Environmental Protection Not A Major Issue For Majority

In a survey of 38 countries carried out by Statista Consumer Insights, only between 21 and 44 percent of respondents said that they considered environmental protection a major issue for their country.

As Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, respondents in Brazil were the most concerned about the environment, with those in Mexico and Colombia also rating environmental protection as more important than most countries in the survey.

You will find more infographics at Statista

The picture was more mixed in Asia, with Indonesians seeing the issue as highly important, while respondents in Indian and China hit around the survey average and Pakistan ranked lower in the international comparison. However, the countries rating the environment as a major issue typically also rated many other issues as highly problematic. Despite fewer people seeing the problem in China and India, environmental protection was still rated as the second and fourth most important issue, respectively, by respondents in these countries behind the likes of health/social security or unemployment, education and poverty.

In developed countries, climate change was typically rated more important than environmental protection, while it was the other way round in developing countries. European ratings ranked from 40 percent in Italy deeming environmental protection a major issue to just 19 percent saying the same in Ireland. Among U.S. respondents, 27 percent thought the issue was major - rank 13 among 20 issues.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 23:20

A Nanny State Idiocracy: A Tale Of Too Many Laws And Too Little Freedom

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our great adversary remains the apparatus—the bureaucracy, the police, the military.”

- Simone Weil, French philosopher

We are caught in a vicious cycle of too many laws, too many cops, and too little freedom.

It’s hard to say whether we’re dealing with a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves), a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens), or a Nanny State Idiocracy. 

Whatever the label, this overbearing despotism is what happens when government representatives (those elected and appointed to work for us) adopt the authoritarian notion that the government knows best and therefore must control, regulate and dictate almost everything about the citizenry’s public, private and professional lives.

The government’s bureaucratic attempts at muscle-flexing by way of overregulation and overcriminalization have reached such outrageous limits that federal and state governments now require on penalty of a fine that individuals apply for permission before they can grow exotic orchids, host elaborate dinner parties, gather friends in one’s home for Bible studies, give coffee to the homeless, let their kids manage a lemonade stand, keep chickens as pets, or braid someone’s hair, as ludicrous as that may seem.

As the Regulatory Transparency Project explains, “There are over 70 federal regulatory agencies, employing hundreds of thousands of people to write and implement regulations. Every year, they issue about 3,500 new rules, and the regulatory code now is over 168,000 pages long.”

In his CrimeADay Twitter feed, Mike Chase highlights some of the more arcane and inane laws that render us all guilty of violating some law or other.

As Chase notes, it’s against the law to try to make an unreasonable noise while a horse is passing by in a national park; to leave Michigan with a turkey that was hunted with a drone; to refill a liquor bottle with different liquor than it had in it when it was originally filled; to offer to buy swan feathers so you can make a woman's hat with them; to enter a design in the Federal Duck Stamp contest if waterfowl are not the dominant feature of the design; to transport a cougar without a cougar license; to sell spray deodorant without telling people to avoid spraying it in their eyes; and to transport “meat loaf” unless it’s in loaf form.

In such a society, we are all petty criminals.

In fact, Boston lawyer Harvey Silvergate estimates that the average American now unknowingly commits three felonies a day, thanks to an overabundance of vague laws that render otherwise innocent activity illegal and an inclination on the part of prosecutors to reject the idea that there can’t be a crime without criminal intent. 

The bigger the government grows, the worse the red tape becomes.

Almost every aspect of American life today, including the job sector, is now subject to this kind of heightened scrutiny and ham-fisted control.

Whereas 70 years ago, one out of every 20 U.S. jobs required a state license, today, almost 1 in 4 American occupations requires a license.

According to business analyst Kaylyn McKenna, more than 41 states require that makeup artists be licensed. Twenty-eight states require a license before you can work as a residential painter. Funeral attendants, whose duties include placing caskets in visitation rooms, arranging flowers and directing mourners, have to be licensed to do so in Kansas, Maine and Massachusetts.

The problem of overregulation has become so bad that, as one analyst notes, “getting a license to style hair in Washington takes more instructional time than becoming an emergency medical technician or a firefighter.”

This is what happens when bureaucrats run the show, and the rule of law becomes little more than a cattle prod for forcing the citizenry to march in lockstep with the government.

Overregulation is just the other side of the coin to overcriminalization, that phenomenon in which everything is rendered illegal, and everyone becomes a lawbreaker.

As policy analyst Michael Van Beek warns, the problem with overcriminalization is that there are so many laws at the federal, state and local levels—that we can’t possibly know them all.

“It’s also impossible to enforce all these laws. Instead, law enforcement officials must choose which ones are important and which are not. The result is that they pick the laws Americans really must follow, because they’re the ones deciding which laws really matter,” concludes Van Beek. “Federal, state and local regulations — rules created by unelected government bureaucrats — carry the same force of law and can turn you into a criminal if you violate any one of them… if we violate these rules, we could be prosecuted as criminals. No matter how antiquated or ridiculous, they still carry the full force of the law. By letting so many of these sit around, just waiting to be used against us, we increase the power of law enforcement, which has lots of options to charge people with legal and regulatory violations.”

Case in point: in New Jersey, in what journalist Billy Binion describes as “yet another example of the effects of overcriminalization, which increases interactions between civilians and police with little benefit to actual public safety,” police went so far as to arrest a teenager and seize other teen’s bicycles for so-called traffic violations and a failure to register their bikes with the state.

This is the police state’s superpower: it has been vested with the authority to make our lives a bureaucratic hell.

That explains how a fisherman can be saddled with 20 years’ jail time for throwing fish that were too small back into the water. Or why police arrested a 90-year-old man for violating an ordinance that prohibits feeding the homeless in public unless portable toilets are also made available. Or how states across the country, in a misguided attempt to disperse homeless populations, have criminalized sitting, sleeping, or resting in public spaces; sharing food with people; and camping in public.

The laws can get downright silly.

For instance, in Florida, it’s against the law to eat a frog that was used in a frog-jumping contest. You could also find yourself passing time in a Florida slammer for such inane activities as singing in a public place while wearing a swimsuit, breaking more than three dishes per day, farting in a public place after 6 pm on a Thursday, and skateboarding without a license.

“Such laws,” notes journalist George Will, “which enable government zealots to accuse almost anyone of committing three felonies in a day, do not just enable government misconduct, they incite prosecutors to intimidate decent people who never had culpable intentions. And to inflict punishments without crimes.”

Unfortunately, the consequences are all too serious for those whose lives become grist for the police state’s mill.

In this way, America has gone from being a beacon of freedom to a locked down nation.

We labor today under the weight of countless tyrannies, large and small, carried out in the so-called name of the national good by an elite class of governmental and corporate officials who are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions.

We increasingly find ourselves badgered, bullied and browbeaten into bearing the brunt of their arrogance, paying the price for their greed, suffering the backlash for their militarism, agonizing as a result of their inaction, feigning ignorance about their backroom dealings, overlooking their incompetence, turning a blind eye to their misdeeds, cowering from their heavy-handed tactics, and blindly hoping for change that never comes. 

The overt signs of the despotism exercised by the increasingly authoritarian regime that passes itself off as the United States government (and its corporate partners in crime) are all around us: censorship, criminalizing, shadow banning and de-platforming of individuals who express ideas that are politically incorrect or unpopular; warrantless surveillance of Americans’ movements and communications; SWAT team raids of Americans’ homes; shootings of unarmed citizens by police; harsh punishments meted out to schoolchildren in the name of zero tolerance; community-wide lockdowns and health mandates that strip Americans of their freedom of movement and bodily integrity; armed drones taking to the skies domestically; endless wars; out-of-control spending; militarized police; roadside strip searches; privatized prisons with a profit incentive for jailing Americans; fusion centers that spy on, collect and disseminate data on Americans’ private transactions; and militarized agencies with stockpiles of ammunition, to name some of the most appalling.

