Which States Have The Highest Minimum Wage In America?

This year, 22 states are raising their minimum wage, impacting almost 10 million workers across the country.

Many states raise the minimum wage each year to adjust to a cost of living index, while others have raised the pay floor for delivery drivers and fast-food workers. Today, the federal minimum wage stands at $7.25, a rate that has remained the same for 15 years.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, shows the states with the highest minimum wage in America, based on data from Bloomberg Law.

The Highest Minimum Wages, by State

Here are the states with the highest minimum wage as of January 1, 2024:

1 District of Columbia: Indexes hourly minimum wage rate to inflation

2 New Jersey: Seasonal/small employer with five employees or less= $13.90, agricultural employers= $12.81, long term care facility direct care staff= $18.13

3 New York: New York City, Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester counties= $16.00

4 Oregon: Indexes hourly minimum wage rate to inflation. Nonurban counties= $13.20, Portland metro= $15.45

The District of Columbia has the highest minimum wage in the country, at $17 an hour.

Next in line is Washington state, where the minimum wage was raised to $16.28 an hour at the start of the year, up from $15.74. Both jurisdictions tie their minimum wage increases to inflation, along with several of the states on this list such as New York, Colorado, and Arizona.

With the largest planned increase nationally, Hawaii is raising its minimum wage to $18 an hour by 2028. Currently, the minimum wage stands at $14 an hour in the Aloha State.

As we can see, many of the top states have minimum wages that are more than double the federal minimum wage, which has declined in real value for many years. For context, the real value of the federal minimum wage hit a peak in 1970, where it would be worth $12.61 today.

California’s New Fast-Food Wage Hike

Fast-food workers in California recently received a pay bump after a new law raised the minimum wage to $20 an hour, $4 more than the state’s minimum wage.

In response, Pizza Hut announced it was laying off over 1,200 delivery drivers, while McDonalds said that it would increase prices in California due to higher wage costs. Other chain operators are reducing hours, while El Pollo Loco plans to automate part of how it makes salsa.

Affecting half a million workers at 33,000 restaurants, the law applies to chains with 60 or more locations across the country, making it the highest minimum wage in America.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/05/2024 - 09:55

Who's Funding University Unrest?

Via OpenTheBooks substack,

FOUR MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES GAVE $10.3 BILLION TO U.S. COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES!

The civil unrest playing out at America’s elite universities continues to headline the news.

And OpenTheBooks is here to follow the money.

Previously, our reporting broke down the massive taxpayer subsidy of America's elite universities.

This week, we continued to highlight it in national media.

We found that foreign countries also are providing immense subsidy of the U.S. university.

In fact, more than $44 billion in FOREIGN gifts have been disclosed under the Higher Education Reporting Act since 1986.

Here's what Mark Tapscott, at PJ Media noted:

"If you aren't already familiar with OpenTheBooks, you are missing one of the crown jewels of the transparency in government movement...

The facts are front and center, including the reality that the total amount in checks written by the U.S. Treasury and sent to these elite campuses exceeds the income the schools receive in tuition payments."

Here are some media highlights from the week: 

Yesterday FOX News aired segments of my interview across daytime programming including FOX & Friends and Varney & Co.

Economist Larry Kudlow at FOX Business showcased our oversight of the elite universities on the air and in his column.

My interview on The National Desk by Sinclair Broadcast, owners of nearly 200 ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX local stations across America, broke down all the numbers:

INTERVIEW: AMERICAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES MUST BE UNABASHEDLY "AMERICAN!"

Here is just a sample of our findings: 

• $10.3 billion given by Qatar ($5.2 billion), Saudi Arabia ($3 billion), United Arab Emeritus ($1.3 billion) and Kuwait ($800 million) dwarfed China who gave $2.8 billion.   

• During the past 40 years $1 of every $4 of foreign gifts into U.S. colleges and universities flowed from these four countries.

• Are these countries buying seats in our elite schools? Our auditors found millions of dollars in restricted gifts paying the tuition bills for their students.  

Columbia, Harvard, Yale and other elite universities are turning out graduates who believe that open antisemitism and the championing of terrorism are forms of "social justice."

Congress should convene hearings to preserve our top schools as unabashedly "American" institutions. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/05/2024 - 08:45

Fraudulent Logic Guides The UK Smoking Ban

Authored by Owen Ashworth via The Mises Institute,

It is the waning days of the Sunak premiership, and the Conservative party still has a stonking majority despite its cataclysmic capitulation in the polls. The government is effectively a lame duck; everyone knows it has no support, yet it will still be around for a few more months. One would think that since the Conservative party still has a large majority in the House of Commons that it would let loose with policy and attempt real reform so that the MPs have something to take to the people when election time begins.

The Conservative party could radically reform the housing sector so that young people do not turn their backs even more on the free market, they could be tackling NHS reform so our healthcare could match, or even surpass, international standards. Alas, it chose the path that states around the world naturally desire: more state intervention.

The prime minister has decided to go on a crusade against smoking! The government passed its legislation that effectively bans smoking for those born after 2009. The government says it is doing this to reduce the burden on the NHS, billions of pounds will be saved in the long run due to fewer people developing smoking related illnesses. The NHS needs saving so the conservatives are standing their defense of the legislation on the grounds they know are extremely popular amongst the electorate. Perhaps this is the perfect encapsulation of how MPs being guided by public opinion necessitates creation of bad policy.

Members of Parliament from all political parties voted for the legislation showing bipartisanship is alive and well. MPs scrambled to save the NHS and the government’s reasoning that this legislation saves the NHS billions is magnificent PR for all parties. There is a bigger matter at stake here, bodily autonomy. You own yourself, and this is indisputable. Thus, you can put whatever you like in your body as long as it does not harm anybody else. I will return later why this applies to smoking despite it seemingly violating the rule I have set out through the creation of second-hand smoke. If the sole reasoning behind running roughshod over one’s bodily autonomy is to save the NHS billions of pounds, then this logic raises absolutely zero issues with a rather uncomfortable number of crazy policies.

Obesity is becoming a major health issue in the UK, particularly in children, it will undoubtedly cost the NHS billions of pounds to treat these people once they get to an age where the massive medical issues become prevalent. To save the NHS, we should force feed these people a healthy diet so they lose the weight and do not develop costly obesity related diseases. In fact, we should force feed everyone a healthy and balanced diet so a myriad of other diet related health issues does not cost the NHS billions in treatment.

