull-market cycle, fueled by Central Bank liquidity, it is understandable why mainstream analysis believed the markets could only go higher. What was always a concern to us was the rather cavalier attitude they took about the risk.

“Sure, a correction will eventually come, but that is just part of the deal.”

What gets lost during bull cycles, and is always found in the most brutal of fashions, is the devastation caused to financial wealth during the inevitable decline. It isn’t just the loss of financial wealth, but also the loss of employment, defaults, and bankruptcies caused by the coincident recession. This is the story told by the S&P 500 inflation-adjusted total return index. The chart shows all of the measurement lines for all the previous bull and bear markets, along with the number of years required to get back to even.

What you should notice is that in many cases bear markets wiped out essentially all or a very substantial portion of the previous bull market advance.

But that is the inherent problem of “eternal bullishness” which is the “willful blindness” to the underlying data in an effort to chase short-term returns. This leads to the unfortunate problem of being “all-in” on every hand which has a devastating consequence when a mean reverting event occurs.

John Hussman once penned an excellent piece on the full-market cycle:

“Put simply, most apparent “opportunities” to obtain investment returns above zero in conventional assets over the coming decade are based on a misunderstanding of valuations, total returns, and historical yield relationships. At current valuations, virtually everything is priced for a decade of zero. The unwinding of these speculative extremes is likely to be chaotic, and will likely occur over a shorter horizon than investors imagine. That chaos, driven not by central bank tightening but by an emerging default cycle, will usher in fresh investment opportunities in conventional assets, where presently there are none.

Looking beyond the near-term, my view is that a ‘permanently high plateau’ is unlikely, and we will instead see a violent unwinding of recent speculative extremes over the completion of the current market cycle, even if central banks ease aggressively, as they did throughout the 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 collapses. Corporate income growth and profit margins have already begun to narrow from their extremes, and the default cycle has already turned higher. The completion of this cycle won’t arrive because central banks suddenly become enlightened enough to abandon their recklessness. It will arrive precisely because they have sustained yield-seeking speculation for too long already; because they have amplified the vulnerability of the debt and equity markets to normal economic fluctuations; and because the consequences of this fragility are now fully baked in the cake.”

In the end, it does not matter IF you are “bullish” or “bearish.” The reality is that both “bulls” and “bears” are owned by the “broken clock” syndrome during the full-market cycle. However, what is grossly important in achieving long-term investment success is not necessarily being “right” during the first half of the cycle, but by not being “wrong” during the second half.

Tyler Durden Tue, 11/18/2025 - 07:40

​​​​​​​Home Depot Slashes Outlook As Home-Renovation Demand Continues To Crumble

Home improvement retailer Home Depot slashed its full-year earnings outlook after another weak quarter, citing soft big-ticket spending, a paralyzed housing market, and lackluster seasonal demand. Adjusted EPS is now expected to fall 5%, worse than prior guidance. 

Third-quarter comparable sales rose just .2%, far below Bloomberg Consensus estimates of 1.36%. The retailer warned about weak consumer demand as elevated interest rates discourage home buying and remodeling. As a result, consumers are opting for smaller projects rather than upgrading their patios or building new decks. 

Snapshot of the third quarter with Bloomberg Consensus estimates:

Comparable sales: +0.2% (miss; est. +1.36%)

• U.S. comps: +0.1% (miss; est. +1.25%)

Total net sales: $41.35 bn (+2.8% y/y) — modest beat (est. $40.97 bn)

• Includes ~$900 m from recent GMS acquisition

Adjusted EPS: $3.74 (miss; est. $3.84; down from $3.78 y/y)

Average ticket: +1.8% (beat est. +1.1% implied)

Other notables:

• Inventories higher than expected ($26.2 bn vs est. $25.0 bn)

• SG&A expenses up 5.9% y/y, above estimates

Management commentary:

• Miss driven mainly by the absence of storm/hurricane activity (hurt disaster-recovery categories) and failure of anticipated sequential demand improvement to appear

• Ongoing headwinds: consumer uncertainty + continued pressure on the housing market, disproportionately hurting big-ticket home-improvement spending

Updated FY 2026 Guidance (previously issued in Aug 2025)

• Sees sales about +3%, saw about +2.8%

• Sees operating margin about 12.6%, saw about 13%, estimate 13.3%

• Sees EPS decline about 6%, saw down about -3%

• Sees adjusted EPS decline about 5%, saw down about 2%

Guidance reflects third-quarter underperformance and a continuation in the home improvement downturn, as we've pointed out in recent weeks:

• Consumer Squeeze Hits Home Renovation Spending As Leading Deck-Maker Shares Collapse

• Home Improvement Downturn Flashes Red For Housing Market

Shares of Home Depot are slightly lower in premarket trading in New York, though nothing too notable. However, the long-term chart of the stock shows three clear rejections at the $400 level.

Goldman's top sector specialist Scott Feiler's first take on Home Depot earnings... 

Will We See Multiple Contraction?: HD stock is -2.5% on a 3% EPS cut.  A slight miss was expected here, but the magnitude of the miss and cut, while not huge, does feel slightly worse. It feels just weak enough to make investors really question how quickly to defend the name and slower to play for the 2026 recovery. While the stock being down makes sense, a price reaction more than the 3% cut will likely draw out some interest, given the stock is already -16% off September highs.

On Monday, Feiler told clients this would be a "very important week" for the consumer space. With Home Depot reporting weak demand for big-ticket items, here's what comes next (read the report).

Tyler Durden Tue, 11/18/2025 - 07:15

Poland Suspects Russia In "Unprecedented Act Of Sabotage" Of Rail Line

EU and NATO leaders are currently pointing the finger at Russia for what could be one of the single biggest acts of sabotage on European soil since the Ukraine war began.

A train track linking the Polish cities of Warsaw and Lublin was destroyed in an "unprecedented act of sabotage" on Sunday. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk declared that the now damaged railway is "crucially important for delivering aid to Ukraine." In invoking Ukraine aid, he's clearly letting suspicion fall on Moscow - though no arrests have been made in the early investigation. But photos suggest it's only a very small section of track left missing and subject to damage. And yet this could indeed be enough to derail a train.

via EPA/Daily Mail

An "explosive device" blew up the rail track, Tusk stated X. He followed by decrying that the act "directly (targeted) the security of the Polish state and its civilians." Apparently there was more damage even beyond this, with destruction located further down the line as well.

"Unfortunately, the worst suspicions were confirmed. An act of sabotage occurred on the Warsaw-Lublin line (in the village of Mika). An explosive device detonated and destroyed the railway track," Tusk said.

While not directly naming Russia, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was quick to chime in, calling for greater European collective defense, also to 'protect the skies' amid alleged Russian-directed drone operations...

The threats to our security are real and growing.

Europe must urgently boost capacity to protect our skies and our infrastructure.

Poland is the largest defence spender in Europe. And it will be the biggest beneficiary of the SAFE instrument.

Razem jesteśmy silniejsi. https://t.co/bzHulLpnys

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) November 17, 2025

Estonia's Prime Minister Kristen Michal additionally condemned the apparent sabotage op, writing on X that he and his country stand with Poland. "Those behind hostile acts against (European Union) and NATO members must be exposed. Our response must be united," Michal said.

Estonia is one among several Balkan and Eastern European countries which have lately been alleging EU airspace is being widely sabotaged by Russian drones or at times military aircraft incursions.

United Media/Dyspozytura Trakcji via X: Damaged railway track with shattered concrete sleepers and a deformed steel rail section near Warsaw, Poland — suspected sabotage site under investigation.

As for the location of the alleged train track sabotage, Mika is located a little over 60 miles from Warsaw. It could indeed be part of an ongoing tit-for-tat sabotaging of both Russian and European infrastructure, in a long-running chain of mystery events.

Tyler Durden Tue, 11/18/2025 - 04:15

"You Can't Handle the Truth": UK Health Watchdog Reportedly Refuses To Release Data On Vaccine Deaths

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The United Kingdom’s public health service is reportedly refusing to release data on the potential relationship between the COVID vaccine and excess deaths.

The reason?

It would upset people to know the truth.

The question is whether British citizens have become so passive and yielding that they will support their government, keeping them from learning the facts about vaccines and allowing them to reach their own conclusions.

The UK has long embraced speech controls and censorship to protect citizens from unacceptable views or what one criminal defendant was told were “toxic ideologies.”

Social media companies assisted governments in censoring opposing scientific views during the pandemic, including those regarding the potential dangers of the vaccines.

Over the years, dissenting faculty members have been forced out of scientific and academic organizations for challenging preferred conclusions on subjects ranging from transgender transitions to COVID-19 protections to climate change. Some were barred from speaking at universities or blacklisted for their opposing views.

Many of the exiled experts were ultimately proven correct in challenging the efficacy of surgical masks or the need to shut down our schools and businesses. Scientists moved like a herd of lemmings on the origin of the virus, crushing those who suggested that the most likely explanation is a lab leak (a position that federal agencies would later embrace).

Scientists have worked with the government in suppressing dissenting views. For example, The Wall Street Journal released a report on how the Biden administration suppressed dissenting views supporting the lab leak theory, as dissenting scientists were blacklisted and targeted.

When experts within the Biden Administration found that the lab theory was the most likely explanation for COVID-19, they were told not to share their data publicly and were warned about being “off the reservation.”

Universities and associations joined the crackdown. Scientists questioning the efficacy of those blue surgical masks and the six-foot rule were suppressed. So were those arguing that we should, as in Europe, keep schools open. These experts were also later vindicated, but few were rehired or reestablished in universities or associations.

It was all done in the name of protecting the public from opposing views or data.

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) shows that little has changed. 