Yet as egregious as these incursions on our rights may be, it’s the endless, petty tyrannies—the heavy-handed, punitive-laden dictates inflicted by a self-righteous, Big-Brother-Knows-Best bureaucracy on an overtaxed, overregulated, and underrepresented populace—that illustrate so clearly the degree to which “we the people” are viewed as incapable of common sense, moral judgment, fairness, and intelligence, not to mention lacking a basic understanding of how to stay alive, raise a family, or be part of a functioning community.

In exchange for the promise of an end to global pandemics, lower taxes, lower crime rates, safe streets, safe schools, blight-free neighborhoods, and readily accessible technology, health care, water, food and power, we’ve opened the door to lockdowns, militarized police, government surveillance, asset forfeiture, school zero tolerance policies, license plate readers, red light cameras, SWAT team raids, health care mandates, overcriminalization, overregulation and government corruption.

We relied on the government to help us safely navigate national emergencies (terrorism, natural disasters, global pandemics, etc.) only to find ourselves forced to relinquish our freedoms on the altar of national security, yet we’re no safer (or healthier) than before.

We asked our lawmakers to be tough on crime, and we’ve been saddled with an abundance of laws that criminalize almost every aspect of our lives.

We wanted criminals taken off the streets, and we didn’t want to have to pay for their incarceration. What we’ve gotten is a nation that boasts the highest incarceration rate in the world, with many doing time for relatively minor, nonviolent crimes, and a private prison industry fueling the drive for more inmates.

We wanted law enforcement agencies to have the necessary resources to fight the nation’s wars on terror, crime and drugs. What we got instead were militarized police decked out with M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, silencers, battle tanks and hollow point bullets—gear designed for the battlefield, more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year (many for routine police tasks, resulting in losses of life and property), and profit-driven schemes that add to the government’s largesse such as asset forfeiture, where police seize property from “suspected criminals.”

We fell for the government’s promise of safer roads, only to find ourselves caught in a tangle of profit-driven red light cameras, which ticket unsuspecting drivers in the so-called name of road safety while ostensibly fattening the coffers of local and state governments.

This is what happens when the American people get duped, deceived, double-crossed, cheated, lied to, swindled and conned into believing that the government and its army of bureaucrats—the people we appointed to safeguard our freedoms—actually have our best interests at heart.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the problem with these devil’s bargains is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions.

In the end, such bargains always turn sour.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 23:00

 – by New Deal democrat Tomorrow and Thursday a plethora of data will be released, on consumer inflation and spending, production, housing, and jobless claims. In the meantime today we got a chance to look at upstream pressures on inflation. And those upstream pressures do seem to be building slightly, reflecting a strong economy with […]

The post April producer prices reflect some building pressure from a strong economy with full employment appeared first on Angry Bear.

Convicted Non-Violent Felons Can Own Guns, Ninth Circuit Rules

In what must be the first time California's 9th circuit has ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment, non-violent convicted felons can now own guns.

The decision stems from a 2020 case, in which California resident Steven Duarte was arrested after tossing a handgun out of a moving car during a traffic stop. He was indicted by a federal grand jury for possessing said firearm while being previously convicted of "a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" in violation of the federal “felon-in-possession” law.

A customer shops for a pistol in Tinley Park, Ill., on Dec. 17, 2012. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Duarte had five prior non-violent criminal convictions in California; vandalism, felon in possession of a firearm, drug possession, and two convictions for fleeing a police officer - each of which is punishable by one year or more in prison. After pleading not guilty, Duarte's case proceeded to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 51 months in prison.

Not so fast!

As the Epoch Times notes further, in a 2-1 decision handed down on May 9, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Mr. Duarte’s conviction violated the Second Amendment as applied to him.

Specifically, the court’s majority found that the federal government failed to prove that its felon-in-possession law supports disarming convicted felons for life under a two-step framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2022 “New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen” case.

The two-step process, put forth by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, first requires the court to determine whether the Second Amendment’s “plain text” covers an individual’s conduct. If so, then that conduct is presumptively protected, and the government must prove that its law is “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

“Because Duarte is an American citizen, he is part of the people whom the Second Amendment protects,” Senior Circuit Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the majority.

“The Government argues only that ’the people‘ in the Second Amendment excludes felons like Duarte because they are not members of the ’virtuous’ citizenry,” he wrote. “We do not share that view.”

The burden then fell back to the federal government to show that its gun possession policy aligns with the “historical tradition” of the United States.

However, during the Early Republic era, Mr. Duarte’s past convictions either would have been considered misdemeanors, didn’t exist as a crime, or may have had predecessors for which the government failed to provide evidence of their existence, Judge Bea noted.

‘Historically Understood Meaning’

“Based on this record, we cannot say that Duarte’s predicate offenses were, by Founding-era standards, of a nature serious enough to justify permanently depriving him of his fundamental Second Amendment rights,” the majority opinion read.

“The Second Amendment’s plain text and historically understood meaning therefore presumptively graduate his individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense.”

Judge Bea, a George W. Bush appointee, was joined by Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, a Donald Trump appointee. The majority opinion overturned a 2010 Ninth Circuit precedent, “U.S. v. Vongxay”, which upheld the federal prohibition on possession of firearms by felons.

Circuit Judge Milan Smith, a George W. Bush appointee who penned the Vongxay opinion, dissented and urged the appeals court to order a new hearing of Mr. Duarte’s case before a full, 11-judge panel.

He argued that Buren does not override Vongxay, at least not before the U.S. Supreme Court further clarifies the constitutionality of the federal felon-in-possession law.

“One day—likely sooner, rather than later—the Supreme Court will address the constitutionality of [the federal felon firearm ban] or otherwise provide clearer guidance on whether felons are protected by the Second Amendment,” Judge Smith wrote in his dissenting opinion.

“But it is not our role as circuit judges to anticipate how the Supreme Court will decide future cases.”

The Ninth Circuit’s vacation of Mr. Duarte’s conviction added to the post-Bruen “Circuit Split” over the scope of the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit joins, at least for now, the Third Circuit to rule in favor of Americans permanently stripped of Second Amendment rights because of past non-violent offenses, while the Tenth Circuit has reaffirmed its precedent upholding the restriction on those individuals.

In a 2-1 ruling last October, the Tenth Circuit observed that the Bruen Court “didn’t appear to question the constitutionality of longstanding prohibitions on possession of firearms by convicted felons.”

Instead, it argued, “Bruen apparently approved the constitutionality of regulations requiring criminal background checks ... to ensure that the applicant is a ‘law-abiding, responsible citizen.’”

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 22:40

Toxic Atmosphere At FDIC Spurs Calls For Chair's Resignation

Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClearPolitics,

The White House did not offer their full faith and credit to the FDIC chairman when asked by RealClearPolitics about a bombshell 234-page investigation that detailed a toxic environment within the agency.

Other than noting that Martin Gruenberg, the official in question, had already “apologized and spoke[n] to” allegations that he presided over a culture of bullying, harassment, and mismanagement, Karine Jean-Pierre, the president’s spokeswoman, mostly demurred.

Gruenberg will not skate by so easily when he testifies before Congress this week. Republicans in both the House and Senate are hell-bent for leather. And his scalp.

The report was published by law firm Cleary Gottlieb last week and followed a Wall Street Journal investigation last November that documented a federal agency akin to “a good ol’ boys club” where female employees were subjected to stalking, unwelcome illicit messages, and sexual harassment.

The episode is an embarrassment to President Biden, who promised on the first day of his administration to fire “on the spot” anyone who engaged in such behavior.

It is also a political liability. If Gruenberg, a Biden nominee who served in both the Obama and Trump administrations and the Senate confirmed by voice vote, exits under pressure, it would leave the FDIC board deadlocked during an election year. “A 2-2 vote would stall and probably doom politically sensitive banking policy,” observed Renaissance Macro Research. The regulatory policy of the administration would then hang in limbo.

These realities are not lost on many in the FDIC workforce who want reform. In a statement obtained by RCP, current employees expressed their concern that “the egregious issues documented in the Cleary report by over 500 employees have become partisan.”

Working at an agency now under scrutiny for a history of reprisals against whistleblowers, the statement was left unsigned, though the drafters noted that they “have a wide range of political views, ranging from far left to far right.”