You see how this is nutty right? They would clearly object to these policies but there is nothing in their own logic telling them it is wrong. This means the matter of bodily autonomy to them is a completely arbitrary one, there is no limit except one they “feel” is just about right. Bodily autonomy is not an arbitrary matter; you either own yourself or you don’t. There can be no in-between unless you want to take the massive risk of going down a dystopian path where bodily autonomy is slowly chipped away until you have none left, since it is entirely arbitrary for our politicians to decide. State policy should never be decided based on a completely incoherent, inconsistent and arbitrary view on your right to self-ownership.

Reason Magazine does an amazing series titled “Great Moments in Unintended Consequences”. Readers should watch a few of their videos in that series because they illustrate how the law of unintended consequences can create some absolutely wild outcomes. It also relates to the smoking ban. The government has been slowly restricting smoking over the years until its now becoming a full-fledged ban where it is entirely realistic to say that in 30 years there may be very few people who can legally smoke. The UK had not even reached the stage of a complete ban before the vaping market exploded.

While this is anecdotal, I have witnessed how the development of the vaping market has meant that people who I thought would never touch that stuff have happily accepted vaping as part of their life. Vaping is becoming something of an epidemic amongst young people who would never have smoked normal cigarettes but the government has slowly restricted the market for normal cigarettes, creating the market for vapes. Obviously, the government did not intend to create the perfect storm for such an unintended consequence, yet it has done just that and we will not know for years if the storm will make landfall and destroy any of the savings accumulated from the smoking ban through health issues created by excessive vaping.

The law of unintended consequences is well-established, yet state actors will never connect the dots that lead to the problems. It is also quite amusing (but incredibly revealing about the level of thought our leaders do) to hear from contributors to the Politics Live daily show that they want to heavily restrict vaping too! They even acknowledge that mass vaping is an unintended consequence of the restrictions on smoking, but their solution is to further restrict vaping because, presumably, they will get it right this time with no further unintended consequences.

Returning to how we should deal with second hand smoke. This is a problem entirely perpetuated by the state. Any of the public areas that the state purports to own are havens for smokers who know there will be no private citizen who can legally tell them to stop. If public property did not exist, then private owners could either choose to accept or refuse smokers who will create second hand smoke on their property. That way, individuals would clearly know which route to take and what establishments allow smoking and refuse to allow smoking.

The conception of public property supported through our current system allows for actions that some people do not approve of with no restriction. If all property were private, then we could easily control the actions we wish to approve or disapprove. Smokers can frequent those dark and cloudy bars that are ever-present in some of our favorite classic films while those who do not wish to have any relation to such activity can completely avoid those establishments. Clear, coherent private property law shifts the choices about second hand smoke to individuals instead of taking it away from them.

The smoking ban is an entirely ludicrous policy. To add one last dash of inconsistency to the mix, the government also wants to reduce the burden on police for events they describe as “non-police demands.” The logic is the exact same for the smoking ban but the legislation will be incredibly costly to enforce so it is just going to lead to demands for more funding for the police as they need extra resources to deal with the extra workload now heaped on them by this legislation; the inconsistency is alarming.

Rishi Sunak could have gone to his government, acknowledged that he will most likely lose the next election and decide to fight for what really matters but alas, he chose to be a spineless individual and further drive us down the slippery slope towards zero bodily autonomy. Even his own reasoning for the ban perfectly captures the pitiful level of thought that goes into his (along with many other members of the government, including most other political parties) decisions. The smoking ban should clearly magnify to everyone the state of our supposed political leaders and how intellectually shallow they really are.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/05/2024 - 08:10

Trump Develops 'Detailed' Plan On Achieving Ukraine Peace: Telegraph

Trump has long touted on the campaign trail that he can stop the Ukraine war in 24 hours while taking shots a Biden's inability to oversee a negotiation that would ultimately end the war.

The Daily Telegraph is now reporting, citing an unnamed source who is said to be close to the former president and current GOP frontrunner going into the November election, that Trump has developed a detailed plan for achieving Ukraine peace.

AFP via Getty Images

"There is a plan, but he’s not going to debate it with cable news networks because then you lose all leverage," the source said.

Below is the section of the Friday Telegraph report which previews the plan: 

A source close to the Trump campaign has told The Telegraph that a detailed Ukraine-Russia peace plan has been drawn up but will not yet be disclosed in any detail before his in an effort to maintain leverage.

Mr Trump will style himself as the only candidate who can end the war, with a simple “bumper-sticker” slogan, they said.

“He wants to stop the killing,” said the source. “That’s the bumper sticker: Trump will stop the killing.”

Last month a Washington Post report claimed that key to Trump's plan would be pressuring Kiev to permanently give up Crimea and part of the Donbas to the Russians.

The Post had cited aides who said the plan is to push for "Ukraine to cede Crimea and Donbas border region to Russia" in return for an end the Russian occupation and invasion.

But the truth is that at the very least Kiev would have to forever relinquish claims of sovereignty over Crimea. Moscow is also never going to let go to the four annexed territories in the east.

But Trump had slammed the apparently premature report as "fake news". At the time a statement from the Trump campaign said "The whole thing is fake news from the Washington Post. They’re just making it up." Spokesman Jason Miller did emphasize, however, that "President Trump is the only one talking about stopping the killing. Joe Biden is talking about more killing."

Meanwhile, things on the battlefield are making it increasingly clear that Ukraine may soon have no other option. The country's military and intelligence leadership also appears to be coming around to the hard reality that it will have to surrender territory, or else continue suffering massive losses and ceded ground. The Telegraph writes in its fresh report:

Ukraine is preparing for peace talks with Russia as there is “no way to win on the battlefield alone”, Kyiv’s deputy spy chief has said.

Maj Gen Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of Ukraine’s HUR military intelligence agency, said both sides were currently vying for “the most favorable position” ahead of possible negotiations in 2025.

As with virtually all wars, negotiations will likely be the final stage of the conflict, he told the Economist.

Yet President Zelensky himself has yet to echo this perspective. Instead he's currently urging the West for more and more advanced weapons, and talking about "ten year defense" plans ensured by the US and Kiev's backers.

He has further recently said that if Ukraine ever hopes to formally join NATO, it must 'win' against Russia - which at this point seems in the realm of fantasy. The White House has so far done nothing to dispel this fantasy, but has instead encouraged it.

Russian state media had captured and translated key lines of Zelensky's address. "I believe that we will be in NATO only if we win. I don’t think that we will be admitted [...] during the war," Zelensky had said during a meeting with officers. Ukrainian sources also confirmed the remarks.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/05/2024 - 07:35

Largest Review On Transgender-Youth Medicine Finds Insufficient Evidence For Medicalization

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

England may be the third country to withdraw from a “gender-affirming” treatment pathway due to recommendations from a long-awaited report.