According to the Telegraph, the agency declared that releasing the data would lead to the “distress or anger” of bereaved relatives if a link were to be discovered.

It also suggested that the data might stress or undermine the mental health of the families and friends of people who died.

The story has received little attention in the media, which previously joined efforts to suppress opposing views during the pandemic.

We have no idea what the data actually says, but there should be uniform agreement that the public has a right to know.

The controversy is reminiscent of the position of the British courts on sharing information with patients. In the United States, there is a strong common law in favor of disclosing to patients any risks or complications associated with possible treatments or surgeries. In the UK, the courts took a more deferential view of doctors. As with the agency’s position, the rationale was hard for many in the United States to comprehend, let alone accept.

For example, in Sidaway v. Bethlem Royal Hospital (1985), the court rejected the need for a surgeon to inform a patient of a low risk of nerve damage from a laminectomy, writing:

“I confess that I reach this conclusion with no regret. The evidence in this case showed that a contrary result would be damaging to the relationship of trust and confidence between doctor and patient, and might well have an adverse effect on the practice of medicine.  It is doubtful whether it would be of any significant benefit to patients, most of whom prefer to put themselves unreservedly in the hands of their doctors.”

The decision to withhold the data on vaccines shows the same arrogant assumptions.

If I had a loved one who died from the vaccine, I would like to know about it.

The government is essentially arguing a Jessup rule that “you can’t handle the truth.”

We will now see if the British people have lost all self-respect and separation from their government in yielding to this decision.

Tyler Durden Tue, 11/18/2025 - 03:30

Climate Scientists Claim That Global Warming Is Going To Cause A New Ice Age?

In the past, climate change has been consistently ranked as a "top concern" for people all over the world. However, that priority has shifted in recent years according to a revealing study published in October by global research firm Ipsos.   

The change has been dramatic. In 2025, public concern over climate change has fallen sharply behind concerns of war and economic instability, with geopolitical turmoil and the cost of living crisis.  Ipsos' 2025 Global Consumer Awareness Survey, which was published in collaboration with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), covers 50 countries and surveyed more than 40,000 respondents.  It found that war and the economy now dominate public worries at 52%, while climate change trails at just 31%.

Climate scientists say this drop in public concern over global warming is disturbing.  They claim 2024 was the "hottest year on record" (which is a lie), and that the populace should be more worried, not less.

The public is, of course, more concerned about the immediate dangers to their standard of living and such threats have easily supplanted climate change:  A threat which we have been browbeaten with over the course of decades even though it never seems to materialize.  

However, education on the facts surrounding climate change has also given the public perspective and people are beginning to realize that climate science might just be one of the biggest scams of the 21st Century.  In other words, the indoctrination is failing and less and less people are buying into the hysteria.

Climate science is an industry that us built like a labyrinthine bureaucracy.  Various governments worldwide spend around $10 billion annually on direct funding for climate research.  The scam is lucrative, and so the scam must continue.  But what happens when climate predictions turn out consistently false and the public gets wise?

Time to switch gears and fabricate new fears... 

Popular Mechanics is on the case (yet again), promoting a new climate science theory that global warming is going to get so bad it will trigger a new ice age.  Yes, it's the complete opposite of what global warming theorists have been positing for years, but let's ignore that fact for a moment.

A new study suggests that biological and oceanic process—supercharged by anthropogenic climate change—could eventually lead the Earth to overcorrect and send the planet into a deep freeze. 

Popular Mechanic's claims:

"Today, the Earth is experiencing a warming period unlike any other. The Jurassic, which was warm due to high levels of atmospheric carbon, reached its sweltering temperatures gradually, whereas anthropogenic climate change has caused much more rapid shifts - so rapid, in fact, that certain climactic changes have been discernible even within the average human lifespan..."

None of this is true.  They continue:

"Typically, one way the Earth regulates its temperature is through the slow weathering of silicate rocks—a process sometimes referred to as Earth’s “natural thermostat.” But a new study, led by scientists at the University of Bremen in German and the University of California (UC) Riverside, shows that a combination of biological and oceanic feedback loops (particularly those involving algae, phosphorus, and oxygen) could outpace this long-standing moderation strategy. This would paradoxically lead Earth to a premature deep freeze hundreds of thousands of years in the future..."

So, even if this theory was accurate, we've got plenty of time to figure it out.  If you are familiar with the history of climate change propaganda dating back to the 1970's, then this idea might sound very familiar to you.  Some of the first claims of impending climate doom were not about global warming, they were about global cooling.  This was back when the narrative was not solidified and consensus had not yet been paid for.

In reality, today's "warming period" is actually one of the coldest periods in the history of the Earth.  When climate scientists say that a particular year was the "hottest on record", what they omit is the length of the record they are referring to.  Climate scientists base all of their claims of global warming on a 140 year record going back to the 1880s.  This is a tiny sliver of time in the Earth's overall climate history.  If you look at a record going back millions of years, you will find that our planet has had warming cycles far hotter than today.

Not only do they consistently lie about comparative temperatures and the climate record, they also lie about carbon emissions being the cause of warming trends.  A graph of atmospheric carbon content over the same time frame shows no correlation or causation between carbon and warming.

One thing that is true is that global cooling would be more dangerous to the Earth than global warming.  The most recent Ice Age was a devastating event that is projected to have killed up to 150,000 non-microbe species.  On a grand scale of Earth-time, we have barely exited that disaster which ended 11,000 years ago.

In all likelihood the climate change industry is rushing to find a new narrative as the populace drifts away from global warming fear.  Carbon taxation, population control, centralized government dominance of energy and industry all rely on people blindly accepting man-made climate change as real. Global cooling might make a comeback as the premier bogeyman of the future if global warming doesn't stick.  

Tyler Durden Tue, 11/18/2025 - 02:45

If Demographics Are Destiny... We're Screwed!

Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,

Demographics don’t lie. The governments of the world and their captured bureaucrats can manipulate inflation data, unemployment data, GDP data, and numerous other data based figures to make things appear better than they are. It’s called propaganda and manipulation to create a false narrative beneficial to their interests. But, demographic data can’t be massaged to provide a happy ending for the psychopaths in suits, running the show.

They can ignore the data and pretend it doesn’t exist, but you can’t change the ages of the people inhabiting this planet.

The data is dire for the Western world and Asia, particularly China, Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore.

The U.S. fertility rate is at an all-time low, down 55% from its peak in 1957. It is down 40% since the early 1970s, when women, brainwashed by feminist tripe, joined the workforce in droves, and murdered 63 million of their unborn children, in the name of women’s rights.

This is what the woman’s movement, created by the globalist cabal to advance their agenda of destroying the western world and replacing it with their one world order, has wrought.

Their plan has been to replace the educated white people in western countries with low IQ 3rd world parasites, as a means to their end of controlling the masses in a digital prison of their making. Feminism was designed to convince women to stop having children, stop marrying strong men, and believing their lives were more fulfilled working 60 hours a week rather than raising children. The cultural destruction of America is almost complete.

Our globalist overlords have succeeded spectacularly in destroying the social fabric and community mores of our nation and other “developed” countries. And, as designed, the gene altering Pfizer/Moderna jabs are causing global fertility rates to plummet further, exacerbating the already dire trend. I wonder why very few 3rd worlders received the toxic covid jabs. Maybe the globalist controllers wanted to keep their fertility rates high.

The charts and maps below paint a bleak picture for the citizens of the world, but an absolute windfall for the totalitarians seeking to imprison us in their social credit, CBDC techno-gulag world of the future. The illiterate, mud hut dwellers are pumping out more illiterate 3rd worlders at a rate five to six times as high as the rich developed world countries. With a required replacement rate of 2.1, in order to maintain a static population, the U.S. and most of the countries in the developed world are in a self imposed death spiral. With 6,000 Boomers dying per day, the U.S. spiral is accelerating.

Via Visual Capitalist

The world’s fertility rate continues its steady decline, averaging 2.25 children per woman, a 6.2% drop from 2019. The map reveals a striking global divide: countries in sub-Saharan Africa still record some of the world’s highest birth rates, with Chad leading at 6.03, while nations in East Asia and Europe see record lows, led by South Korea at just 0.73.

Despite this overall slowdown, some countries have bucked the trend. Uzbekistan, Bulgaria, and Armenia saw notable increases, while Niger, Uganda, and Kuwait experienced the sharpest declines.

These shifts reflect the complex mix of economic, cultural, and policy factors influencing family planning worldwide.

As more countries fall below the population replacement rate of 2.1, the implications for labor forces, ageing populations, and future economic growth are becoming increasingly clear; signaling that the world’s demographic balance is rapidly changing.

The elimination of high IQ, highly productive whites and Asians, and replacing them with low IQ parasitical african and muslim dregs, guarantees the degradation of our society, culture, and financial viability. The open borders and purposeful importation of the riffraff, scum and rabble from Africa and Middle East is part of the Great Reset agenda. The social welfare costs of maintaining these lazy good for nothings will bankrupt the developed world, causing a global financial Armageddon. This will lead to the masses begging their overlords for CBDCs, a living stipend, tiny government issued hovels, and technological monitoring of all their communications.

You will come to love your servitude in this brave new world.

“Most human beings have an almost infinite capacity for taking things for granted.”

- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

We took the world we had for granted. Now we will pay the price.

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

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 22:35

Our 'Great Ally' Saudi Arabia Will Be Getting F-35s: Trump Ahead Of MbS Visit

The first US ally to typically get whatever it wants from Washington is Israel. The second is Saudi Arabia. And so in the same order...

"President Trump said Monday that he will approve the sale of F-35s to Saudi Arabia, making the kingdom the first country in the Middle East other than Israel to obtain the advanced fighter jets," Axios reports Monday.