“The FDIC employees behind this statement do not have confidence that the chairman and executive management have the willingness to truly make the cultural and structural changes necessary to fully address the [matters] identified in the report,” they write.

For his part, Gruenberg has already offered an apology.

“I want to also thank everyone who shared their experiences throughout this process. I know that doing so was difficult. To anyone who experienced sexual harassment or other misconduct at the FDIC, I again want to express how very sorry I am. I also want to apologize for any shortcomings on my part,” he said in a statement when the Cleary Gottlieb report was published.

“As chairman, I am ultimately responsible for everything that happens at our agency, including our workplace culture,” Gruenberg added.

The chairman, whom the report found has a history of anger and belittling staff, plans to announce a new, independent office devoted to professional conduct at the agency, according to prepared testimony before the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday. But the head of that committee, Republican Chairman Patrick McHenry, has already called for his resignation. And some FDIC employees are already registering their dissatisfaction.

“The Chairman has communicated the action plan that he oversaw the creation of as proof of his commitment to improving conditions at the FDIC. We, however, do not have confidence that this action plan is meaningful,” they wrote.

More than a dozen Republicans now oppose Gruenberg. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, the ranking member on the Senate Banking Committee, has called for his resignation. Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst has called on the Department of Justice to open an investigation. Only one Democrat, however, Illinois Rep. Bill Foster, has followed suit, calling for the FDIC chairman to step down.

Rep. Maxine Waters, the top Democrat on Financial Services, blasted the report, not the FDIC chairman, for focusing too much on current leadership. Democrats are expected to circle the wagons to protect Gruenberg during his testimony – an irony given the propensity of Democrats, not Republicans, to rail against toxic workplace environments.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen signaled her displeasure, telling reporters Tuesday that “the kind of abuses that were documented in the report are a totally unacceptable way to treat employees at the FDIC and not in line with the core values of the Biden administration.” She stopped short, however, of joining Republican calls for his resignation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 22:20

"Make Innocence Great Again": Mothers Gear Up To Decide The 2024 Elections

Authored by Russ Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A voter casts her ballot with her child during the midterm primary election at a polling station at Rose Hill Elementary School in Alexandria, Va., on June 21, 2022. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“Make innocence great again.”

It’s a mantra that Juliana Ormond feels strongly about. The suburban mom of three children seeks to call attention to the importance of preserving the purity and innocence of childhood. She said she desires a return to a time when she contends innocence was valued and protected, which conflicts with the complexities and challenges of the current culture.

“The only way to bring back innocence is to keep our children away from those who want to make everything about sexual identity,” Ms. Ormond said. “I look for political candidates who support policies that align with the Bible.”

She said she has watched the culture become more progressive since she was young. From her home in suburban Orlando, Ms. Ormond told The Epoch Times that two of her children are 10 years apart. Her younger daughter had a radically different school experience from her older sister.

“One day, my younger daughter brought a girlfriend home after school,” she said. “The friend proudly proclaimed that she was nonbinary. I was shocked. That ideology wasn’t pushed when my older daughter went to school.”

Mothers such as Ms. Ormond represent a significant demographic segment of the population and make up a sizable portion of the electorate. Candidates recognize the importance of appealing to this demographic group to secure their votes. Their motivations are deeply personal, rooted in parenthood’s daily struggles and triumphs. From grassroots activism to high-profile political campaigns, mothers harness their perspectives and experiences to advocate for change on issues ranging from abortion, health care, and education to the environment and social justice.

“I believe both the Democrat and Republican parties have left the people,” Ms. Ormond said. “I am dissatisfied with our government and think they are all in cahoots with one another.”

Moms of various social and political stripes are welcomed in the corridors of strategic planning, and mothers are stepping out and striding onto the political stage with vigor and determination, reshaping the political landscape. These women assert their influence in the public arena, driven by a deep-seated desire to create a better world for their children.

Mama Bears Bite Back

With almost 89 million women eligible to vote, they represent the largest and possibly most persuasive voting bloc in the United States. Among this constituency are those who identify as “mama bears.”

The Mama Bear movement is growing and altering the nation’s political climate. These mothers represent a diverse group of everyday women who are driven to shield their children from the agendas of special interest groups who think they know what’s best for kids.

Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich talked with The Epoch Times about parents’ growing concern about public education and parental rights. In 2021, three mothers from Florida founded Moms for Liberty to combat COVID-19 restrictions.

“Moms are troubled about the country’s future and education crisis in America,” she said. “Schools have been infiltrated with woke ideologies, so moms are looking closely at private schools or homeschooling their children.”

Ms. Descovich, a former Brevard School Board member in Florida, said Moms for Liberty focuses on the 2024 state school board elections nationwide, where progressive agendas thrive.

In April, the Biden administration reversed changes made under President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos that updated Title IX regulations governing schools’ responses to sexual misconduct. The revised rules, which go into effect in August, reinterpret what constitutes harassment and sex discrimination to prohibit actions driven by sexual orientation, gender identity, sex stereotypes, and pregnancy.

To date, 15 states have sued the administration over the new policy. Moms for Liberty has elevated its effort to inform moms about the changes.

“Many moms are deeply troubled with the rewriting of Title IX,” Ms. Descovich said. “We must stand up for the parental right to raise our children and support them as they navigate significant life lessons.”

For these reasons, she said, many parents seek alternative education options such as homeschooling or private schools.

Moms for Liberty is represented in 48 states, with 300 chapters and 330,000 members. Ms. Descovich said the organization recently discovered that more than half of its members have not voted more than once in the past eight years in a primary.

“Most moms are not historically politically active,” she said. “We’re working on getting them registered to vote on our issues.”

Progressive Moms Embrace Social Diversity

Alexandria White founded Student Affairs Moms, the largest online community for mothers in the student affairs profession. She is the mother of one daughter and a seasoned diversity, leadership, and inclusive communities trainer. The resident of Oxford, Mississippi, said she understands the desire to maintain innocence with children but also said that complex social issues must be addressed.

“I believe in preparing my children for complex topics,” Ms. White said.

Such topics include, for instance, a classmate who has two moms.

“This kind of preparation reduces bullying,” she said. “Our children are more likely to be more empathetic.”

Ms. White told The Epoch Times that moms seek candidates who identify with their family needs and align with their community and family values.

“There is no perfect candidate,” she said. “We must, however, have passion in our hearts and reason in our minds. What can a particular candidate do that connects with my heart but also reasoned with my mind regarding policies?”

Ms. White consults clients who work hard to meet the financial needs of their families and women who seek “work-life harmony.” She engages moms, who evaluate these issues and demands as they vote.

“The pulse is on what candidate can make the average person’s dollar go the farthest,” Ms. White said. “Most moms are worried about their children’s overall mental, spiritual, or physical health.”

According to a survey conducted by The Current Project, nearly 70 percent of black single mothers with school-age children think the nation is headed in the wrong direction. About 90 percent of respondents said they believe that the current public school system does not adequately serve students’ needs, and 56 percent have considered transferring their children to different schools in the past year. The Current Project, a New York City-based advocacy group, surveyed 504 middle-to-low-income black mothers who are single.

Six out of 10 respondents strongly agreed they would be more inclined to support a candidate who advocated granting parents greater flexibility in selecting the school for their children. The respondents emphasized after-school child care, gifted and talented programs, respect for their child’s gender identity, and class sizes.

“I’m concerned that some of the social wedge issues are being used to defund public education,” Merisa Bowers, a mom of a 7-year-old son and City Council president of Gahanna, Ohio, told The Epoch Times. “We need vital public education systems for workforce development and a system that creates an educated population.”

She acknowledged that following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, Ohio voters last year overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that guarantees access to abortion and reproductive health care.

“All politics is local,” Ms. Bowers said. “While presidential cycles are important and do a lot of good, most politics at the state and local level affect individuals and families. It’s important that moms evaluate what’s happening politically in their local communities.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 22:00

Al Gore Said The Ice-Caps Would Be Gone By 2014... Yes 2014!