(Illustration by The Epoch Times, The Cass Review, Getty Images, Freepik)

In April, the country published the Cass Review, “most comprehensive summary on transgender-youth medicine,” psychologist Erica Anderson, who identifies as transgender and has a doctorate in clinical psychology, told The Epoch Times.

The review, chaired by Dr. Hilary Cass, British honorary physician, consultant in pediatric disability, and former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, stated that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate the long-term benefits of medicalizing children who want to identify as a different gender. Instead, the review recommends focusing on psychotherapy.

For some clinicians and researchers, this recommendation was a long time coming. Others are concerned that it potentially threatens medicalization—currently the primary treatment—for gender-incongruent youths.

The National Health Service (NHS) England, which commissioned the report in 2020, stated it would be committed to following through on the recommendations.

“[The Cass Review] final report will not just shape the future of healthcare in this country for children and young people experiencing gender distress but will be of major international importance and significance,” the statement read.

Eight days after the Cass Review’s release, Scotland’s health boards announced a pause on new prescriptions for puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones as they gather evidence to support the safety and clinical effectiveness of these medications.

‘End of the Era’

The Cass Review is based on the work of 237 papers, including 214 studies, 21 guidelines, and two position statements, which covered data of over 113,000 children and young people. The authors also analyzed anonymized data from over 3,700 children diagnosed with gender dysphoria, survey responses from professionals, and numerous interviews and testimonies from stakeholders of the issue.

The review team commissioned researchers at the University of York to conduct systematic reviews of these papers and get feedback by interviewing young gender-incongruent children, their parents, and clinicians.

The University of York disclosed that it interviewed 12 young people who were part of voluntary organizations or the UK’s Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), along with 12 parents. The university researchers also interviewed clinicians at the UK’s gender identity clinics.

Additionally, Dr. Cass also interviewed numerous transgender youths, adults, parents of these children, advocacy groups, psychologists, pediatricians, and related clinicians, both British and international, though the number of interviewees was undisclosed. She also wanted to do a follow-up with 9,000 patients referred to England’s Tavistock Centre, but that could not be done due to the lack of cooperation from all but one adult clinic.

The review found insufficient and inconclusive evidence demonstrating the effectiveness and benefits of gender reassignment treatments for children. Additionally, many of these children are on the autism spectrum and share mental comorbidities often overshadowed by the medicalization model.

Dr. Cass hence advised cautionary psychological interventions while also leaving room for children to explore their identities.

The Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine (SEGM), a medical group that advocates for evidence-driven research on transgender care, stated that for England, the review marked “the end of the era of a highly medicalized approach to the treatment of young people with gender-related distress,” which has come to be known as “gender-affirming” care.

The report also mentioned that while medicalization comprising puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgery, known as the “Dutch Protocol,” was invented in the Netherlands in the 1990s, the concept of “gender affirmation”—accepting children’s gender identity at face value—actually originated in the United States and then spread internationally.

As a result of the review, children under 18 in England will not be treated using such protocol but with the same level of care as other youths with mental health struggles. Finland and Sweden made similar changes in 2023.

The NHS Tavistock Centre, England's first gender-identity development service for children, in London on April 10, 2024. (Henry Nicholls/AFP via Getty Images)

Puberty blockers and hormones will only be made available to 16-year-olds and older under the context of research-controlled conditions. Therefore, experimentation of such treatment on minors will be hindered.

“So as the Cass report made clear, they can design a study, but the study has to be approved by a larger body that passes on its ethics,” said Dr. Stephen Levine, clinical professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University.

Top Findings and Suggestions

The report found that, unexpectedly, most current influential guidelines have been determined based on board consensus instead of science.

Most of the current guidelines were influenced by two American standards of care: the 2012 World Professional Association of Transgender Healthcare (WPATH) and the Endocrine Society 2009.

Both relied on a consensus process among professionals to decide on the best treatment for gender dysphoria and were built upon one another. WPATH members were co-sponsors of the Endocrine Society guidelines. WPATH’s 2012 standards of care adopted the Endocrine Society’s consensus-based recommendations but did not refer to WPATH’s own systematic review data, which found inconclusive evidence of the benefits of hormone therapy.

The recommendations from these guidelines were then referred to by subsequent guidelines, snowballing into what we now see.

The Cass Review is not about “rolling back on people’s rights to healthcare,” Dr. Cass wrote in the review’s foreword. “It is about what the healthcare approach should be.”

The review presented the following findings and recommendations.

1. Psychotherapy Is Recommended

Effectiveness and risks: Due to low quality and poor reporting of interventions in transgender children, the review couldn’t form a proper conclusion about the effectiveness of psychotherapy.

However, there is evidence that psychotherapy can help address mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety, common among transgender youths, and hormone interventions often overshadow these therapies. The review highlighted that psychotherapy is not the same as conversion therapy, as it is not about changing a child’s perception of who they are but exploring the cause of their concerns and experiences and helping alleviate distress.

A young girl at the annual NYC Pride March in New York City on June 25, 2023. (Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times) 2. Partial Social Transitioning Is Preferred

Effectiveness and risks: The systematic reviews did not show clear evidence of the positive or negative effects social transitioning has on mental health. Social transition generally refers to a person making only social changes, including altering hair and clothing and changing names and pronouns, instead of medical changes to live as a different gender.

The review noted that many children grow out of gender dysphoria by adulthood but that those who socially transition often medically transition, meaning that they continue to have gender dysphoria.

While it is unknown whether social transitioning contributes to gender dysphoria, the review authors speculated that a partial transition may be more advantageous and offer greater flexibility to help children explore and express their gender identities.

3. Hormonal Treatments Not Recommended Except Under Research Conditions

Effectiveness and risks: The review showed no significant improvements in gender dysphoria symptoms or body satisfaction from medicalization. While some reports showed short-term improvement in mood when patients began hormonal treatment, the magnitude of such improvement was small.

Hormonal treatment, which refers to the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, is not recommended for minors due to the permanence of its effects. Children 16 or older may instead be enrolled in high-quality research studies on experimental treatments.

Evidence about the effects of puberty suppression on psychological well-being, cognitive and bone development, and cardio-metabolic risk or fertility was found to be inconsistent and insufficient.

Evidence also did not support the claim that hormonal treatment reduced the risk of suicide.

The report did not discuss recommendations and changes to guidelines on gender-reassignment surgeries since, unlike children in the United States, minors in the United Kingdom typically cannot undergo these.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/05/2024 - 07:00

The Interlocking Of Strategic Paradigms

Authored by Alastair Crooke via the Ron Paul Institute,

Theodore Postol, Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy at MIT, has provided a forensic analysis of the videos and evidence emerging from Iran’s 13th April swarm drone and missile ‘demonstration’ attack into Israel: A ‘message’, rather than an ‘assault’.