USAF image

Trump made the following public comments to reporters in the Oval, "They want to buy. They are a great ally. We will be doing that. We will be selling them F-35s."

A day ahead of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's (MbS) White House visit, Trump hailed the kingdom as a "great ally".

But ironically, the Israelis aren't thrilled about this development, as it has long sought to maintain total technological superiority over other countries in the region.

"We told the Trump administration that the supply of F-35s to Saudi Arabia needs to be subject to Saudi normalization with Israel," one Israeli official was quoted in Axios as saying. "It takes minutes for an F-35 to fly from Saudi Arabia to Israel," the official complained.

The Gaza War has indefinitely derailed the prospect of Saudi normalization with Israel. But it's possible the Trump administration could be using the F-35 transfer to induce Riyadh into seeing the Abraham Accords as 'back on' as a real possibility.

The Saudis and Israelis do have a recent history of covert cooperation in Syria, where both sought to topple Bashar al-Assad, and disrupt the 'pro-Iran axis' - which eventually happened in December 2024.

According to F-35 producer Lockheed Martin, the advanced fighter represents total air dominance:

The F-35 is essential to securing air dominance and ensuring mission success across every domain. As the most lethal, survivable, and connected fighter aircraft for America and its allies, it acts as the quarterback of the skies—integrating air, land, sea, space, and cyber operations to lead the fight and deliver a decisive advantage.

More than a fighter jet, the F-35 is a force multiplier. Its unmatched ability to gather, process, and share data empowers joint forces, strengthens global partnerships, and keeps pilots ahead of emerging threats—all while helping them return home safely.

Interestingly, Israel has also of late been lobbying against Turkey ever acquiring the F-35. It's deeply ironic that Saudi Arabia will get the fighters far ahead of NATO-member Turkey ever will.

BREAKING: Trump:

We will be selling F-35 jets to Saudi Arabia. pic.twitter.com/6TmZvIreoV

— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 17, 2025

As we featured earlier, MbS is interested in a defense deal with the United States which outshines Qatar's: AI chips and AI-powered drones, and potentially, even American nuclear weapons stationed in his country. Probably the Saudis will eventually get many of these things, as years after the brutal murder Jamal Khashoggi, the kingdom keeps failing up.

* * *

More info on the world's most advanced stealth fighter jet:

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 22:10

Inside The Growing Trend Of Digital Detoxing

Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The concept of digital “detoxing” has entered the mainstream, with wellness experts and scientists highlighting its considerable health benefits. Research from BMC suggests that even modest reductions in daily digital engagement can help alleviate symptoms of depression, enhance sleep quality, and lower cortisol levels for many people.

People with their phones in New York City on June 13, 2024.Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

Studies examining the advantages of reducing or limiting different types of digital habits have gained momentum in recent years. Promising new results published by researchers at the University of Applied Sciences consistently show a link between less screen time and improved states of wellness.

BMC’s three-week analysis of 125 students who engaged in reduced screen time showed improvements in depressive symptoms, stress, sleep quality, and overall well-being. Once the control trial ended and digital engagement reached normal levels, researchers noted that the initial values of mental health symptoms began rising in lockstep.

Too much time spent online, particularly on social media platforms, has long been linked with negative mental health outcomes. However, evidence from a study produced by researchers from three Turkish universities suggests this extends to all types of digital connections.

Research from Cureus identifies this as “technostress,” a negative byproduct that stems from screen time. Examples include anxiety, irritability, frustration, and exhaustion. This is often associated with the psychological condition known as “fear of missing out,” or FOMO. The FOMO phenomenon is also a problem within the career space, according to the Turkish study, driving excessive smartphone engagement after the workday ends.

Harmony Healthcare IT conducted a smartphone screen time survey of more than 1,000 Americans and found that 60 percent who expressed a desire to cut back on their phone usage plan to replace phone time with a different activity, while 57 percent planned to delete “time-wasting” apps. Overall, 53 percent said they wanted to cut down on their smartphone usage in 2025. This represents a 33 percent increase from 2023.

Negative effects from excessive online activity aren’t disputed, but some experts say reduced screen time only carries lasting benefits if the lifestyle changes match.

Learning to Unplug

“Digital detoxing is not a quick fix. Screen use is a deeply ingrained habit, and lasting change comes from small, consistent adjustments rather than short periods of complete abstinence,” neuroscientist and author Emma Louth Als told The Epoch Times.

Louth Als said the problem with screen time isn’t necessarily the screen itself, but what it replaces. If digital engagement takes the place of proper socializing or rest, that’s when negative impacts on mental well-being start to appear.

“Screens are highly stimulating. They’re designed to keep you engaged, as the brain craves novelty and stimulation,” Louth Als said. “Taking time away allows your brain to slow down and recover.”

She said the pressure to always be “on” means the brain never truly rests. Reducing screen time gives your mind space to relax and lower stress levels.

Psychotherapist John McGuirk has also found this to be true when working with clients on digital detoxing.

“First, the quality of digital engagement itself can produce stress, such as repeatedly consuming negative news articles or finding oneself in online conflicts. This kind of engagement produces stress, low mood, or anxiety,” McGuirk told The Epoch Times.

“Secondly, the quantity of digital engagement can end up leaving very little time for other positive activities that might help improve well-being.”

Meta has unveiled plans to launch an ad-free subscription option for UK Facebook and Instagram users Alamy/PA

In his observations, McGuirk said this cycle prevents recovery from negative feelings.

“So, cortisol levels rise and stay high, and this negatively impacts heart rate, blood pressure, mood, and so on,” he said.

The amount of time people spend online has continued increasing since 2013, with overall screen time rising nearly 8 percent, according to an Exploding Topics analysis. On average, U.S. residents spend 7 hours, 3 minutes per day looking at digital screens.

Another Exploding Topics analysis showed U.S. teenagers spend almost half of their waking hours—7 hours, 22 minutes per day—looking at screens.

“When the brain is overloaded with notifications or content that leans on comparison, cortisol goes up in a state of hyperarousal until the nervous system gets a chance to settle,” psychologist Nick Bach told The Epoch Times.

Bach said his clients who take breaks from their devices report sleeping better, less irritation, and greater mental clarity within just a few days.

“I usually recommend that my clients try short and daily rituals such as the ‘screenless first hour’ or having an area in the home that is considered a tech-free zone. These shortcuts create a reset for someone without feeling deprived,” he said.

Jumping onto a smartphone first thing in the morning has been associated with increased stress and anxiety as well as reduced productivity, according to Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

McGuirk said creating “digital engagement windows,” such as five minutes at the end of every hour, is a healthy way of reducing screen time without creating too extreme a change.

However, he also believes it’s important to identify positive alternatives to being perpetually plugged in.

“This is vital and often missed. Just stopping leaves a huge window for ‘what do I do now?’ This can result in the old habit of ‘I’ve nothing to do, so I’ll just go online.’ Identifying good alternatives can include exercise, creativity, journaling, meditation, socializing [in real life], and going out into nature,” McGuirk said.

People run past the Department of State building in Washington on March 28, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

Cainan Oliver, co-founder of wellness center Found Recovery, also takes this approach to digital detoxing.

“We don’t remove technology. We help people fill that space with something more real: connection, movement, art, time outside,” Oliver told The Epoch Times.

In his work with mental health and addiction, Oliver has observed a pattern.

“When clients start feeling grounded again, their relationship with screens shifts naturally,” he said.

Oliver believes that more people are starting to crave stillness over stimulation.

“We’ve spent years in overdrive, and our bodies are asking for balance,” he said. “Digital detoxing isn’t about rejecting technology. It’s about remembering how to feel connected to real life again.”

The Center for Internet & Technology Addiction reported the average smartphone user checks their phone 142 times per day—a 12 percent increase from 2024. The center also noted a 39 percent increase in ADHD diagnoses linked with “digital multitasking,” and social media users are more than three times as likely to experience depression.

Changing Habits

Louth Als says it’s difficult to change behavior patterns while in the same environment surrounded by the same cues. Eventually, people still need to check their work emails, upload homework assignments, and complete a multitude of other daily tasks that require screen time.

She emphasized that despite the benefits of a short-term digital detox, a one-off event won’t “reset the brain.”

“My husband and I have tried before but quickly fell back into old habits,” she said.

That’s because habits take time to change, according to Louth Als.

“Let’s say you eliminate digital engagement for a week or two. And then you reintroduce screens. You may keep it down for another week or so, but ultimately, you will come back to the same usage. Why? Because you have deeply ingrained neurocircuitry that finds it rewarding to interact with screens,” she explained.

Louth Als said real change comes from reshaping daily routines over weeks or months.

This is where daily digital reduction strategies come into play. Resetting the brain in a retreat setting is a great way to get rid of “mental clutter and physical tension,” according to Bach. However, small daily adjustments can help build a better mental health balance between the digital and physical world.

McGuirk gave an example, saying, “Set times when digital engagement is ruled out, like no digital engagement after 10 p.m.”

“I encourage people to think about their whole day and identify where screens take over. Once you spot those patterns, you can replace them with something more meaningful,” Louth Als said.

In the office, she suggests people turn off their email notifications and only look at emails when they’re ready to answer them.

“Otherwise, they cause stress,” she said. “When you read an email but don’t answer it, your brain uses energy thinking about it and remembering to answer it later. Too many small tasks like this cause stress.”

McGuirk said, “I regularly do digital detoxes and restrict my digital engagement. ... I am much happier when my digital engagement is both quantitatively reduced and qualitatively improved.”

Bach also takes a quarterly 48 hour break from all devices, which allows him to come back feeling “grounded and ready to deeply connect with others and myself.”