Authored by Martin Armstrong via ArmstrongEconomics.com,

The Press refuses to hold all of these failed Climate Change forecasts to task...

All they do is keep moving the date for our doom, all due to CO2.

In fact, the real crisis is the continued weakening of the magnetic field, which leads to pole shifts about every 43000 years – yes, that conforms to the ECM frequency.

The major shifts we discovered from the data scientists provided us came out to be 720,000 years.

Either way, they both seem to be lining up in our lifetime.

We are headed more into a pole shift than a climate change thanks to CO2.

The fact that they are targeting farmers when we should be stockpiling food now is either the most idiotic human decision in history or intentional with hopes of reducing the population.

If I keep forecasting every year that the stock market would crash by 90%, I think they would call me a nut-job and laugh after ten years of perpetual failed forecasts.

But with the climate, they just love to keep the fraud going.

After June 6th, they are whispering about restricting travel to reduce CO2 this summer.

They want to deprive you of your vacation this year as well.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 20:20

Mississippi Passes Law Banning Trans-Friendly Bathroom Policies In Public Schools

A lot of Americans are asking how we so quickly got to a point where a man could simply declare he is the opposite sex, throw on a wig and a leotard, and then walk into a women's restroom while being protected by government officials? 

In some Democrat controlled states if you try to stop these people from doing this you could even be arrested or sued.  Even worse, the gender ideology has now infiltrated public schools where young and vulnerable children are subject to trans exceptionalism.  

How did this happen?

Through a combination of political support, NGO influence, ESG money, corporate promotion, media propaganda and astroturf activism the trans movement gained momentum too swiftly to be countered in a practical way.  The gears of local and state government turn slowly and convincing public officials that the gender ideology problem was a reality took time.  That is how a movement representing only 1% of the population was suddenly in a position to dictate the speech and behavior of the other 99% - They had the backing of every major institutional power structure.

With Big Tech companies censoring or banning almost anyone questioning the gender cult and government officials vying to pass laws making criticism of trans people a hate crime, the effort was almost victorious.  A lot of people were afraid to speak up for fear of being "cancelled."  Then public schools, teacher's unions and other organizations started pushing gender theory onto kids and this is when things changed.  Mess with people's children and now you have a war on your hands.

The idea of biological males being allowed to enter girls bathrooms in a school setting was perhaps the straw that broke the camel's back.  This was a situation in which parent tax dollars were going towards the indoctrination of their own kids and putting those kids at risk from mentally unstable people.  This is why homeschooling in the US in 2023 remained 45% higher than it was in 2019, even after covid mandates had been lifted.  Public school enrollment has been falling nationwide. Americans don't want their kids exposed to activist controlled environments. 

Multiple red states are finally taking action to rectify the situation, much to the outrage of progressives.  In particular, Utah and Mississippi have recently passed laws requiring trans people to use the bathroom that corresponds to their biological sex in public education centers (including in dorms and locker rooms).  Mississippi State Governor Tate Reeves notes:

“It’s mind blowing that this is what Joe Biden’s America has come to...Having to pass common sense policies that protect women’s spaces was unimaginable just a few years ago. But here we are… we have to pass a law to protect women in bathrooms, sororities, locker rooms, dressing rooms, shower rooms, and more."

  

Rob Hill, the Mississippi state director for the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ advocacy group, called the new law an attempt to “strip basic rights from LGBTQ+ people in our state":

“This bill does nothing but attempt to push us further apart at the expense of LGBTQ+ people, who deserve the freedom to be and to use bathrooms and locker rooms without the prying eyes of politicians peering over the stall...Shame on the governor and the MAGA agenda of hate."

But it's the prying eyes of mentally deranged weirdos that these laws are specifically designed to address.  Why are leftists so insistent on trans-friendly bathroom laws?  It's not about bathroom convenience.  They know that it is a way to get their foot in the door in terms of special legal protections and government affirmation for the trans ideology.  In other words, if the government recognizes your delusion your delusion becomes real.  Trans friendly bathrooms in public schools are also a short skip away from trans privileged speech laws like those seen in Europe and Canada.

The political left relies on the conservative and moderate sense of compromise to gain advantage.  Give them and inch and they will always take a mile, until one day your kids wake up in a world where being "trans" is the only way to get the government to take your concerns seriously. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 20:00

Thousands Of Children Prescribed Ivermectin Or Hydroxychloroquine For COVID: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Doctors prescribed ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine more than 4,400 times to children with COVID-19 during periods of time when the drugs were not recommended against the illness by authorities, according to a new study.

Doctors issued 813 prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine to minors with COVID-19 after the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society on Sept. 12, 2020, advised against using hydroxychloroquine outside of a clinical trial, researchers found. The recommendation came after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19.

Another 3,602 prescriptions of ivermectin for children with COVID-19 were issued after Feb. 5, 2021, when the Infectious Diseases Society of America released guidelines advising not to use ivermectin outside of a trial. The FDA later in 2021 urged people not to take ivermectin against COVID-19, although it has since been forced to rescind those warnings.

Dr. Julianne Burns, a clinical assistant professor of pediatric infectious diseases at Stanford Medicine Children’s Health, and other researchers examined records from Komodo Healthcare Map, a health care claims database that Komodo Health says covers 330 million patients. They looked for children who had acute COVID-19 from March 7, 2020, to Dec. 31, 2022.

After excluding some children, including those who did not have continuous insurance coverage for at least one year prior to diagnosis, the researchers found approximately 4,480 prescriptions of “nonrecommended medications.”

All but a few dozen of the prescriptions were for ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine.

Both drugs are approved by the FDA, but not against COVID-19. Some agencies, groups, and doctors say the drugs should not be used against the illness, pointing in part to clinical trials that have found little or no evidence that they’re effective. Other organizations and doctors, though, say the drugs work against COVID-19, citing their own experience and other trials that found the drugs were beneficial. Off-label prescriptions are common in the United States.

Dr. Burns and the other researchers who conducted the new study, which was published by the American Academy of Pediatrics’ journal, said their findings showed “children were prescribed ineffective and potentially harmful medications for acute COVID-19 despite national clinical guidelines.”

The only data on effectiveness or lack thereof they cited was the FDA’s authorization revocation for hydroxychloroquine and the guidance from the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America. As for their safety description, they pointed to a federal advisory that found a 24-fold increase in ivermectin prescriptions and a five-fold increase during the same time of ivermectin-related calls to poison control centers.

Dr. Robert Apter, who was not involved in the study, highlighted how the study referred to potential issues but cited no evidence of actual issues from usage of the drugs against COVID-19.

“The fact that there was a report of increased calls to poison control centers about ivermectin doesn’t mean a thing. When something gets in the news and people are curious about it, they may call the poison control center,” Dr. Apter told The Epoch Times.

He said that the drugs “have a long history of safe use in children.”

Dr. Apter has prescribed treatments for thousands of COVID-19 patients and was one of the doctors who sued the FDA over its anti-ivermectin statements. He said he’s prescribed ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine for several teenagers who became so sick that their families became concerned. Those children improved quickly and there were no side effects, according to the doctor.

Dr. Burns did not respond to a request for comment.

The researchers said limitations to their study stemmed from their reliance on health care records, which can’t account for COVID-19 infections that were not reported to a health care provider and might contain mislabeled codes. Funding came from the Stanford Maternal and Child Health Research Institute. No conflicts of interest were listed.

A previous study, examining claims data from Dec. 1, 2020, through March 31, 2021, identified 128 prescriptions of ivermectin for children for non-parasitic infections, with researchers assuming the prescriptions were for COVID-19. That paper drew from IQVIA’s health claims database. The researchers also examined data from patients with Medicare Advantage insurance and found some ivermectin prescriptions, though none for children.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 19:40

These Are The Most Polluted Cities In The US

According to the World Health Organization, air pollution is responsible for 7 million deaths annually, and could cost the global economy between $18–25 trillion by 2060 in annual welfare costs, or roughly 4–6% of world GDP.

And with predictions that 7 in 10 people will make their homes in urban centers by mid-century, cities are fast becoming one of the frontlines in the global effort to clear the air.