The leading Israeli daily, Yediot Ahoronot, has estimated the cost of attempting to down this Iranian flotilla at between $2-3 billion dollars. The implications of this single number are substantial.

Professor Postol writes:

“This indicates that the cost of defending against waves of attacks of this type is very likely to be unsustainable against an adequately armed and determined adversary”.

“The videos show an extremely important fact: All of the targets, whether drones or not, are shot down by air-to-air missiles”, [fired from mostly U.S. aircraft. Some 154 aircraft reportedly were aloft at the time] likely firing AIM-9x Sidewinder air to air missiles. The cost of a single Sidewinder air-to-air missile is about $500,000”.

Furthermore:

“The fact that a very large number of unengaged ballistic missiles could be seen glowing as they reenter the atmosphere to lower altitudes [an indication of hyper-speed], indicates that whatever the effects of [Israel’s] David’s Sling and the Arrow missile defenses, they were not especially effective. Thus, the evidence at this point shows that essentially all or most of the arriving long-range ballistic missiles were not intercepted by any of the Israeli air and missile-defense systems”.

A Tel Aviv demonstrator holds an Israeli flag during a Ukraine-related protest, AFP via Getty Images

Postel adds, “I have analyzed the situation, and have concluded that commercially available optical and computational technology is more than capable of being adapted to a cruise missile guidance system to give it very high precision homing capability … it is my conclusion that the Iranians have already developed precision guided cruise missiles and drones”.

“The implications of this are clear. The cost of shooting down cruise missiles and drones will be very high and might well be unsustainable unless extremely inexpensive and effective anti-air systems can be implemented. At this time, no one has demonstrated a cost-effective defense system that can intercept ballistic missiles with any reliability”.

Just to be clear, Postol is saying that neither the U.S. nor Israel has more than a partial defense to a potential attack of this nature – especially as Iran has dispersed and buried its ballistic missile silos across the entire terrain of Iran under the control of autonomous units which are capable of continuing a war, even were central command and communications to be completely lost.

This amounts to paradigm change – clearly for Israel, for one. The huge physical expenditure on air defense ordinance – 2-3 billion dollars worth – will not be repeated willy-nilly by the U.S. Netanyahu will not easily persuade the U.S. to engage with Israel in any joint venture against Iran, given these unsustainable air-defence costs.

But also, as a second important implication, these Air Defense assets are not just expensive in dollar terms, they simply are not there: i.e. the store cupboard is near empty! And the U.S. lacks the manufacturing capacity to replace these not particularly effective, high cost platforms speedily.

‘Yes, Ukraine’ … the Middle East paradigm interlinks directly with the Ukraine paradigm where Russia has succeeded in destroying so much of the western supplied, air-defence capabilities in Ukraine, giving Russia near complete air dominance over the skies.

Positioning scarce air defense ‘to save Israel’ therefore, exposes Ukraine (and slows the U.S. pivot to China, too). And given the recent passage of the funding Bill for Ukraine in Congress, clearly air defence assets are a priority for sending to Kiev – where the West looks increasingly trapped and rummaging for a way out that does not lead to humiliation.

But before leaving the Middle East paradigm shift, the implications for Netanyahu are already evident: He must therefore focus back to the ‘near enemy’ – the Palestinian sphere or to Lebanon – to provide Israel with the ‘Great Victory’ that his government craves.

In short, the ‘cost’ for Biden of saving Israel from the Iranian flotilla which had been pre-announced by Iran to be demonstrative and not destructive nor lethal is that the White House must put-up with the corollary – an attack on Rafah. But this implies a different form of cost – an electoral erosion through exacerbating domestic tensions arising from the on-going blatant slaughter of Palestinians.

It is not just Israel that bears the weight of the Iranian paradigm shift. Consider the Sunni Arab States that have been working in various forms of collaboration (normalissation) with Israel.

In the event of wider conflict embracing Iran, clearly Israel cannot protect them – as Professor Postol so clearly shows. And can they count on the U.S.? The U.S. faces competing demands for its scarce Air Defenses and (for now) Ukraine, and the pivot to China, are higher on the White House priority ladder.

In September 2019, the Saudi Abqaiq oil facility was hit by cruise missiles, which Postol notes, “had an effective accuracy of perhaps a few feet, much more precise than could be achieved with GPS guidance (suggesting an optical and computational guidance system, giving a very precise homing capability)”.

So, after the Iranian active deterrence paradigm shift, and the subsequent Air Defence depletion paradigm shock, the putative coming western paradigm shift (the Third Paradigm) is similarly interlinked with Ukraine.

For the western proxy war with Russia centered on Ukraine has made one thing abundantly clear: this is that the West’s off-shoring of its manufacturing base has left it uncompetitive, both in simple trade terms, and secondly, in limiting western defense manufacturing capacity. It finds (post-13 April) that it does not have the Air Defence assets to go round: ‘saving Israel’; ‘saving Ukraine’ and preparing for war with China.

The western maximalization of shareholder returns model has not adapted readily to the logistical needs of the present ‘limited’ Ukraine/Russia war, let alone provided positioning for future wars – with Iran and China.

Put plainly, this ‘late stage’ global imperialism has been living a ‘false dawn’: With the economy shifting from manufacturing ‘things’, to the more lucrative sphere of imagining new financial products (such as derivatives) that make a lot of money quickly, but which destabilize society (through increasing disparities of wealth); and which ultimately, de-stabilise the global system itself (as the World Majority states recoil from the loss of sovereignty and autonomy that financialism entails).

More broadly, the global system is close to massive structural change. As the Financial Times warns,

“the U.S. and EU cannot embrace national-security “infant industry” arguments, seize key value chains to narrow inequality, and break the fiscal and monetary ‘rules’, while also using the IMF and World Bank – and the economics profession– to preach free-market best practice to EM ex-China. And China can’t expect others not to copy what it does”. As the FT concludes, “the shift to a new economic paradigm has begun. Where it will end is very much up for grabs.”

‘Up for grabs’: Well, for the FT the answer may be opaque, but for the Global Majority is plain enough – “We’re going back to basics”: A simpler, largely national economy, protected from foreign competition by customs barriers. Call it ‘old- fashioned’ (the concepts have been written about for the last 200 years); yet it is nothing extreme. The notions simply reflect the flip side of the coin to Adam Smith’s doctrines, and that which Friedrich List advanced in his critique of the laissez-faire individualist approach of the Anglo-Americans.