Oliver said, “When I take time off my phone, I notice how quiet life actually is. My thoughts clear, and I start paying attention to the world again.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 21:45

"People Love It": Trump Talking To Dems About 'Direct Payment' Health Care Plans

President Donald Trump on Sunday said that he's spoken with congressional Democrats about a plan to hand people cash that they can use to purchase their own health insurance. 

President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media aboard Air Force One as he departs for Florida from Joint Base Andrews, Md., on Oct. 31, 2025. Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

"I’ve had personal talks with some Democrats," Trump told reporters in West Palm Beach, FL before returning to DC, adding that he talked to the dems "about paying large amounts of dollars back to the people."

Trump appears to be talking about a plan floated by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) - chairman of the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), who want to overhaul Obamacare by creating individual accounts that would direct money to people rather than insurance companies. Last week Trump told Fox News' Laura Ingraham that he supports the idea. 

"People love it," Trump said of the idea. "The insurance companies are making a fortune. Their stock is up over a thousand percent over a short period of time. They are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars, and they’re not really putting it back, certainly not like they should."

When asked about the idea, Trump told Ingraham that he wants "the money to go into an account for people where the people buy their own health insurance."

"The insurance will be better. It’ll cost less. Everybody’s going to be happy. They’re going to feel like entrepreneurs," he told the host, adding that the plan could be called "Trumpcare," while slamming Obamacare over skyrocketing premiums in recent years. 

Democrats made extending an enhanced ACA (Obamacare) credit central to their refusal to reopen the government earlier this month - refusing to go along with a short-term spending bill that didn't include that priority until they ultimately caved after Senate Majority Leader John Thune promised them a December vote on the matter. 

A group of eight Democrats then cut a deal with Republicans to reopen the government without winning a concession from the GOP to extend the subsidies.

Retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), one of the eight, has led negotiations between a group of 10-12 Republicans and Democrats, but many GOP senators say they are opposed to the premium subsidies. A Senate aide familiar with the negotiations told The Hill that roughly 20 Democratic offices have put out feelers on a potential deal to extend the subsidies. -The Hill

Will 'Trumpcare' render that moot?

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 21:20

Ultraprocessed Foods Linked To Increased Risk Of Precancerous Colorectal Tumors: Study

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A new study revealed that ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) may be linked to a rise in colon cancers among young people across the globe.

Potato chips are displayed in pharmacy Duane Reade by Walgreens in New York on March 25, 2021. AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, file

The first-of-its-kind study, which took place over 24 years, found that young people who consumed high levels of ultra-processed foods reported a surge in being diagnosed with adenomas and colon polyps, which often lead to colorectal cancer.

“Those with the highest quintile of UPF intake had a statistically significant 45 percent higher odds of early-onset colorectal conventional adenomas compared with the lowest quintile,” the study published Nov. 13 in the journal JAMA Oncology found.

The study followed 29,105 female registered nurses between June 1, 1991, through June 1, 2015. Male nurses were not part of the study.

Overall, 1,189 participants, born between 1947 and 1964, were diagnosed with early-onset conventional adenomas and 1,598 were diagnosed with serrated lesions.

Women who had a higher intake of ultraprocessed foods seemingly had an increased risk of early-onset conventional adenomas but not serrated lesions, the study claimed.

“Our findings support the importance of reducing the intake of ultra-processed foods as a strategy to mitigate the rising burden of early-onset colorectal cancer,” senior author and gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew Chan wrote.

Chan defined ultra-processed foods as “ready-to-eat foods that often contain high levels of sugar, salt, saturated fat and food additives.”

“The increased risk seems to be fairly linear, meaning that the more ultra-processed foods you eat, the more potential that it could lead to colon polyps.”

Not all polyps are cancerous. However, the number of people under 50 being diagnosed with colorectal cancer increased by 2 percent in 2025, according to a report by the American Medical Association in July.​

Colorectal cancer incidence rates increased by 500 percent in ages 10 to 14, went up 333 percent in teens aged 15 to 19, and went up 185 percent in young adults aged 20 to 24, the American Medical Association reported over the summer, citing CDC data from 1999 to 2020.

Colon cancer is usually a condition associated with people older than 50, but more and more young people across the world have been diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer, according to the Mayo Clinic.

“In about 20 percent of people with early-onset colon cancer, a genetic condition is the underlying cause. However, most people diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer have no such condition,” the Mayo Clinic reported.

Doctors have noticed that young people being diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer usually have fewer varieties of bacteria in their gut than “healthy people,” used antibiotics early in life, had a high intake of sugary drinks and processed foods while young and spent time at a desk or watching television for hours at a time while young.

​Colorectal cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 20:55

Ultraprocessed Foods Linked To Increased Risk Of Precancerous Colorectal Tumors: Study

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A new study revealed that ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) may be linked to a rise in colon cancers among young people across the globe.

Potato chips are displayed in pharmacy Duane Reade by Walgreens in New York on March 25, 2021. AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, file

The first-of-its-kind study, which took place over 24 years, found that young people who consumed high levels of ultra-processed foods reported a surge in being diagnosed with adenomas and colon polyps, which often lead to colorectal cancer.

“Those with the highest quintile of UPF intake had a statistically significant 45 percent higher odds of early-onset colorectal conventional adenomas compared with the lowest quintile,” the study published Nov. 13 in the journal JAMA Oncology found.

The study followed 29,105 female registered nurses between June 1, 1991, through June 1, 2015. Male nurses were not part of the study.

Overall, 1,189 participants, born between 1947 and 1964, were diagnosed with early-onset conventional adenomas and 1,598 were diagnosed with serrated lesions.

Women who had a higher intake of ultraprocessed foods seemingly had an increased risk of early-onset conventional adenomas but not serrated lesions, the study claimed.

“Our findings support the importance of reducing the intake of ultra-processed foods as a strategy to mitigate the rising burden of early-onset colorectal cancer,” senior author and gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew Chan wrote.

Chan defined ultra-processed foods as “ready-to-eat foods that often contain high levels of sugar, salt, saturated fat and food additives.”

“The increased risk seems to be fairly linear, meaning that the more ultra-processed foods you eat, the more potential that it could lead to colon polyps.”

Not all polyps are cancerous. However, the number of people under 50 being diagnosed with colorectal cancer increased by 2 percent in 2025, according to a report by the American Medical Association in July.​

Colorectal cancer incidence rates increased by 500 percent in ages 10 to 14, went up 333 percent in teens aged 15 to 19, and went up 185 percent in young adults aged 20 to 24, the American Medical Association reported over the summer, citing CDC data from 1999 to 2020.

Colon cancer is usually a condition associated with people older than 50, but more and more young people across the world have been diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer, according to the Mayo Clinic.

“In about 20 percent of people with early-onset colon cancer, a genetic condition is the underlying cause. However, most people diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer have no such condition,” the Mayo Clinic reported.

Doctors have noticed that young people being diagnosed with early-onset colon cancer usually have fewer varieties of bacteria in their gut than “healthy people,” used antibiotics early in life, had a high intake of sugary drinks and processed foods while young and spent time at a desk or watching television for hours at a time while young.

​Colorectal cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 20:55

Trump Suggests Airstrikes On Cartels In Mexico, Colombia: 'Okay With Me'

President Donald Trump told reporters gathered in the Oval Office on Monday that potential military strikes in Mexico to disrupt the drug trade would be "okay with me".

He expressed rare openness to direct Pentagon action inside America's neighbor to the immediate south, at a moment of ongoing deadly drone strikes on alleged drug boats off the coast of Venezuela. This is sure to turn US-Mexico relations in a more negative direction, but Trump doesn't seem overly concerned with this as he ramps up the pressure, also on Colombia. 

CFR via AFP/Getty Images

He said he'd be willing to do this to prevent drugs from entering the United States, and further he'd be proud to "knock out" cocaine factories in Colombia.

On Colombia, where the president, his family and top officials have recently been hit with US sanctions, Trump said as follows:

"Colombia has cocaine factories where they make cocaine. Would I knock out those factories? I would be proud to do it personally. I didn’t say I’m doing it, but I would be proud to do it because we’re going to save millions of lives by doing it."

This renewed war on drugs rhetoric has been met with immense controversy, including among some US Congress members who demand a Congressional vote before war is declared on Venezuela or any other sovereign Latin American country.

But the administration has also been utilizing 'terrorism' labels to justify strikes, which up to now has included targeting over twenty alleged drug boats and killing some 80 people.

NOW - Trump: "Would I launch strikes on Mexico to stop drugs? That's OK with me... Would I do that on the land corridors? I would— absou..." pic.twitter.com/g61Gq9JVu8

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 17, 2025

Trump really focused the bulk of the Monday comments with putting Mexico on notice:

The State Department designated six Mexican drug cartels, along with Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and MS-13, as foreign terrorist organizations in February. 

The president indicated on Monday that he would go to Congress to ask for permission for the strikes and predicted the potential actions would be supported by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. 

"So let me just put it this way," he said. "I am not happy with Mexico."

Watch the full exchange below:

Trump: Would I launch strikes in Mexico to stop drugs? It's ok with me…

Reporter: Would you need Mexico's permission?

Trump: I've been speaking to Mexico. They know how I stand. I’m not happy with Mexico pic.twitter.com/u16dH4bLb9

— Acyn (@Acyn) November 17, 2025

Last month, as attacks on drug boats in the southern Caribbean escalated, Trump expressed something similar on the question of bypassing Congress. "I’m not going to necessarily ask for a declaration of war," he said at the time. "I think we’re just doing to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. Okay? We’re going to kill them, you know, they’re going to be like, dead."