In this visualization, Visual Capitalist's Chris Dickert uses 2024 data from the State of the Air report from the American Lung Association to show the most polluted cities in the United States.

What is Air Pollution?

Air pollution is a complex mixture of gases, particles, and liquid droplets and can have a variety of sources, including wildfires and cookstoves in rural areas, and road dust and diesel exhaust in cities. 

There are a few kinds of air pollution that are especially bad for human health, including ozone and carbon monoxide, but here we’re concerned with fine particulate matter that is smaller than 2.5 microns, or PM2.5 for short. 

The reason for the focus is because at that small size, particulate matter can penetrate the bloodstream and cause all manner of havoc, including cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and chronic pulmonary disease. 

The American Lung Association has set an annual average guideline of 9 µg/m³ for PM2.5, however, the World Health Organization has set a much more stringent limit of 5 µg/m³.

The 21 Worst Polluted Cities in the U.S.

Here are the top 21 most polluted cities in the U.S., according to their annual average PM2.5 concentrations:

Rank City, State Annual average concentration, 2020-2022 (µg/m3) 1 Bakersfield, CA 18.8 2 Visalia, CA 18.4 3 Fresno, CA 17.5 4 Eugene, OR 14.7 5 Bay Area, CA 14.3 6 Los Angeles, CA 14.0 7 Sacramento, CA 13.8 8 Medford, OR 13.5 9 Pheonix, AZ 12.4 10 Fairbanks, AK 12.2 11 Indianapolis, IN 11.9 12 Yakima, WA 11.8 13 Detroit, MI 11.7 T14 Chico, CA 11.6 T14 Spokane, WA 11.6 15 Houston, TX 11.4 16 El Centro, CA 11.1 17 Reno, NV 11.0 18 Pittsburgh, PA 10.9 T19 Kansas City, KS 10.8 T19 Las Vegas, NV 10.8

Note: The American Lung Association uses Core Based Statistical Areas in its city and county rankings, which have been shortened here to the area’s principal city, or metro area in the case of the Bay Area, CA.

Six of the top seven cities are in California, and four in the state’s Central Valley, a 450-mile flat valley that runs parallel to the Pacific coast, and bordered by the Coast and Sierra Nevada mountain ranges. As a result, when pollution from the big population centers on the coast is carried inland by the wind—cities #5 and #6 on the list—it tends to get trapped in the valley. 

Bakersfield (#1), Visalia (#2), and Fresno (#3) are located at the drier and hotter southern end of the valley, which is worse for air quality. The top three local sources of PM2.5 emissions in 2023 were farms (20%), forest management / agricultural waste burning (20%), and road dust (14%). 

Benefit to Economy

While the health impacts are generally well understood, less well known are the economic impacts.

Low air quality negatively affects worker productivity, increases absenteeism, and adds both direct and indirect health care costs. But the flip side of that equation is that improving air quality has measurable impacts to the wider economy. The EPA published a study that calculated the economic benefits of each metric ton of particulate matter that didn’t end up in the atmosphere, broken down by sector.

Sector Benefits per metric ton Residential Woodstoves $429,220 Refineries $333,938 Industrial Boilers $174,229 Oil and Natural Gas Transmission $125,227 Electricity Generating Units $124,319 Oil and Natural Gas $88,838

At the same time, the EPA recently updated a cost-benefit analysis of the Clean Air Act, the main piece of federal legislation governing air quality, and found that between 1990 and 2020 it cost the economy roughly $65 billion, but also provided $2 trillion in benefits. 

Benefit to Business

But that’s at the macroeconomic level, so what about for individual businesses?

For one, employees like to breathe clean air and will choose to work somewhere else, given a choice. A 2022 Deloitte case study revealed that nearly 70% of highly-skilled workers said air quality was a significant factor in choosing which city to live and work in.

At the same time, air quality can impact employer-sponsored health care premiums, by reducing the overall health of the risk pool. And since insurance premiums averaged $7,590 per year in 2022 for a single employee, and rose to $21,931 for a family, that can add up fast. 

Consumers are also putting their purchase decisions through a green lens, while ESG, triple-bottom-line, and impact investing are putting the environment front and center for many investors.

And if the carrot isn’t enough for some businesses, there is the stick. The EPA recently gave vehicle engine manufacturer Cummins nearly two billion reasons to help improve air quality, in a settlement the agency is calling “the largest civil penalty in the history of the Clean Air Act and the second largest environmental penalty ever.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 19:20

Note: Mortgage rates are from MortgageNewsDaily.com and are for top tier scenarios.

Thursday:
• At 8:30 AM ET, Housing Starts for April. The consensus is for 1.410 million SAAR, up from 1.321 million SAAR in March.

• Also at 8:30 AM, The initial weekly unemployment claims report will be released.  The consensus is for 222 thousand initial claims, down from 231 thousand last week.

• Also at 8:30 AM, the Philly Fed manufacturing survey for May. The consensus is for a reading of 8.0, down from 15.5.

• At 9:15 AM, The Fed will release Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization for April. The consensus is for a 0.2% increase in Industrial Production, and for Capacity Utilization to be unchanged at 78.4%.

Tyson Foods CEO Unsure When Nation's Collapsing Beef Herd Will Reverse

Tyson Foods CEO Donnie King spoke at the BMO Global Farm to Market Conference in Toronto on Wednesday, expressing much uncertainty about when US ranchers will rebuild tight cattle herds meaningfully. 

Reuters was the first to report King's comments at BMO's farm conference. He stated ranchers had been pressured in recent years to offload cattle due to high grain costs and drought, which, in return, sent the nation's beef cattle herd plunging to the lowest in more than half a century. 

King provided some encouraging news, citing slightly lower grain costs and improved grazing conditions in the Midwest as factors in increasing the US herd. However, he noted that a high-interest rate environment is a significant headwind. 

All in all, King's comments did not provide confidence that the nation's beef cattle herd would reverse from seven-decade lows as ranches continue offloading cows to slaughterhouses. The latest figures from the US Department of Agriculture show that the nation's cattle herd is 87.2 million head (as of Jan. 1), the lowest level since 1951. Data from USDA in the chart below only goes back to 1974. 

Shrinking herds means fewer cows, as the latest slaughter price per 100 pounds is around $186, the highest ever and in breakout territory. 

We have explained that ranches have been culling more cows for several years because of droughts, surging feed costs, and high interest rates. 

• Dwindling US Cattle Herd Implies Supermarket Beef Prices May Rise Even More
• Hamburger Prices Might Continue To Rise As US Cattle Herd Shrinks
• US Cattle Prices Hit Nine-Year High As National Herd Drops To Half-Century Low
• US Beef Prices Hit Record High As Nation's Cattle Herd Expected To Shrink Through 2025

This perfect storm has sent beef prices at the supermarket to record highs. 

Lane Broadbent, president of KIS Futures Inc. in Oklahoma City, told Bloomberg earlier this year that herds aren't expected to rebound before at least 2026. 

We suspect retail prices will go higher until demand destruction is achieved. Seasonally, outdoor cookouts ignite an upswing in beef demand in the coming weeks. 

Can the Fed just print more beef? Oh wait, no, but you know who can: Bill Gates.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 18:40

Diesel Takes Another Hit And May Be Driving Down Broader Oil Market

By John Kingston of FreightWaves

With the benchmark diesel price used for most fuel surcharges down for the fifth week in a row, diesel consumers should be reveling in the fact that market trends appear to have completely thrown out concerns about the Middle East conflict and are focused on the markets for both diesel and gasoline as primary drivers.

The Department of Energy/Energy Information Administration average weekly retail diesel price fell 4.6 cents Monday to $3.848 a gallon. The five consecutive declines have taken that price down 21.3 cents a gallon during, and the price is now at a level not seen since the end of January.

Whatever impact that oil markets may have felt from the conflict in Gaza, the Iran-Israel back-and-forth and the diversions of shipping away from the Red Sea (which may have faded from the news but continue) are apparently having no impact on oil prices. A reaction to those developments would tend to be macro in nature and would generally impact crude more than products.