‘European leaders’, however, see the economic paradigm solution differently:

“The ECB’s Panetta gave a speech echoing Mario Draghi’s call for “radical change”: He stated for the EU to thrive it needs a de facto national-security focused POLITICAL economy centered around: reducing dependence on foreign demand; enhancing energy security (green protectionism); advancing production of technology (industrial policy); rethinking participation in global value chains (tariffs/subsidies); governing migration flows (so higher labour costs); enhancing external security (huge funds for defence); and joint investments in European public goods (via Eurobonds … to be bought by ECB QE)”.

The ‘false dawn’ boom in U.S. financial services began as its industrial base was rotting away, and as new wars began to be promoted. It is easy to see that the U.S. economy now needs structural change. Its real economy has become globally uncompetitive – hence Yellen’s call on China to curb its over-capacity which is hurting western economies.

But is it realistic to think that Europe can manage a relaunch as a ‘defense and national security-led political economy’, as Draghi and Panetta advocate as a continuation of war with Russia? Launched from near ground zero?

Is it realistic to think that the American Security State will allow Europe to do this, having deliberately reduced Europe to economic vassalage through causing it to abandon its prior business model based on cheap energy and selling high-end engineering products to China?

This Draghi-ECB plan represents a huge structural change; one that would take a decade or two to implement and would cost trillions. It would occur too, at a time of inevitable European fiscal austerity. Is there evidence that ordinary Europeans support such radical structural change?

Why then is Europe pursuing a path that embraces huge risks – one that potentially could drag Europe into a whirlpool of tensions ending in war with Russia?

For one main reason: The EU leadership held hubristic ambitions to turn the EU into a ‘geo-political’ empire – a global actor with the heft to join the U.S. at Top Table. To this end, the EU unreservedly offered itself as the auxiliary of the White House Team for their Ukraine project, and acquiesced to the entry price of emptying their armories and sanctioning the cheap energy on which the economy depended.

It was this decision that has been de-industrializing Europe; that has made what remains of a real economy uncompetitive and triggered the inflation that is undermining living standards. Falling into line with Washington’s failing Ukraine project has released a cascade of disastrous decisions by the EU.

Were this policy line to change, Europe could revert to what it was: a trading association formed of diverse sovereign states. Many Europeans would settle for that: Placing the focus on making Europe competitive again; making Europe a diplomatic actor, rather than as a military actor.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 23:20

CIA Engaged In "Infinite Race" With China For AI, Other Tech

The CIA is engaged in an "infinite race" with China when it comes to AI and other top technologies, according to the agency's Chief Technology Officer, Nand Mulchandani, who outlined a strategy that prioritizes technological prowess as crucial to national security.

Speaking at the Hill & Valley Forum's gathering of top technology and government officials in Washington this week, Mulchandani’s made it clear that the agency is aggressively pursuing advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) to bolster both offensive and defensive capabilities, the Washington Times reports.

"We’re looking at transforming every single part of what the agency does," he stated, underscoring the depth of the CIA's commitment to integrating AI into its core operations. The agency's push includes the development of large language models, sophisticated algorithms that are the backbone of generative AI tools, aiming to enhance everything from field operations to analytical and support functions.

This strategic pivot comes as geopolitical rivalry with China is intensifying. The CCP has repeatedly expressed its ambition to dominate the AI sphere, which would present profound challenges and implications for global power dynamics. Mulchandani emphasized the need to rethink the concept of this competition as a "race," suggesting that viewing it as having a definitive end is a misstep. "This is an infinite race. This is not going to stop. It’s going to keep on going," he explained, framing the scenario as a continuous struggle for technological superiority.

The implications of this shift are profound. If the deployment of these new tools escalates to warfare, it will test America's position in the technology stakes, a scenario Mulchandani hopes will never materialize. He predicts the next major conflict will be "primarily a software war," driven by AI, changing the nature of warfare from hardware-dependent to software-driven.

The concerns are not just theoretical. At Stanford’s Hoover Institution, Herbert Lin of the Stanford Emerging Technology Review highlighted the shift in global tech leadership, with the U.S. losing its primacy in certain key areas like AI. Lin pointed out the critical need for a robust talent pipeline and a strategic vision, especially in fields like biotechnology, to maintain competitiveness.

Moreover, the CIA is particularly wary of AI-driven Ubiquitous Technical Surveillance (UTS), which threatens the secrecy of U.S. intelligence operations. In response, the agency is engaged in foundational infrastructure work, which Mulchandani described as the "sewer and plumbing work" necessary to navigate the AI revolution. This involves constant adaptation to rapid technological changes, ensuring that the CIA remains agile in its tech tactics.

"We talk about UTS, which is basically something that’s really, really killing us out in the field in terms of competitively, you know, biometrics, video cameras," he said. "Well, how do we turn it around [and continue] those operations in the face of this much AI being thrown at us is another big area that they’re looking at. So directorate by directorate, we’re rethinking, reshaping every part of what CIA needs to do in the face of using it and deploying it."

The urgency of these initiatives is echoed in the broader governmental plea for collaboration from Silicon Valley. House Speaker Mike Johnson's call to technologists and venture capitalists at the forum to guide and assist the government underscores the critical role of public-private partnerships in navigating the technological labyrinth.

As the U.S. and China continue their relentless pursuit of technological dominance, the narrative is clear: this is not a sprint with a finish line but a marathon without end, defining the future of global power, security, and technological innovation.

Big Mike Begs

No, not that Big Mike... House Speaker Mike Johnson (R?-LA), who implored the technologists and venture capitalists at the forum to help the government wherever they can.

Via @jacobhelberg

"There are not many industries, not many leaders and experts, who we just openly plead for your counsel, but I am doing that here today," said Johnson. "Because a lot of the people who are of goodwill here, who want to do the right thing, could use some of your guidance along the way to make sure that we don’t step on any land mines that we don’t see. You have a much better vision, I think, on a lot of that than we do."

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 22:45

Almost Half Of Health Care Workers Hesitant To Take COVID-19 Boosters: Study

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Approximately half of the health care workers in a Polish study were found to be averse to taking COVID-19 booster shots, with one of the reasons for this hesitancy being their negative experiences with previous vaccinations.

A man received a dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine at the Amazon Meeting Center in downtown Seattle, on Jan. 24, 2021. (Grant Hindsley/AFP via Getty Images)

The peer-reviewed study, published in the Vaccines journal on April 29, examined factors underlying “hesitancy to receive COVID-19 booster vaccine doses” among health care workers (HCW) in Poland. Almost 50 percent of the participants were identified as being wary of the boosters. “Our study found that 42 percent of the HCWs were hesitant about the second booster dose, while 7 percent reported no intent to get vaccinated with any additional doses.”