Without doubt, leaders in Mexico City and Bogota are increasingly nervous over such rhetoric - but there's little in reality they could do if their sovereignty were violated by US military action. Clearly Trump thinks these corrupt countries have not done enough to dismantle the cartels, which has in turn fueled the drug crisis in America.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 20:30

FT Confirms Our Report From 2024 That China Is Buying 10x More Gold Than Officially Disclosed

One year ago, Goldman's precious metal analyst Lina Thomas made the case that gold would rise to $3000 by the end of 2025 (it ended up rising more than $1000 higher) as a result of relentless central bank purchases in general, and thanks to China's ravenous appetite for gold in particular. The bank promptly got pushback on this thesis, with skeptics countering that it is unlikely that gold will manage to keep its ascent at the same time as the dollar rises to new record highs, one of the largest consensus Trump trades.

In response, Thomas also - correctly - pushed back, writing that she disagrees with the argument that "gold cannot rally to $3,000/toz by end-2025 in a world where the dollar stays stronger for longer", for four reasons:

• First, it will be US policy rate that drives investor gold demand, with no significant additional role for the dollar. 
• Second, Thomas disagreed with the view that dollar strength will halt structurally higher central bank purchases because central banks tend to buy gold internationally from their dollar reserves. In fact, the large central bank buyers tend to raise their gold demand amid local currency weakness to boost confidence in their currency.
• Third, the tendency for the dollar and gold prices to rise with uncertainty supports their roles as portfolio hedges, including against tariff escalation.
• Finally, the yuan depreciation and broader easing that Goldman economists expect should have a roughly neutral net effect on China's retail gold demand, as the gold demand boost from lower China rates roughly offsets the hit from higher local gold prices.

And while it took less than a year for gold prices to surge far above the bank's (in retrospect) conservative forecast, there was one aspect of the prediction that was already playing out: as we showed at the time using an analysis of central bank and other institutional gold buying on the London OTC market, China was secretly buying up 10x more gold than it admits.

A few months later we repeated this observation: China continued to secretly buy 10x more gold (27 tonnes) than it reports (3 tonnes).

China continues to secretly buy 10x more gold (27 tonnes) than it reports (3 tonnes) pic.twitter.com/uKMMQGvGXX

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 13, 2025

While that alone was sufficient to validate the bullish thesis, another key factor that also emerged was the aggressive ramp up of gold ETF purchases by retail investors, something we predicted over a year ago...

Gold ETF holdings have a long way to go: they have been mostly net sold since 2022 (weaponization of USD after Ukraine war), when central bank buying engaged and bought everything retail had to sell https://t.co/2fFhWQfp7s pic.twitter.com/TyGvKSNNqq

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 16, 2024

... and which Morgan Stanley confirmed over the weekend had been a "big support for gold this year."

But while ETF purchases come and go as price momentum ebbs and flows, in retrospect the biggest shocker was our revelation that - in keeping with tradition  - China was secretly buying up most of the available gold in the open market (presumably in anticipation of some major event which has yet to be unveiled). Needless to say, there was tremendous pushback to this claim, with the "serious" strategists balking at the possibility that China would be allocating its precious reserves to a barbarous relic.

Not any more: fast-forwarding to one year later when over the weekend, the FT reported that "China’s actual gold purchases could be more than 10 times its official figures as it quietly tries to diversify away from the US dollar, highlighting the increasingly opaque sources of demand behind bullion’s record-breaking rally." Or precisely what we said last December.

The FT notes that publicly reported buying by China’s central bank has been so low this year - 1.9 tonnes purchased in August, 1.9 tonnes in July and 2.2 tonnes in June - that few in the market believe the official figures. Instead, echoing the same trade data analysis we did back in 2024 (and ever since), the newspaper points to work done by analysts at Société Générale who estimate that China’s total purchases could reach as much as 250 tonnes this year, or more than a third of total global central bank demand.

The scale of the country’s unreported purchases highlights the growing challenges facing traders trying to work out where prices go next in a market increasingly dominated by central bank purchases.

“China is buying gold as part of their de-dollarisation strategy,” said Jeff Currie, chief strategy officer of energy pathways at Carlyle, who says he does not try to guess how much gold the People’s Bank of China is buying. 

“Unlike oil, where you can track it with satellites, with gold you can’t. There’s just no way to know where this stuff goes and who is buying it.”

And since official Chinese data is unreliable at best, or simply fake, traders had turned to alternative sources of data to gauge demand, such as orders for freshly cast 400oz bars with consecutive serial numbers, which are typically refined in Switzerland or South Africa, shipped via London and flown to China, for evidence of the country’s purchases. The same analysis we have been doing since 2022.

China Said To Be Mystery Buyer Stockpiling Gold To "Cut Dollar Dependence" https://t.co/qtqv2SgnfX

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 22, 2022

“This year, people are really not believing the official figures, especially about China,” said Bruce Ikemizu, director of the Japan Bullion Market Association, who believes China’s current gold reserves are nearly 5,000 tonnes, double the level it publicly reports.

Of course, China is not alone: ever since the US weaponized the dollar in response to the Ukraine war, Central banks have been buying up huge quantities of bullion fuelling a rally that has pushed the price above $4,300 per troy ounce.

Gold price decoupled from ETF flows after Ukraine war (weaponization of dollar), but now even ETF flows are turning positive https://t.co/BoMY0hzTSJ pic.twitter.com/LICCLClIR1

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 25, 2024

This accumulating has been so relentless, that gold’s share of global reserves outside the US has climbed from 10% to 26% over the past decade, World Gold Council data shows, making it the second-largest reserve asset after the dollar. Yet fewer and fewer of these purchases are being reported to the IMF, which collects data voluntarily.

In the most recent quarter, only about one-third of official buying was publicly reported, down from about 90% four years ago, according to WGC estimates based on Metals Focus data.

Central banks may choose not to report their gold activity to avoid front-running the market or for political reasons. Some fear that publicly buying bullion, which is often a hedge against the dollar, could worsen relations with the Trump administration.

“It makes sense to just report the bare minimum, if need be, for fear of reprisal from the US administration,” said Nicky Shiels, analyst at Swiss refinery MKS Pamp. “Gold is seen as a pure USA hedge. In most emerging markets it is in central banks’ interest to not fully disclose purchases.”

At the same time, sellers are also keen not to move prices against themselves by announcing their intentions. Former UK chancellor Gordon Brown’s well-publicized statements in 1999 that the Bank of England would sell half its gold reserves helped push prices even lower, and the sale yielded just $275 per ounce on average, about one-fifteenth of today’s price.

Michael Haigh, an analyst at Société Générale, said this opacity made the gold market “unique and tricky” compared with commodities such as oil, where Opec plays a role in regulating production.

“What is different with gold is that the tonnage going in and out of central banks is so impactful. Without having clarity on that, it is a bit more of an issue.”

And while China is the world’s biggest producer and consumer of gold, it is also the least transparent, leaving analysts to run their own numbers based on import data, guesswork and tips.

Its official gold-buying program, which is managed by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange, part of the People’s Bank of China, has officially bought just 25 tonnes this year. Reserve gold is typically stored either in Shanghai or in Beijing. And yet, applying the same proxy we used one year ago, namely looking at UK gold exports to China (as the PBOC favors large bars which are mainly traded in London), SocGen estimates that Safe will import about 250 tonnes this year, or 10x more. This number sure sounds familiar... 

Another method is to calculate the gap between China’s net imports and domestic gold production, and the change in the amount held by commercial banks or purchased by retail consumers. Using this method, Plenum Research, a Beijing consultancy, calculates a “gap” attributable to official buying of 1,351 tonnes in 2023 and 1,382 tonnes in 2022, more than six times the public purchases China made in those years.

But while the actual numbers are unclear, one thing is certain: China will buy much more gold than it officially reports. Safe has one-year and five-year targets for its purchases of gold, and current official holdings remain far below target, according to a former Safe official. The purchases are made not only by Safe and its intermediaries, but also by China’s sovereign wealth fund CIC and the military, which are not mandated to disclose their holdings on a timely basis.

Complicating the picture is China’s status as the world’s largest gold miner, accounting for 10% of global production last year, which means that it also has the option of buying bullion domestically for its reserves. But in a geopolitical statement of force, as China expands its gold holdings, it is also courting developing nations to store it in the country. As BBG recently reported, Cambodia recently agreed to place newly purchased gold, paid for in renminbi, in the Shanghai Gold Exchange’s vault in Shenzhen.

In light of all these variables, many gold analysts will not even hazard a guess as to the true scale of purchases by the PBoC. 

“It’s ultimately unknowable,” said Adrian Ash, research director of BullionVault, an online trading platform. “Any apparent route to figuring it out . . . misses the problem that it is only one part of the enigma wrapped in the riddle which is China’s bullion market.”

One thing is clear: it will keep rising. 

In a note published earlier today Lina Thomas (and available to pro subs), the Goldman gold analyst who correctly calculated China's true purchases over a year ago, she writes that the bank's latest gold nowcast estimates that central bank purchased 64 tonnes for September vs. 21 tonnes in August, and central bank buying likely continued in November: "We continue to see elevated central bank gold accumulation as a multi-year trend, as central banks diversify their reserves to hedge geopolitical and financial risks. We maintain our assumption of average monthly central bank buying of 80 tonnes in 2025Q4-2026", Thomas wrote.

Some more details from her note (available to pro subs):

The gold price broke higher last week, jumping about $25 in a vertical move during last Monday’s Asia hours and rising nearly 6% before correcting on Friday to just under $4,100. The timing, size and speed of last Monday’s price increase are consistent with Asian [ZH: read Chinese] central bank buying, which often appears in London prices around Asian trading hours and thus sees an initial decrease in the Shanghai-London price premium but is then often followed by delayed momentum buying in retail China and then the West.