But market weakness continues to show up in products markets, including diesel. And diesel in particular is getting a great deal of focus of late. 

Diesel is increasingly being viewed as one of the primary reasons for the gradual fall in oil markets that has been occurring since early to mid-April. Whereas a few months ago, the rising price of oil was primarily attributed to a tight market for gasoline, the more recent weakness in oil overall is being laid firmly at the feet of the diesel market.

In his weekly report released Sunday, energy economist Philip Verleger noted that diesel weakness is becoming more structural because of the growing role of renewable diesel, which is made not from petroleum but from feedstocks such as plant oils and animal fats, including those captured in grease traps at restaurants.

In the report, Verleger noted that weekly EIA data on distillate consumption in the U.S., which is about 90% diesel, has been running anywhere from 400,000 to 600,000 barrels per day less than pre-pandemic levels. While some analysts are looking at that and concluding it is the function of a slow trucking market, Verleger’s report cited the fact that the data isn’t capturing the consumption of renewable diesel. 

“Taxes and regulations promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency have prompted refiners to convert crude oil processing facilities to produce renewable diesel, making more renewable fuel available,” Verleger wrote. “The higher renewable diesel use will cut US petroleum consumption. At this juncture, it seems that none of the … most-quoted forecasts of global oil demand have been adjusted to account for this replacement.”

Refining company earnings calls with analysts often feature management discussion of renewable diesel and its impact on the refiners’ bottom line. For example, on the latest Phillips 66 call, CEO Mark Lashier reviewed the company’s expanding renewable diesel operations and said that as a result of them, “we have gained valuable operational experience and market knowledge that positions us for success in our expanding renewable fuels business.”

But on the latest round of calls, talk about the weak diesel market — its crack spread against Brent crude is down about 20 cents a gallon in two months — did arise. 

The view that diesel demand is weak was rejected by Gary Simmons, the executive vice president and chief operating officer at Valero. He said on the company’s first-quarter earnings calls that diesel sales at Valero are about 2% higher than those of a year ago. 

But he added that he expects diesel demand will be “flat to slightly down compared to last year.” “However, some of the freight indices appear to be turning, and indicate we could start seeing better demand,” Simmons said. 

Brian Mandell, executive vice president of marketing and commercial for Phillips 66 (NYSE: PSX) said on the company’s call that even though Ukraine’s attacks on Russian refining capacity have probably taken about 200,000 barrels per day of Russian diesel supplies off the market, diesel prices have been suppressed by the warm winter in the northeastern U.S. — where heating oil, a distillate, is heavily used for home warmth — and by refiners coming out of maintenance season strong.

But the result has been reduction in refinery operating rates in Europe and Asia because of refining margins for distillates, which he said are around breakeven.

The weak market for products relative to crude is most visible in the 3-2-1 crack spread, a basic indicator of refinery probability. It is calculated by taking the price of two barrels of gasoline plus one barrel of diesel, converting it to a price per barrel and subtracting the price of crude, either Brent or West Texas Intermediate.

The Brent 3-2-1 on Monday, based on CME prices, fell to close to $21 a barrel. Two months ago, in mid-March, it was approximately $29.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 18:20

'Guns & Butter': Putin Explains Reason Behind Major Cabinet Shake-Up

Russian President Vladimir Putin has for the first time explained the rationale behind this week's major cabinet reshuffling, which for the first time of the Ukraine operation saw Sergey Shoigu removed as defense minister (and 'promoted' to head of the national security council), and former minister for economic development Andrey Belousov moved into the defense chief spot. He described the decision as due to the dramatic rise in the defense budget and military spending.

Putin said of Belousov: "He understands perfectly well what needs to be done in order for the economy of the entire security complex – and the Ministry of Defense as its key component – to fit into the overall economy of the country," according to state media translation.

Getty Images

The Russian president was addressing a gathering of top military officers. "This is extremely important and relates to the innovative development of industry and taking into account the capabilities of the economy and the budget," he said, explaining further: 

"This relationship between ‘guns’ and ‘butter’, so to speak, must be organically integrated into the overall development strategy of the Russian state," Putin said. "I hope that Andrey Removich [Belousov] will handle this task in the best possible way."

Putin noted that Russia’s military spending has grown to approximately 8.7% of GDP in 2024. While not quite the 13% that the Soviet Union was spending in the 1980s at the height of the Cold War, “these are significant resources, and we have to use them very efficiently and effectively,” the president explained. 

The appointment had raised eyebrows inside and outside Russia given Belousov has no military experience, nor has he been involved in strategic decision-making regarding the war in Ukraine. Instead, Belousov has always been a 'numbers guy' and Russian central bank planner.

The United States was among those countries claiming that the big shake-up points to a destabilizing trend in the Kremlin due to significant losses suffered by Russia in the context of Ukraine, as well as the sometimes devastating cross-border attacks on Russian soil.

The Biden administration on Monday said it shows signs of "desperation" for Moscow sustaining the high costs of the Ukraine invasion, also amid unprecedented Washington sanctions aimed at Moscow (but which have by and large backfired).

Putin has just spelled out clearly what many observers had already posited - Andrei Belousov’s appointment as defence minister is "linked not least to the fact that spending on the military is growing" pic.twitter.com/j3IsKQbg7o

— Francis Scarr (@francis_scarr) May 15, 2024

"Our point of view is that this is further indication of Putin’s desperation to sustain his war of aggression against Ukraine, despite it being a major drain on the Russian economy and the heavy losses of Russian troops, with some estimates as high as 315,000 casualties," State Department spokesman Vedant Patel said to a press briefing.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 18:00

Money's Grim Future

Authored by Alan Lash via The Brownstone Institute,

Prepare for total control of your economic life. That is the message from Brownstone Fellow Aaron Day at his 4-hour workshop in San Jose, California last Saturday, May 11th.

Day has written the excellent book The Final Countdown, which carefully describes the increasingly aggressive assaults on our freedoms by our government and by the global elites. He has just begun a series of workshops around the country to deliver that message and to show us a way to resist. The book was published just last year, but Day acknowledges during the presentation that he had to make alarming updates to his slides from current news, not even weeks old – more government intrusion, more legislation, and more spurious arrests, all attacking our ability to interact freely and transact our business.

As in the book, the presentation begins with a fictional account of a family set in the near future in a Western democracy, but perhaps all too familiar to current denizens of China, with their controlled currency and social credit scores. The image is easy to dismiss; it could never happen here. And yet, Day goes on to show how it actually is happening here. With a litany of article after article, official statement after statement, and video after video he makes his case. It is happening – he leaves no doubt.

Day gives ample historical reference points as well. How did we get here? It has been a long time coming. The constant push of globalist powers to remove our freedoms and control all resources has been in the works for a century. Perhaps it has never been different; the powerful seek more power, and the levers of technocracy make that easier than ever. The difference now is that the reach is truly global. There has been ever-increasing control over food, water, energy, and even the space we occupy and the air we breathe. 

The particular focus of the workshop is on CDBCs in America and throughout the West. Our central bank has been developing digital currency for some time, hoping to eliminate our ability to keep our business to ourselves. In this new world, all our actions can be easily monitored, tracked, and nudged into whatever direction the elites deem right or beneficial to their wealth and status. 

Within the two hours of historical facts, somber reflections, and sometimes horrifying news, the audience did not sit quietly and take the emotional beating. On the contrary, there was already much knowledge of these events, grunts of awareness, gasps of disbelief – we all knew it, but perhaps didn’t know it was this bad, with all the detail that Day presented. 

Digital currency is in the works, folks, and it is undoubtedly coming, sooner than we all think. One more emergency is all it could take for the government to say we are all doing this now. 

The audience was generally older, probably retired, or with a nest egg they were hoping to protect from debasement. A lively bunch, clearly committed to freedom, voiced their questions often in the quickly paced session. Each query exhibited a tacit but palpable urgency from the attentive crowd, who are all fully aware that what Day exposits is not some futuristic dystopian fantasy, but soon to be the new reality as he predicts.