“As reasons for not vaccinating, participants most frequently highlighted lack of time, negative experiences with previous vaccinations, and immunity conferred by past infections.”

The study involved 69 healthcare workers composed of nurses, midwives, physicians, other health associate professionals, and administrative staff.

At the time of enrollment, 47 had a history of lab-confirmed COVID-19 infection and 31 had at least one comorbidity, a situation where a person suffers from more than one disease or medical condition at the same time.

Over 92 percent of study participants received at least one vaccine booster, with 50.73 percent getting two doses. Five out of the 69 HCWs did not take any boosters.

“Booster hesitancy among health professionals (physicians, nurses, and midwives) was lower than among administrative staff and others. Almost 79 percent of the physicians had received two COVID-19 vaccine booster doses. However, apart from physicians, about half of the HCWs from each occupation group were hesitant about the second booster dose.”

“The highest number of HCWs without any vaccine boosters was observed among administration personnel.”

HCWs in the age groups of 31-40 and 41-50 were found to be the most skeptical about taking the second booster shot. Thirty-four out of the 69 HCWs provided reasons for their COVID-19 booster vaccine hesitancy.

Two of the health care workers who did not take booster shots said their decision was based on their personal experience with the vaccines.

“They reported negative experiences with past COVID-19 vaccination and stated that the natural immunity developed after SARS-CoV-2 infection could protect them against COVID-19, which, overall, does not pose serious health risks,” the study said.

“Responses from HCWs who received only one COVID-19 booster dose can be categorized into two themes: (i) influences arising from personal perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and disease prevention and (ii) issues directly related to vaccination and its safety.”

Six health care workers reported suffering negative adverse effects after previously taking COVID shots. Four had safety concerns about the vaccines.

In an earlier study conducted by the researchers, COVID-19 antibody levels among HCWs after receiving the mandatory primary vaccine series were found to have decreased by around 90 to 95 percent within seven months of vaccination. However, “none of the HCWs contracted COVID-19,” it said.

The current study was funded by the Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry Polish Academy of Sciences. The authors of the study reported no conflicts of interest.

Vaccine Concerns, Harms

Other studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy among health care workers. A March 2023 study that looked at HCWs from Cameroon and Nigeria found that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was “high and broadly determined by the perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines on personal health, mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines, and uncertainty about colleagues’ vaccine acceptability.”

An April 2022 study found that “a concern for vaccine side effects” and “the belief that the vaccines are inadequately studied” were some of the key reasons for vaccine hesitancy among health care workers.

A May 2022 analysis at BMJ Global Health warned that indulging in policies like mandatory vaccination “may cause more harm than good.”

“Current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good,” it said.

“Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunizations.”

The analysis recommended that vaccines should only be mandated “sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions.”

During Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wis.) roundtable discussion on COVID-19 vaccines on Feb. 26, researcher Raphael Lataster, associate lecturer at the University of Sydney, claimed that data from Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials exaggerated the efficacy of the shots.

The data exaggeration could make an ineffective vaccine have a perceived effectiveness of up to 48 percent, he stated.

Meanwhile, a Jan. 27 narrative review found that repeated COVID-19 vaccination may end up boosting the likelihood of experiencing COVID-19 infections and other pathologies. Taking multiple vaccine doses could trigger higher levels of IgG4 antibodies and impair activating white blood cells that protect a person from infections and cancers.

“While booster doses have been recommended to enhance and extend immunity, especially in the face of emerging variants, this recommendation is not based on proven efficacy, and the side effects have been neglected,” the paper said.

In an interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program last year, clinical pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole said that DNA contamination in some of the COVID-19 vaccines could be behind an increase in cancers. He pointed to “turbo cancers,” referring to the phenomenon of cancer symptoms arising faster.

“Now I’m seeing the solid tissue cancers at rates I’ve never seen ... Patients that were stable, or cancer-free for one, two, five, ten years and their cancer’s back, it’s back with a vengeance and it’s not responding to the traditional therapies,” he said.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 21:00

Bitcoin Vs. Gold: Who Won The ZeroHedge Debate?

Friday night’s ZeroHedge Debate explored which is the superior asset: Gold or Bitcoin.

Arguing in favor of Gold were investor Peter Schiff and NYU economist Nouriel Roubini, who went toe-to-toe with crypto proponents Erik Voorhees, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur and wealth manager Anthony Scaramucci.

Schiff made the case that Bitcoin cannot be a viable currency because “money needs to be a commodity” and that Bitcoin has no inherent value.

“It’s not just a unit of account and a medium of exchange. It needs to be a store of value,” he added.

“[Bitcoin] is no more ‘digital gold’ than if I create an image of a hamburger on a computer screen. That’s not digital food.”

Does Bitcoin’s transferability give it value?

Voorhees argued that Bitcoin’s ability to seamlessly cross borders is an example of inherent value.

“I can send $1 million to Europe in five minutes from my phone.”

As things heated up, Roubini echoed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), suggesting that crypto could be exchanged between a “criminal and a terrorist” and that Bitcoin’s transferability allows for the subversion of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) laws.

He blasted Voorhees for being too idealistic.

“Live in your Libertarian cave! That’s not the world we live in.”

Voorhees then gave his best impression of Socrates, attempting to dissect Roubini’s argument that Bitcoin is not "decentralized."

Roubini, meanwhile, made the case that Bitcoin mining is controlled by an oligopoly, and that "The Gini coefficient of Bitcoin is worse than North Korea," - a point he's made in the past, suggesting that Bitcoin contributes to income inequality, rather than reducing it.

One topic the panelists agreed on: inflation is crushing the work class.

According to Schiff, “there’s only one source of inflation and that’s government.”

So, who do you think won?

If you would like to protect yourself from rising inflation, consider checking out this debate's sponsors: Preserve Gold and Bitlayer Labs. ZeroHedge would like to offer a special thank you to each of them for helping to facilitate free speech and open debate.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 20:33

Northern Gaza In Grip Of Full-Blown Famine, UN Food Agency Chief Says

Starting early last month the director of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Samantha Power informed US lawmakers in Congress for the first time that the population in parts of northern Gaza have begun facing famine. This testimony served to hasten international efforts to more efficiently get aid into the Strip, such as the Pentagon's Gaza pier project, though it didn't put a halt of the Western weapons flowing to Tel Aviv.

Now, a top UN official has warned the crisis is worse than previously assessed. The head of the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) Cindy McCain is now warning that northern Gaza is in the midst of a "full-blown famine".