We continue to see elevated central bank gold accumulation as a multi-year trend as central banks diversify their reserves to hedge geopolitical and financial risks.

Our GS nowcast of central bank and institutional gold demand on the London OTC estimates September purchases at 64 tonnes (67 tonnes on a 12-month moving-average basis), up from 21 tonnes in August and consistent with the typical post-summer seasonal acceleration (Exhibit 1).

Goldman estimates that September purchases were led by the Middle East - Qatar at 20 tonnes and Oman at 7 tonnes - and China at 15 tonnes, extending the trend of massively underreporting its actual purchases (the official number was roughly 10% of that estimate).

Goldman concludes that the pickup in central bank buying, together with the largest monthly gold Western ETF inflow (112 tonnes) since mid-2022, marks the first time in this cycle that strong post-2022 central bank demand and such a sizable increase in ETF holdings have occurred simultaneously, something we predicted back in 2024. Thomas believes that this combination, alongside likely additional off-ETF physical buying by ultra-high net worth individuals, as well as the ongoing buying spree by Tether which is increasingly diversifying into gold alongside T-bills, likely contributed to September’s 10% rally, the strongest monthly increase in gold prices since 2016.

Going forward, Goldman expects continued central bank buying, alongside private investor flows under Fed easing, to lift gold prices to $4,900 by end-2026, and predicted even more "significant upside" if the private investor diversification theme gains more traction.

More in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 20:05

FT Confirms Our Report From 2024 That China Is Buying 10x More Gold Than Officially Disclosed

One year ago, Goldman's precious metal analyst Lina Thomas made the case that gold would rise to $3000 by the end of 2025 (it ended up rising more than $1000 higher) as a result of relentless central bank purchases in general, and thanks to China's ravenous appetite for gold in particular. The bank promptly got pushback on this thesis, with skeptics countering that it is unlikely that gold will manage to keep its ascent at the same time as the dollar rises to new record highs, one of the largest consensus Trump trades.

In response, Thomas also - correctly - pushed back, writing that she disagrees with the argument that "gold cannot rally to $3,000/toz by end-2025 in a world where the dollar stays stronger for longer", for four reasons:

• First, it will be US policy rate that drives investor gold demand, with no significant additional role for the dollar. 
• Second, Thomas disagreed with the view that dollar strength will halt structurally higher central bank purchases because central banks tend to buy gold internationally from their dollar reserves. In fact, the large central bank buyers tend to raise their gold demand amid local currency weakness to boost confidence in their currency.
• Third, the tendency for the dollar and gold prices to rise with uncertainty supports their roles as portfolio hedges, including against tariff escalation.
• Finally, the yuan depreciation and broader easing that Goldman economists expect should have a roughly neutral net effect on China's retail gold demand, as the gold demand boost from lower China rates roughly offsets the hit from higher local gold prices.

And while it took less than a year for gold prices to surge far above the bank's (in retrospect) conservative forecast, there was one aspect of the prediction that was already playing out: as we showed at the time using an analysis of central bank and other institutional gold buying on the London OTC market, China was secretly buying up 10x more gold than it admits.

A few months later we repeated this observation: China continued to secretly buy 10x more gold (27 tonnes) than it reports (3 tonnes).

China continues to secretly buy 10x more gold (27 tonnes) than it reports (3 tonnes) pic.twitter.com/uKMMQGvGXX

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 13, 2025

While that alone was sufficient to validate the bullish thesis, another key factor that also emerged was the aggressive ramp up of gold ETF purchases by retail investors, something we predicted over a year ago...

Gold ETF holdings have a long way to go: they have been mostly net sold since 2022 (weaponization of USD after Ukraine war), when central bank buying engaged and bought everything retail had to sell https://t.co/2fFhWQfp7s pic.twitter.com/TyGvKSNNqq

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 16, 2024

... and which Morgan Stanley confirmed over the weekend had been a "big support for gold this year."

But while ETF purchases come and go as price momentum ebbs and flows, in retrospect the biggest shocker was our revelation that - in keeping with tradition  - China was secretly buying up most of the available gold in the open market (presumably in anticipation of some major event which has yet to be unveiled). Needless to say, there was tremendous pushback to this claim, with the "serious" strategists balking at the possibility that China would be allocating its precious reserves to a barbarous relic.

Not any more: fast-forwarding to one year later when over the weekend, the FT reported that "China’s actual gold purchases could be more than 10 times its official figures as it quietly tries to diversify away from the US dollar, highlighting the increasingly opaque sources of demand behind bullion’s record-breaking rally." Or precisely what we said last December.

The FT notes that publicly reported buying by China’s central bank has been so low this year - 1.9 tonnes purchased in August, 1.9 tonnes in July and 2.2 tonnes in June - that few in the market believe the official figures. Instead, echoing the same trade data analysis we did back in 2024 (and ever since), the newspaper points to work done by analysts at Société Générale who estimate that China’s total purchases could reach as much as 250 tonnes this year, or more than a third of total global central bank demand.

The scale of the country’s unreported purchases highlights the growing challenges facing traders trying to work out where prices go next in a market increasingly dominated by central bank purchases.

“China is buying gold as part of their de-dollarisation strategy,” said Jeff Currie, chief strategy officer of energy pathways at Carlyle, who says he does not try to guess how much gold the People’s Bank of China is buying. 

“Unlike oil, where you can track it with satellites, with gold you can’t. There’s just no way to know where this stuff goes and who is buying it.”

And since official Chinese data is unreliable at best, or simply fake, traders had turned to alternative sources of data to gauge demand, such as orders for freshly cast 400oz bars with consecutive serial numbers, which are typically refined in Switzerland or South Africa, shipped via London and flown to China, for evidence of the country’s purchases. The same analysis we have been doing since 2022.

China Said To Be Mystery Buyer Stockpiling Gold To "Cut Dollar Dependence" https://t.co/qtqv2SgnfX

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 22, 2022

“This year, people are really not believing the official figures, especially about China,” said Bruce Ikemizu, director of the Japan Bullion Market Association, who believes China’s current gold reserves are nearly 5,000 tonnes, double the level it publicly reports.

Of course, China is not alone: ever since the US weaponized the dollar in response to the Ukraine war, Central banks have been buying up huge quantities of bullion fuelling a rally that has pushed the price above $4,300 per troy ounce.

Gold price decoupled from ETF flows after Ukraine war (weaponization of dollar), but now even ETF flows are turning positive https://t.co/BoMY0hzTSJ pic.twitter.com/LICCLClIR1

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 25, 2024

This accumulating has been so relentless, that gold’s share of global reserves outside the US has climbed from 10% to 26% over the past decade, World Gold Council data shows, making it the second-largest reserve asset after the dollar. Yet fewer and fewer of these purchases are being reported to the IMF, which collects data voluntarily.

In the most recent quarter, only about one-third of official buying was publicly reported, down from about 90% four years ago, according to WGC estimates based on Metals Focus data.

Central banks may choose not to report their gold activity to avoid front-running the market or for political reasons. Some fear that publicly buying bullion, which is often a hedge against the dollar, could worsen relations with the Trump administration.

“It makes sense to just report the bare minimum, if need be, for fear of reprisal from the US administration,” said Nicky Shiels, analyst at Swiss refinery MKS Pamp. “Gold is seen as a pure USA hedge. In most emerging markets it is in central banks’ interest to not fully disclose purchases.”

At the same time, sellers are also keen not to move prices against themselves by announcing their intentions. Former UK chancellor Gordon Brown’s well-publicized statements in 1999 that the Bank of England would sell half its gold reserves helped push prices even lower, and the sale yielded just $275 per ounce on average, about one-fifteenth of today’s price.

Michael Haigh, an analyst at Société Générale, said this opacity made the gold market “unique and tricky” compared with commodities such as oil, where Opec plays a role in regulating production.

“What is different with gold is that the tonnage going in and out of central banks is so impactful. Without having clarity on that, it is a bit more of an issue.”

And while China is the world’s biggest producer and consumer of gold, it is also the least transparent, leaving analysts to run their own numbers based on import data, guesswork and tips.

Its official gold-buying program, which is managed by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange, part of the People’s Bank of China, has officially bought just 25 tonnes this year. Reserve gold is typically stored either in Shanghai or in Beijing. And yet, applying the same proxy we used one year ago, namely looking at UK gold exports to China (as the PBOC favors large bars which are mainly traded in London), SocGen estimates that Safe will import about 250 tonnes this year, or 10x more. This number sure sounds familiar... 

Another method is to calculate the gap between China’s net imports and domestic gold production, and the change in the amount held by commercial banks or purchased by retail consumers. Using this method, Plenum Research, a Beijing consultancy, calculates a “gap” attributable to official buying of 1,351 tonnes in 2023 and 1,382 tonnes in 2022, more than six times the public purchases China made in those years.

But while the actual numbers are unclear, one thing is certain: China will buy much more gold than it officially reports. Safe has one-year and five-year targets for its purchases of gold, and current official holdings remain far below target, according to a former Safe official. The purchases are made not only by Safe and its intermediaries, but also by China’s sovereign wealth fund CIC and the military, which are not mandated to disclose their holdings on a timely basis.

Complicating the picture is China’s status as the world’s largest gold miner, accounting for 10% of global production last year, which means that it also has the option of buying bullion domestically for its reserves. But in a geopolitical statement of force, as China expands its gold holdings, it is also courting developing nations to store it in the country. As BBG recently reported, Cambodia recently agreed to place newly purchased gold, paid for in renminbi, in the Shanghai Gold Exchange’s vault in Shenzhen.