The age of the audience is to be expected, perhaps: with time and money on their hands, they are probably more aware of the unfolding events with a perspective of history and have more wealth to lose. Indeed, many of the questions the audience asked centered around their ability to maintain their legacy when a CDBC replaces the dollar – how do I protect my assets when the currency falls and centralized control follows? 

But that is not the point, says Day. The point is not that our money is a store of value; the point is that it is a medium of exchange. It is not the inherent value of gold or crypto that is important, whether it goes up or goes down; its importance is its utility and its freedom from tracking by the State.  

Viewing the importance of money through this lens of freedom and impact on the future, we could easily see that those with truly the most to lose were largely not present at the workshop. The young adults – whose lives will be impacted the most gravely should the economic stranglehold ensue – will not make their financial decisions freely according to their own obligations, their own goals, and their own dreams. 

Every purchase will ultimately have to pass the test of the State’s agenda: did they use too much gas or too much water? Did they say something against the State? Will it be possible for them to attain the kind of comfort that their parents attained, out of the State’s watchful eye? If Day’s CDBC roadmap to economic tyranny is deployed, he clearly demonstrates what follows, and he proves it by citing recent events. 

The second part of the workshop focuses on what can possibly be done to counter this insidious march into economic slavery. Unfortunately, as Day describes, it is not possible to simply pack up and move out. Even with ample wealth and mobility, escape is not possible. Day recounts the stories of several colleagues who tried a different way – many of them arrested for saying too much and being too influential. Live in a different country? Doesn’t matter. We’ll call our people there and have you picked up. 

No, the only true way to beat this movement into CDBC tyranny is to stand in the light and refuse to participate. Use other methods to transact your business wherever you can and get others to do likewise. See which businesses will accept payment in crypto, and get yourself a wallet. Giving the waiter a tip? Give her a Goldback. 

As Day also makes clear, no one such solution will work; we have to use them all, as the effort to undermine the options is well underway. You may have heard that the largest threat to the dollar, Bitcoin, has been subverted into a system to be controlled by insiders, who are ultimately influenced by the State. Roger Ver’s recent book, Hijacking Bitcoin, tells this story. Tellingly, Ver, a citizen of St. Kitts since 2014, was arrested in Spain at the behest of the US just weeks ago.

Day explains that this is the point of using every way possible to sidestep the use of the dollar. If one method gets too big it becomes compromised by attacks of the State. 

The other important takeaway from the workshop is the idea of self-custody. Any crypto account you keep, or any asset anywhere, should be kept under your own custody, where only you have the keys. This is not possible with many cryptocurrencies by their construction, and not possible if you leave custody with a bank. It’s a lot harder for the State to go after millions of anonymous accounts than to go after one central repository that has the keys. Day notes which cryptos do and don’t allow self-custody. If you trade crypto through a large exchange, they too will most likely keep the keys.

I have only touched on the depth and breadth of Aaron Day’s workshop. It is well worth the time to understand the evil before us and practical ways to combat it. We will all need to work together to keep our financial freedom. Get in touch with Aaron via email and ask him to visit your city and present his workshop, or sign up to receive information through his website. Share those valuable lessons with your family and friends, and pay particular attention to the youth. It is their world being taken from them before they even get the chance to call it their own.   

Every attendee walked out of the workshop empowered with practical tools for resisting the move to CBDC. We each had a crypto wallet set up on our phone, to which one of Aaron’s sponsors donated $5 in self-custody crypto. We also left with a New Hampshire Goldback, currently worth $5, and a Citizens for Sound Money 1/5 oz round of silver worth about $5. As Aaron explained, there is growing acceptance of these forms of payment everywhere. Goldbacks can be used in Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, New Hampshire, and South Dakota. The workshop also included a signed copy of Aaron’s book.

On my drive back home after the workshop I met some friends at a local pub. I tried out my newfound power as I attempted to buy a beer with the Goldback, going through all the waiters all the way up to the owner. He looked the gold foil leaf up and down examining the obvious care and purpose in its making. He scowled. “I don’t think so,” he said. 

We have a ways to go in California. I for one will keep trying, and encourage all to join me in the pursuit of economic freedom.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 17:40

Bill Hwang Wanted To Become A "Wall Street Legend", Prosecutors Allege In Opening Statements

As the Bill Hwang trial began making its way through its first week, prosecutors described the family office manager as someone attempting to "become a legend on Wall Street" to jurors, according to the Financial Times. 

The trial of Hwang in Manhattan began this with hopes of uncovering motives behind his historic collapse that caused $100 billion in collateral damage.

Prosecutor Alexandra Rothman told the court in her opening statement: “From the inside these two men turned an investment business into a crime business, all because the defendant Bill Hwang wanted to become a legend on Wall Street..."

Hwang’s defense argued, meanwhile, that he was merely a committed investor who backed companies like ViacomCBS and Discovery.

One of his lawyers, Barry Berke, told the court Monday: “Mr. Hwang . . . most certainly put his money where his mouth is.” 

On Tuesday, testimony was heard from UBS risk manager Bryan Fairbanks, who revealed that UBS was startled to discover Archegos' main investments were in less liquid firms like Viacom, Discovery, and Tencent Holdings, contrary to earlier assurances of stable tech holdings like Apple and Google, according to Bloomberg.

This revelation made UBS anticipate significant losses, he said. Concerns grew as UBS felt Archegos prioritized other banks during portfolio liquidation to meet margin calls.

On a crucial call on March 25, Hwang unsuccessfully tried to reassure his major prime brokers by claiming he could stabilize Archegos' positions quickly, despite alarming loss figures.

“They weren’t trying to do anything to meet the margin call,” Fairbanks wrote in an email on March 25.

Meanwhile, Hwang's defense highlighted UBS's financial motives and attempted to expose potential biases in testimony, suggesting that UBS overlooked risks due to lucrative fees from Archegos.

The charges in Hwang's trial come from the 2021 collapse of the $36 billion dollar Archegos and Reuters has said that testimony could last up to 8 weeks. Prosecutors have said that Archegos' collapse led to $100 billion in shareholder losses at companies he held.

The trial is set to shed a light on how major Wall Street players accommodated, and potentially turned a blind eye, to risky tactics from a wealthy client. Hwang is being accused of using total return swaps to take massive positions in companies without holding their underlying stock. 

As Reuters notes, the company faced crippling margin calls in March 2021 due to falling stock prices. This, in turn, led to significant losses for Archegos and its lenders, including Credit Suisse and Nomura Holdings.

Archegos founder Bill Hwang and CFO Patrick Halligan, charged with racketeering conspiracy and multiple counts of fraud and market manipulation, have pleaded not guilty.

They contest the prosecutors' claims of market manipulation, which some legal experts view as a challenging case for the government. The trial is expected to feature testimony from Archegos’s guilty-pleading head trader and Chief Risk Officer, alongside potential appearances from bank executives.

Hwang was arrested in April 2022 and charged with racketeering conspiracy, securities fraud and wire fraud in connection with a scheme to manipulate the share prices of public companies in order to boost profits. He was then released on $100 million bail. 

According to the 40-page indictment, Hwang engaged in a "fraudulent scheme" that included "interlocking deceptive acts and misconduct, through false and misleading statements to security-based swap ("SBS") counterparties and prime brokers and manipulative trading designed to artificially move the market, which, in tandem, increased Archegos’s assets under management from around $4 billion to over $36 billion in just under six months."

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 17:20

Precarious: One Misfortune Away From Insolvency

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

As a result, a significant percentage of households that are considered middle-class are one misfortune away from insolvency.

We can summarize the changes in our economy over the past two generations with one word: precarity, as life for the bottom 90% of American households has become far more precarious over the past 40 years, despite the rising GDP and "wealth" as measured in phantom capital.

This reality is expressed in the portmanteau word precariat, combining proletariat (someone whose livelihood comes from their labor) and precarious: outside of government employment, work has become far more precarious. Where it was still common 40 years ago to work for a company for much or most of one's career and have a private-sector pension, now private-sector pensions have vanished, replaced by self-managed 401K funds, and private-sector work is characterized by a series of not just job changes but career changes.