AFP via Getty Images

She further said that famine is "moving its way south" in a new NBC News interview set to air Sunday. She described that this is base on the humanitarian office's assessment on the ground.

"It’s horror. It’s so hard to look at and it’s so hard to hear," McCain told Meet the Press. "What we are asking for and what we continually ask for is a ceasefire and the ability to have unfettered access, to get in safe through the various ports and gate crossings."

But a ceasefire is unlikely to come for at least a week, given that is how long Israel has just given Hamas to respond in a a fresh ultimatum. "Israel has informed Egyptian mediators that Hamas has one week to agree to a hostage deal or Tel Aviv will begin the invasion of Rafah," AntiWar.com writes. "The Israeli proposal does not offer a permanent ceasefire, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared the attack on the city will occur with or without the release of hostages."

Conditions for the civilian population are expected to compound in the south if Israel's military goes through with its planned ground offensive against Rafah.

"The idea that we will halt the war before achieving all of its goals is out of the question," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhu told representatives of hostage families this past Tuesday. "We will enter Rafah and we will eliminate the Hamas battalions there – with or without a deal, in order to achieve the total victory."

The southern city is packed with some 1.5 million people at this point - with most of these being internally displaced refugees. But Israel says that some final key Hamas battalions and commanders are hiding out in the city, embedded within the civilian population, and that there will be no way to root them out except to send in the IDF infantry.

In her early April testimony, USAID's Power warned that "Food has not flowed in sufficient quantities to avoid this imminent famine in the south, and these conditions that are giving rise already to child deaths in the north."

"There's been significant damage during the war; bullet holes, walls missing, roofs not intact" @UNWateridge

Critical @UNRWA & @WFP mission to expand food distribution in north #Gaza. Agencies working closely to avert famine through meaningful supply despite massive destruction. pic.twitter.com/khMHxOU7qH

— UNRWA (@UNRWA) May 2, 2024

Aid officials have warned that in addition to the likelihood of mass deaths, famine would grow in the south of the Strip as well in the wake of a major Rafah assault. The population is so concentrated there that people would have few or no safe places to which to flee for safety. The US has been leaning on Israel to establish a credible civilian evacuation plan, but it's unclear the degree to which this is being realized.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 20:25

California Bill Would Give Black Applicants An Edge In Getting Occupational Licenses

Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times,

California lawmakers are considering a bill that would give preference to African American applicants seeking occupational licenses, for such professions as teaching, nursing, counseling, electrical work and others, especially those who are descendants of slaves.

Assemblyman Mike Gipson, author of AB 2862, said the state’s licensing process poses barriers for African Americans seeking employment, particularly in terms of wage disparities and access to leadership or managerial positions.

“There has been historical longstanding deficiencies and internal barriers … [for] African Americans seeking professional work, and by prioritizing their applications, we are bridging the gap of professional inequities of under representation and under compensation,” Mr. Gipson said in a bill analysis.

Under current law, only veterans are eligible for such prioritization.

Mr. Gipson argued in the analysis that if such priority can be granted to veterans, similar standards should be applicable to African-American applicants.

“If expediting licensure for veterans does not discriminate, then perhaps prioritizing African American applicants also is not discriminatory,” his statement reads.

“Nor would a preference for African American applicants violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution any more than the existing preference for veterans.”

Supporters of the bill, including the Greater Sacramento Urban League and the California African American Chamber of Commerce, said the legislation addresses historical injustices and “promotes equity and provides opportunities for economic advancement within our community.”

However, opponents say it is “unconstitutional” and lacks legal backing.

The Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm, argues in a statement that both the U.S. and California Constitutions guarantee citizens equal protection under the law, prohibiting the government from treating citizens differently based on race, ancestry, or other protected categories.

The law firm suggested if the bill were to become law, it would probably not hold up against legal challenges, referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard last summer. The court deemed the consideration of an applicant’s race as a factor in admissions decisions unconstitutional.

They argued that while the constitution allows the government to use race to remedy instances of past discrimination, the bill doesn’t cite any specific California laws that exclude African Americans or that were drafted with the intention of excluding workers needing redress.

Additionally, they said that introducing race as a factor in the licensing process would exacerbate barriers for many Californians seeking to enter the workforce, particularly low-income workers, who already face numerous challenges.

The law firm also pointed out that the representation of minority groups within industries often varies, suggesting that prioritizing one group over others would fail to address the root of the problem.

They argued that if the state were to do so, it should reduce barriers to licensure for all Californians.

The bill, which will now be heard in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, passed the Assembly’s Business and Professions Committee on a 13–2 vote last week.

If ultimately passed, it would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2029.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 19:50

Cargill Recalls 8 Tons Of Ground Beef At Walmart Stores Nationwide Over Possible E. Coli

Eight tons of ground beef, processed at a Cargill Meat Solutions plant in Pennsylvania and distributed to Walmart stores nationwide, have been recalled due to potential E. coli contamination. 

On Wednesday, the US Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service announced that 16,243 pounds of raw ground beef products may be contaminated with E. 

In recent days, Cargill shipped the raw ground beef to Walmart stores in a wide range of states, including Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, DC, and West Virginia. 

The recalled beef from Cargill includes:

• All Natural Lean Ground Beef with lot code 117 (2.25 pounds)

• Prime Rib Beef Steak Burgers Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

• Fat All Natural Angus Premium Ground Beef with lot code 117 (2.25 pounds)

• Fat All Natural Ground Beef Chuck with lot code 118 (2.25 pounds)

• Fat All Natural Ground Beef Chuck Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

• Fat All Natural Good Beef Sirloin Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

This comes about one month after walnuts sold at Whole Foods were recalled for potential  E. coli contamination. 

Last month, Trader Joe's recalled fresh basil sold in 29 states and Washington, DC, due to dozens of cases of salmonella. 

The recent spate of food recalls, including the current ground beef recall, highlights the need for Americans to understand better the sourcing of their food. 

Here's what X users said about the recall: 

It was eggs last week, peanut butter the week before that, granola bars before that, who tf is letting this all threw.

— Godhasreturned (@Godhasreturned_) May 2, 2024

I wouldn’t eat any meat sold at Walmart regardless

— Mang (@Manglonian) May 2, 2024

I can’t believe that many people buy meat there.

— Mrs.America (@NeoAndTrinity_) May 2, 2024

That’s what you get for buying meat at Walmart

— Bobby (@0gbobbyEth) May 2, 2024

This calls for reevaluating food sources, moving away from big companies, and shifting towards more localized and transparent farming practices. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 19:15

David Stockman On The $1.3 Trillion Elephant In The Room

Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

These people have to be stopped!