In light of all these variables, many gold analysts will not even hazard a guess as to the true scale of purchases by the PBoC. 

“It’s ultimately unknowable,” said Adrian Ash, research director of BullionVault, an online trading platform. “Any apparent route to figuring it out . . . misses the problem that it is only one part of the enigma wrapped in the riddle which is China’s bullion market.”

One thing is clear: it will keep rising. 

In a note published earlier today Lina Thomas (and available to pro subs), the Goldman gold analyst who correctly calculated China's true purchases over a year ago, she writes that the bank's latest gold nowcast estimates that central bank purchased 64 tonnes for September vs. 21 tonnes in August, and central bank buying likely continued in November: "We continue to see elevated central bank gold accumulation as a multi-year trend, as central banks diversify their reserves to hedge geopolitical and financial risks. We maintain our assumption of average monthly central bank buying of 80 tonnes in 2025Q4-2026", Thomas wrote.

Some more details from her note (available to pro subs):

The gold price broke higher last week, jumping about $25 in a vertical move during last Monday’s Asia hours and rising nearly 6% before correcting on Friday to just under $4,100. The timing, size and speed of last Monday’s price increase are consistent with Asian [ZH: read Chinese] central bank buying, which often appears in London prices around Asian trading hours and thus sees an initial decrease in the Shanghai-London price premium but is then often followed by delayed momentum buying in retail China and then the West.

We continue to see elevated central bank gold accumulation as a multi-year trend as central banks diversify their reserves to hedge geopolitical and financial risks.

Our GS nowcast of central bank and institutional gold demand on the London OTC estimates September purchases at 64 tonnes (67 tonnes on a 12-month moving-average basis), up from 21 tonnes in August and consistent with the typical post-summer seasonal acceleration (Exhibit 1).

Goldman estimates that September purchases were led by the Middle East - Qatar at 20 tonnes and Oman at 7 tonnes - and China at 15 tonnes, extending the trend of massively underreporting its actual purchases (the official number was roughly 10% of that estimate).

Goldman concludes that the pickup in central bank buying, together with the largest monthly gold Western ETF inflow (112 tonnes) since mid-2022, marks the first time in this cycle that strong post-2022 central bank demand and such a sizable increase in ETF holdings have occurred simultaneously, something we predicted back in 2024. Thomas believes that this combination, alongside likely additional off-ETF physical buying by ultra-high net worth individuals, as well as the ongoing buying spree by Tether which is increasingly diversifying into gold alongside T-bills, likely contributed to September’s 10% rally, the strongest monthly increase in gold prices since 2016.

Going forward, Goldman expects continued central bank buying, alongside private investor flows under Fed easing, to lift gold prices to $4,900 by end-2026, and predicted even more "significant upside" if the private investor diversification theme gains more traction.

More in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 20:05

Trump Hints US Might Still Be Talking With Maduro, Despite Huge Force Build-Up

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

President Trump said on Sunday that the US "may be having discussions" with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, suggesting his administration has not entirely cut off diplomacy with Caracas as previous reports have said.

Trump made the comments when asked about Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s announcement that the State Department would be designating the so-called Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization,” though the group doesn’t actually exist.

.@POTUS on Venezuela: "We may be having some discussions with Maduro, and we'll see how that turns out — but they would like to talk." pic.twitter.com/ooeKngFUch

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) November 16, 2025

The term “Cartel of the Suns” was first used in the 1990s, before Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, came to power, to describe two Venezuelan military generals with sun insignias on their uniforms who were involved in the drug trade. One of the generals was working with the CIA at the time, according to a 1993 60 Minutes report.

Today, the term is used to describe Venezuelan military and government officials who allegedly profit from drug trafficking, but the Cartel of the Suns doesn’t exist as a structured organization.

Regardless of the reality, the US claims that Maduro is the leader of the Cartel of the Suns, signaling it will use the terror designation as a pretext to target him. Trump was asked if the designation could justify the US targeting Maduro’s assets or infrastructure inside Venezuela, and claimed that it “allows us to do that,” though any military action without congressional authorization would be illegal under the Constitution. Trump then suggested that the US and Venezuela are talking.

“It allows us to do that, but I haven’t said we’re going to do that, and we may be having some discussions with Maduro, and we’ll see how that turns out, but they would like to talk,” he told reporters.

Maduro has made clear that he’s willing to reach some kind of deal with the US and sent a letter to Trump after the US began bombing alleged drug-running boats in the region. In the letter, the Venezuelan leader urged for diplomacy to resolve any issues and said he was ready to talk to Trump’s special envoy, Ric Grennel, at any time.

The New York Times reported in early October that Trump called off diplomacy with Venezuela, though another Times report on Friday cited an administration official who said the talks with Venezuela were “not entirely dead.” Officials say the arrival of the US aircraft carrier Gerald Ford is meant to be used as leverage over Maduro, but it’s unclear what sort of deal would satisfy the US.

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro and US President Donald Trump’s envoy Richard Grenell shake hands at the Miraflores Palace, in Caracas, Venezuela, January 31, 2025. Miraflores Palace/Handout via Reuters

Trump has reportedly been briefed in recent days on options to bomb Venezuela, and the US strikes on boats in the region have continued, killing at least 82 people since the bombing campaign began in early September.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 19:40

Trump Hints US Might Still Be Talking With Maduro, Despite Huge Force Build-Up

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

President Trump said on Sunday that the US "may be having discussions" with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, suggesting his administration has not entirely cut off diplomacy with Caracas as previous reports have said.

Trump made the comments when asked about Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s announcement that the State Department would be designating the so-called Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization,” though the group doesn’t actually exist.

.@POTUS on Venezuela: "We may be having some discussions with Maduro, and we'll see how that turns out — but they would like to talk." pic.twitter.com/ooeKngFUch

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) November 16, 2025

The term “Cartel of the Suns” was first used in the 1990s, before Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, came to power, to describe two Venezuelan military generals with sun insignias on their uniforms who were involved in the drug trade. One of the generals was working with the CIA at the time, according to a 1993 60 Minutes report.

Today, the term is used to describe Venezuelan military and government officials who allegedly profit from drug trafficking, but the Cartel of the Suns doesn’t exist as a structured organization.

Regardless of the reality, the US claims that Maduro is the leader of the Cartel of the Suns, signaling it will use the terror designation as a pretext to target him. Trump was asked if the designation could justify the US targeting Maduro’s assets or infrastructure inside Venezuela, and claimed that it “allows us to do that,” though any military action without congressional authorization would be illegal under the Constitution. Trump then suggested that the US and Venezuela are talking.

“It allows us to do that, but I haven’t said we’re going to do that, and we may be having some discussions with Maduro, and we’ll see how that turns out, but they would like to talk,” he told reporters.

Maduro has made clear that he’s willing to reach some kind of deal with the US and sent a letter to Trump after the US began bombing alleged drug-running boats in the region. In the letter, the Venezuelan leader urged for diplomacy to resolve any issues and said he was ready to talk to Trump’s special envoy, Ric Grennel, at any time.

The New York Times reported in early October that Trump called off diplomacy with Venezuela, though another Times report on Friday cited an administration official who said the talks with Venezuela were “not entirely dead.” Officials say the arrival of the US aircraft carrier Gerald Ford is meant to be used as leverage over Maduro, but it’s unclear what sort of deal would satisfy the US.

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro and US President Donald Trump’s envoy Richard Grenell shake hands at the Miraflores Palace, in Caracas, Venezuela, January 31, 2025. Miraflores Palace/Handout via Reuters

Trump has reportedly been briefed in recent days on options to bomb Venezuela, and the US strikes on boats in the region have continued, killing at least 82 people since the bombing campaign began in early September.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 19:40

Appeals Court Halts DOT Restrictions On Commercial Driver's Licenses For Illegals

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal appeals court in the District of Columbia has temporarily blocked the Department of Transportation (DOT) from enforcing a new rule that narrows the conditions under which states may issue commercial driver’s licenses to noncitizens.

The ruling followed an Oct. 20 petition from two truck drivers and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) seeking judicial review of the interim final rule by the DOT’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) in September.

The rule limits eligibility for nondomiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDL) to holders of H-2A (temporary agricultural workers), H-2B (temporary non-agricultural workers), and E-2 (treaty investors) visas, with no other immigration categories eligible, according to a document published on the Federal Register on Sept. 29.

In its Nov. 13 ruling, the appeals court said the federal government didn’t follow proper procedure in drafting the rule and failed to “articulate a satisfactory explanation for how the rule would promote safety.”

The court said the FMCSA’s data show that nondomiciled CDL holders make up roughly 5 percent of all CDL holders but are involved in only about 0.2 percent of fatal crashes in the United States.

“FMCSA does not appear to have demonstrated any safety benefit from the rule, the county petitioner has furnished evidence that the rule would harm public safety by forcing it to replace safer experienced drivers with less-safe new drivers,” it stated.

The ruling also found that the petitioners will likely succeed in their claims that the FMCSA issued the rule without prior consultation with the states.

The agency has argued that it did not consult states because the total cost of compliance with the rule was not expected to be substantial and that such consultation was “not practicable,” according to court documents. The court rejected that argument.

Circuit Judge Karen L. Henderson dissented, noting that FMCSA had presented five recent fatal crashes involving foreign-domiciled CDL drivers—which killed 12 individuals—suggesting that an audit of their foreign driving records might have barred them from obtaining CDLs in the United States.

“These examples merely bolstered the FMCSA’s already reasonable determination that allowing CDL-holders with unverified driving histories on our roadways is unsafe,” Henderson stated.