The source of one's livelihood can dry up and blow away almost overnight, and to fill the hole many turn to gig-work with zero benefits that saddles the worker with self-employment taxes (15.3% of all earnings, as the "self-employed" gig worker must pay both the employee and the employer shares of Social Security-Medicare payroll taxes).

This isn't true self-employment, of course, as true self-employment means the owner-worker can hope to extract the full value of their labor; in contrast, much of the value of the gig work is skimmed off by corporate platforms (Uber et al.). The gig worker is a precariat wage-slave, not a self-employed owner of their own labor and enterprise.

Forty years ago, households with healthcare insurance being driven into bankruptcy by medical bills was unknown. Now this is commonplace. We're forced to ask, what exactly does "insurance" even mean if our share of the medical bills is so burdensome that we're forced into insolvency?

This is just one of many examples of the increasing precarity of life in America. Need dental work? "Insurance" covers only the basics; the rest requires savings, an inheritance, a line of credit or a top 10% income.

Speaking of income, even a substantial earned income doesn't go that far nowadays. Consider what a typical family spends on what we consider middle class birthrights: eating out, going to a movie, etc.



This budget of a household earning a top 1% income (top 2% in high-income states) of $500,000 is interesting on several fronts. Those living in lower-cost states may view it as bloated beyond belief, while those living in NYC, Los Angeles, San Francisco et al. will view it as entirely realistic: yes, property taxes are $20,000, "enrichment" childcare costs $42,000, and so on.

What's not realistic is $5,000 for home maintenance and $18,000 for three vacations a year. Given the age of American houses (40 years being average), the poor quality of a significant portion of recent construction and the soaring cost of labor, $5,000 doesn't buy much in the way of maintenance. A more realistic estimate for pretty much anything serious is $20,000, and $50,000 is remarkably commonplace for even modest kitchen makeovers. The $18,000 in charitable donations may be sucked up by a new roof.

As for vacations, unless it's a very short trip, a camping trip or travel to a low-cost destination, $6,000 per vacation may not be realistic.



The point of this exercise is to examine the buffers needed to survive a serious misfortune, such as losing one's job or a medical crisis. Two generations ago, costs were lower and households generally had enough savings or credit to cover the emergency expense or survive a bout of unemployment. With costs now prohibitive, modest savings are no longer enough.

As a result, a significant percentage of households that are considered middle-class are one misfortune away from insolvency. The concentration of income and wealth into the top 10% isn't just a statistical abstraction; in the real world, it means the buffers of the bottom 90% have thinned while the buffers of the top 10% have increased: for the family holding hundreds of thousands of dollars in 401K accounts and sitting on $1 million in home equity, a $25,000 medical or home repair bill is an inconvenience, not a push off the cliff into insolvency.



This precariousness extends into small business as well. Costs have soared and buffers have thinned. A great many small enterprises are one misfortune away from closing / insolvency.

As the tide of precarity rises, the apologists and cheerleaders of the status quo are cheerily predicting a "Roaring 20s" of widespread prosperity ahead. Correspondent David E. forwarded this cartoon which captures the current zeitgeist perfectly:

*   *   *

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 17:00

Crypto-Libertarian Erik Voorhees Warns Your Chatbot Queries Are Not Safe 

Crypto-libertarian Erik Voorhees, fresh off his passionate defense of crypto in the 'Gold vs. Bitcoin' debate recently hosted by ZeroHedge, spoke with crypto news site Unchained's Laura Shin and Venice's COO Teana Baker-Taylor about the alarming honeypots of user search history data on AI chatbot platforms that could potentially be harvested. 

Venice is one of Voorhees' latest crypto ventures. It is a private, uncensorable, open-source competitor to OpenAI's ChatGPT, powered by a decentralized crypto network.

Around the 25-minute mark, Shin asked Voorhees about the risks that OpenAI, Anthropic, and or other big AI companies could be doing with user search data. 

Voorhees responded: 

"Great question that's really like the most important question. So status quo today is you're using anthropic or OpenAI chat - you send in your question and it goes to that company and they store it forever and it's attached to your identity - right so they know that Lura Shin asked this question - um and they know that the AI responded back to you and they know what that is - and not only do they know that that question that conversation but they know your entire history of all conversations that you asked yesterday last year tomorrow and 10 years from now. All of it is associated with your identity. 

"In the best case that's not that big of a deal, but in reality, what it means is - all your information - and essentially like parts of your mind like think your intellectual inquiries that you pursue - the things you think - the things you want to debate - the questions you have about life - and like big topics um can be known by Third parties." 

"Advertisers for example, like that's not a huge deal if an advertiser knows something about you. But what if like uh a government knows something about you. What if um what if the Biden Administration learns that you are like uh you know orchestrating uh Trump's re-election campaign. What is what is the pressure on uh Biden Administration and OpenAI to use that information for something that people would consider corrupt and dangerous."

"These are very slippery slope arguments, um and it does not really matter what, like you know Anthropic's privacy policy says. If they have your information it will be shared with other parties today or tomorrow and probably both. And you can never get it back. So um that's the status quo - uh for people that are comfortable with that like keep using those services. that's okay."

Voorhees then explained how Venice AI prides itself in user sovereignty: "But like Venice was like well, um let's make a service that's just as easy" OpenAI and others, "but instead of like spying on you and recording all your information and attaching it to your identity forever let's just not do that." 

*   *   * 

Here's the full interview:

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 16:40

As reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on December 20, 2023

Soft CPI & Sloppy Sales Spark Run To Record Highs For Stocks; Bonds, Bullion, & Bitcoin All Bid

Nothing good - all bad... and new record highs for stocks.

SuperCore CPI hotter than expected (but headline and core CPI in-line/small miss), Retail sales way uglier than expected (but gas station spending surged), homebuilder sentiment slumped, and Empire Fed Manufacturing ugly...

Source: Bloomberg

Both 'soft' and 'hard' data is now falling...

Source: Bloomberg

...and the stagflationary threat continues to grow...

Source: Bloomberg

...but the market doesn't care about growth - it spiked rate-cut expectations on the 'cool' CPI (two cuts fully priced in for 2024 and three more cuts - at least - in 2025)...

Source: Bloomberg

And that lifted stonks across the board with Nasdaq leading the way to new record highs (Dow & S&P first new record close since March)

Market volumes were dramatically elevated today, according to Goldman's trading desk (+45% vs the trailing 20 days), as hedge funds (on an illustrative basis) recovered half the losses from the last two nasty days...

Source: Bloomberg

Goldman trader John Flood highlighted the fact that it feels like sentiment during the last  “meme” craze was one of confusion and bewilderment where some funds were willing to hold on and trying to wait out the retail crowd. This time around, HFs collectively are just not nearly as exposed to high SI/float stocks as they used to be, so the risk is a lot more manageable, and funds tend to react much more quickly given past lessons.

Source: Goldman Sachs

'Most Shorted' stocks dumped back yesterday's gains today as the meme-stock mania stalled...

Source: Bloomberg

VIX plunged back to a 12 handle today...

Source: Bloomberg

Treasuries were bid today with yields down 8-10bps across the curve (with the belly slightly outperforming the wings)...

Source: Bloomberg

With the swing lower in 10Y yields erasing all the increase in yields since April's CPI print...

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar followed a similar pattern to yields, erasing all of the post-April CPI gains...

Source: Bloomberg

Gold surged back near record closing highs ($2392).  Interestingly, gold was trading at exactly the same level it was before April's CPI ahead of today's CPI...

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin soared back above $66,000 - this was Bitcoin's best day since March 2023!...

Source: Bloomberg

Crude prices rebounded strongly today after early weakness (following inventory draws). The 100DMA once again acted as support with WTI closing back above it...

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, we noted at the start how ugly the US Macro data was, but there is a potential silver lining...

Source: Bloomberg

The Citi US Macro Surprise Index has a very regular seasonal pattern and 2024 is following it closely... with the positive surprises set to come from here as fiscal year-end looms. Is the 'no landing' narrative about to be realized?

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/15/2024 - 16:00