In a statement to multiple news outlets, a DOT spokesperson said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy will continue efforts to keep “unqualified, foreign drivers off American roads.”

“This is not a ruling on the merits of the case,” the spokesperson noted.

AFSCME president Lee Saunders applauded the court’s decision on Nov. 14.

“Many public service workers who provide essential services like keeping our streets clean and driving our children to school require commercial drivers’ licenses,” Saunders said in a statement.

The FMCSA posted the court’s decision on its website, noting that the interim final rule is on hold until further notice, while states facing corrective action must continue to adhere to the guidance.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) had supported the new rule.

“For too long, loopholes in this program have allowed unqualified drivers onto our highways, putting professional truckers and the motoring public at risk,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.

The DOT took emergency action in September following a fatal crash in Florida on Aug. 12 that involved a semitruck driver who illegally entered the United States in 2018 through the southern border. The driver, identified as Harjinder Singh, obtained a commercial driver’s license in California.

The federal government has already withheld more than $40 million in funding from California after an investigation found that the state had not met federal English-language proficiency standards for truck drivers.

On Nov. 12, the DOT stated that California has revoked about 17,000 illegally issued trucking licenses, which were issued to nondomiciled CDL drivers.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 19:15

Appeals Court Halts DOT Restrictions On Commercial Driver's Licenses For Illegals

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal appeals court in the District of Columbia has temporarily blocked the Department of Transportation (DOT) from enforcing a new rule that narrows the conditions under which states may issue commercial driver’s licenses to noncitizens.

The ruling followed an Oct. 20 petition from two truck drivers and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) seeking judicial review of the interim final rule by the DOT’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) in September.

The rule limits eligibility for nondomiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDL) to holders of H-2A (temporary agricultural workers), H-2B (temporary non-agricultural workers), and E-2 (treaty investors) visas, with no other immigration categories eligible, according to a document published on the Federal Register on Sept. 29.

In its Nov. 13 ruling, the appeals court said the federal government didn’t follow proper procedure in drafting the rule and failed to “articulate a satisfactory explanation for how the rule would promote safety.”

The court said the FMCSA’s data show that nondomiciled CDL holders make up roughly 5 percent of all CDL holders but are involved in only about 0.2 percent of fatal crashes in the United States.

“FMCSA does not appear to have demonstrated any safety benefit from the rule, the county petitioner has furnished evidence that the rule would harm public safety by forcing it to replace safer experienced drivers with less-safe new drivers,” it stated.

The ruling also found that the petitioners will likely succeed in their claims that the FMCSA issued the rule without prior consultation with the states.

The agency has argued that it did not consult states because the total cost of compliance with the rule was not expected to be substantial and that such consultation was “not practicable,” according to court documents. The court rejected that argument.

Circuit Judge Karen L. Henderson dissented, noting that FMCSA had presented five recent fatal crashes involving foreign-domiciled CDL drivers—which killed 12 individuals—suggesting that an audit of their foreign driving records might have barred them from obtaining CDLs in the United States.

“These examples merely bolstered the FMCSA’s already reasonable determination that allowing CDL-holders with unverified driving histories on our roadways is unsafe,” Henderson stated.

In a statement to multiple news outlets, a DOT spokesperson said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy will continue efforts to keep “unqualified, foreign drivers off American roads.”

“This is not a ruling on the merits of the case,” the spokesperson noted.

AFSCME president Lee Saunders applauded the court’s decision on Nov. 14.

“Many public service workers who provide essential services like keeping our streets clean and driving our children to school require commercial drivers’ licenses,” Saunders said in a statement.

The FMCSA posted the court’s decision on its website, noting that the interim final rule is on hold until further notice, while states facing corrective action must continue to adhere to the guidance.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) had supported the new rule.

“For too long, loopholes in this program have allowed unqualified drivers onto our highways, putting professional truckers and the motoring public at risk,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.

The DOT took emergency action in September following a fatal crash in Florida on Aug. 12 that involved a semitruck driver who illegally entered the United States in 2018 through the southern border. The driver, identified as Harjinder Singh, obtained a commercial driver’s license in California.

The federal government has already withheld more than $40 million in funding from California after an investigation found that the state had not met federal English-language proficiency standards for truck drivers.

On Nov. 12, the DOT stated that California has revoked about 17,000 illegally issued trucking licenses, which were issued to nondomiciled CDL drivers.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 19:15

Threats Of Sanctions, Economic Warfare, As Japan-China Relations Sink To Decades Low

China and Japan are experiencing their most intense diplomatic tensions in years after Beijing issued economic warnings in response to recent comments by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi about a potential Taiwan conflict. As we featured previously, Takaichi had suggested that any Chinese use of force against Taiwan could be considered a "situation threatening Japan’s survival" - which could justify Tokyo supporting allied nations in defense of the self-ruled island.

Beijing reacted swiftly, with a Chinese state broadcaster over the weekend having cautioned that the country is "fully prepared for concrete countermeasures," which could include sanctions, trade repercussions, and even the suspension of all diplomatic or military engagement - as cited in Bloomberg. All of this comes after NATO scrapped highly provocative plans to open a 'NATO office' in Japan.

Japan's Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi

Takaichi is only a month in office, and became the first Japanese leader in decades to publicly raise the Taiwan Strait crisis alongside the possible deployment of Japanese troops.

China's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning on Monday repeated Beijing's demand for a full retraction and apology. She called on Japan to "Stop crossing the line and playing with fire, retract the wrongful remarks and deeds and honor its commitments to China with real action." 

She further declared there is "no space" for ambiguity on what China sees as its territory. She further explained, "China has made its serious position clear several times on Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s wrongful remarks on Taiwan." She added: "The remarks seriously violate the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan, and cause fundamental damage to the political foundation of China-Japan relations."

Bloomberg has cited one regional analyst who says a full severing of relations is likely not on the agenda:

"Although China’s reaction has been very strong so far, it’s very calculated," said Rui Aoyama, a professor of Japan-China relations at Waseda University in Tokyo. "China is aiming to deal a blow to Japan’s economy, but I don’t think there’s an intention to cut ties."

Yet this will be a serious test for Takaichi, and there could be painful economic repercussions for Japan just around the corner.

Already last week China urged its nationals not to travel to Japan, and summoned the Japanese ambassador to Beijing to condemn Takaichi's remarks.

State media ramping up the trolling and attacks...

"Learning from" mistakes of the past.#militarism #Japan #history #SanaeTakaichi pic.twitter.com/FMpuzU9yXh

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) November 17, 2025

The situation then turned into a tit-for-tat of outrage. Fox example Japan has been most angered at a social media post issued a week ago by China's consul general in the Japanese city of Osaka, Xue Jian. He had shared article about Takaichi's parliamentary remarks on X with his own words, "the dirty head that sticks itself in must be cut off." Tokyo quickly lodged its own diplomatic protest over the "high inappropriate" commentary.

But China has still maintained all of this ultimately stems from the "extremely wrong and dangerous" words of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi related to defending Taiwan.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 18:50

Threats Of Sanctions, Economic Warfare, As Japan-China Relations Sink To Decades Low

China and Japan are experiencing their most intense diplomatic tensions in years after Beijing issued economic warnings in response to recent comments by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi about a potential Taiwan conflict. As we featured previously, Takaichi had suggested that any Chinese use of force against Taiwan could be considered a "situation threatening Japan’s survival" - which could justify Tokyo supporting allied nations in defense of the self-ruled island.

Beijing reacted swiftly, with a Chinese state broadcaster over the weekend having cautioned that the country is "fully prepared for concrete countermeasures," which could include sanctions, trade repercussions, and even the suspension of all diplomatic or military engagement - as cited in Bloomberg. All of this comes after NATO scrapped highly provocative plans to open a 'NATO office' in Japan.

Japan's Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi

Takaichi is only a month in office, and became the first Japanese leader in decades to publicly raise the Taiwan Strait crisis alongside the possible deployment of Japanese troops.

China's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning on Monday repeated Beijing's demand for a full retraction and apology. She called on Japan to "Stop crossing the line and playing with fire, retract the wrongful remarks and deeds and honor its commitments to China with real action." 

She further declared there is "no space" for ambiguity on what China sees as its territory. She further explained, "China has made its serious position clear several times on Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s wrongful remarks on Taiwan." She added: "The remarks seriously violate the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan, and cause fundamental damage to the political foundation of China-Japan relations."

Bloomberg has cited one regional analyst who says a full severing of relations is likely not on the agenda:

"Although China’s reaction has been very strong so far, it’s very calculated," said Rui Aoyama, a professor of Japan-China relations at Waseda University in Tokyo. "China is aiming to deal a blow to Japan’s economy, but I don’t think there’s an intention to cut ties."

Yet this will be a serious test for Takaichi, and there could be painful economic repercussions for Japan just around the corner.

Already last week China urged its nationals not to travel to Japan, and summoned the Japanese ambassador to Beijing to condemn Takaichi's remarks.

State media ramping up the trolling and attacks...

"Learning from" mistakes of the past.#militarism #Japan #history #SanaeTakaichi pic.twitter.com/FMpuzU9yXh

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) November 17, 2025

The situation then turned into a tit-for-tat of outrage. Fox example Japan has been most angered at a social media post issued a week ago by China's consul general in the Japanese city of Osaka, Xue Jian. He had shared article about Takaichi's parliamentary remarks on X with his own words, "the dirty head that sticks itself in must be cut off." Tokyo quickly lodged its own diplomatic protest over the "high inappropriate" commentary.

But China has still maintained all of this ultimately stems from the "extremely wrong and dangerous" words of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi related to defending Taiwan.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/17/2025 - 18:50