We are talking about the nation’s unhinged monetary politburo domiciled in the Eccles Building, of course. It is bad enough that their relentless inflation of financial assets has showered the 1% with untold trillions of windfall gains, but their ultimate crime is that they lured the nation’s elected politician into a veritable fiscal trance. Consequently, future generations will be lugging the service costs on insuperable public debts for years to come.

For more than two decades these foolish PhDs and monetary apparatchiks drove the entire Treasury yield curve to rock bottom, even as public debt erupted skyward. In this context, the single biggest chunk of the Treasury debt lies in the 90-day T-bill sector, but between December 2007 and June 2023 the inflation-adjusted yield on this workhorse debt security was negative 95% of the time.

That’s right. During that 187-month span, the interest rate exceeded the running (LTM) inflation rate during only nine months, as depicted by the purple area picking above the zero bound in the chart, and even then by just a tad. All the rest of the time, Uncle Sam was happily taxing the inflationary rise in nominal incomes, even as his debt service payments were dramatically lagging the 78% rise of CPI during that period.

Inflation-Adjusted Yield On 90-Day T-bills, 2007 to 2022

The above was the fiscal equivalent of Novocain. It enabled the elected politicians to merrily jig up and down Pennsylvania Avenue and stroll the K-Street corridors dispensing bountiful goodies left and right, while experiencing nary a moment of pain from the massive debt burden they were piling on the main street economy.

Accordingly, during the quarter-century between Q4 1997 and Q1 2022 the public debt soared from $5.5 trillion to $30.4 trillion or by 453%. In any rational world a commensurate rise in Federal interest expense would have surely awakened at least some of the revilers.

But not in Fed World. As it happened, Uncle Sam’s interest expense only increased by 73%, rising from $368 billion to $635 billion per year during the same period.  By contrast, had interest rates remained at the not unreasonable levels posted in late 1997, the interest expense level by Q1 2022, when the Fed finally awakened to the inflationary monster it had fostered, would have been $2.03 trillion per annum.

In short, the Fed reckless and relentless repression of interest rates during that quarter century fostered an elephant in the room that was one for the ages. Annualized Federal interest expense was fully $1.3 trillion lower than would have been the case at the yield curve in place in Q4 1997.

Alas, the missing interest expense amounted to the equivalent of the entire social security budget!

So, we’d guess the politicians might have been aroused from their slumber had interest expense reflected market rates. Instead, they were actually getting dreadfully wrong price signals and the present fiscal catastrophe is the consequence.

Index Of Public Debt Versus Federal Interest Expense, Q4 1997-Q1 2022

Needless to say, the US economy was not wallowing in failure or under-performance at the rates which prevailed in 1997. In fact, during that year real GDP growth was +4.5%, inflation posted at just 1.7%, real median family income rose by 3.2%, job growth was 2.8% and the real interest rates on the 10-year UST was +4.0%.

In short, 1997 generated one of the strongest macroeconomic performances in recent decades—even with inflation-adjusted yields on the 10-year UST of +4.0%. So there was no compelling reason for a massive compression of interest rates, but that is exactly what the Fed engineered over the next two decades. As shown in the graph below, rates were systematically pushed lower by 300 to 500 basis points across the curve by the bottom in 2020-2021.

Current yields are higher by 300 to 400 basis points from this recent bottom, but here’s the thing: They are only back to nominal levels prevalent at the beginning of the period in 1997, even as inflation is running at 3-4% Y/Y increases, or double the levels of 1997.

US Treasury Yields, 1997 to 2024

Unfortunately, even as the Fed has tepidly moved toward normalization of yields as shown in the graph above, Wall Street is bringing unrelenting pressure for a new round of rates cuts, which would result in yet another spree of the deep interest rate repression and distortion that has fueled Washington’s fiscal binge since the turn of the century.

As it is, the public debt is already growing at an accelerating clip, even before the US economy succumbs to the recession that is now gathering force. And we do mean accelerating. The public debt has recently been increasing by $1 trillion every 100 days. That’s $10 billion per day, $416 million per hour.

In fact, Uncle Sam’s debt has risen by $470 billion in the first two months of this year to $34.5 trillion and is on pace to surpass $35 trillion in a little over a month, $37 trillion well before year’s end, and $40 trillion some time in 2025. That’s about two years ahead of the current CBO (Congressional Budget Office) forecast.

On the current path, moreover, the public debt will reach $60 trillion by the end of the 10-year budget window. But even that depends upon the CBO’s latest iteration of Rosy Scenario, which envisions no recession ever again, just 2% inflation as far as the eye can see and real interest rates of barely 1%. And that’s to say nothing of the trillions in phony spending cuts and out-year tax increases that are built into the CBO baseline but which Congress will never actually allow to materialize.

What is worse, even with partial normalization of rates, a veritable tsunami of Federal interest expense is now gathering steam. That is because the ultra-low yields of 2007 to 2022 are now rolling over into the current market rates shown above—at the same time that the amount of public debt outstanding is heading skyward. As a result, the annualized run rate of Federal interest expense hit $1.1 trillion in February and is heading for $1.6 trillion by the end of the current fiscal year in September.

Finally, even as the run-rate of interest expense has been soaring, the bureaucrats at the US Treasury have been drastically shortening the maturity of the outstanding debt, as it rolls over. Accordingly, more than $21 trillion of Treasury paper has been refinanced in the under one-year T-bill market, thereby lowering the weighted-average maturity of the public debt to less than five- years.

The apparent bet is that the Fed will be cutting rates soon. As is becoming more apparent by the day, however, that’s just not in the cards: No matter how you slice it, the running level of inflation has remained exceedingly sticky and shows no signs of dropping below its current 3-4% range any time soon.

What is also becoming more apparent by the day is that the money-printers at the Fed have led Washington into a massive fiscal calamity. It is only a matter of time, therefore, until the brown stuff hits the fan like never before.

*  *  *

The truth is, we’re on the cusp of an economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. And most people won’t be prepared for what’s coming. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. Click here to download the PDF now.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 18:40

Data Centers Hiding In 'Spy Country' Northern Virginia Will Need Reactor's Worth Of Power

Since the beginning of the digital age, most of the world's internet data has flowed through massive data centers in Northern Virginia. The area is known as "Data Center Alley" because it's home to the world's largest concentration of data centers. Some call the area 'spy country' because of the number of data centers used by the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies. 

Given the exponential proliferation of smartphones, streaming services, smart devices, and now generative artificial intelligence, the power demanded by data centers in Northern Virginia will need nuclear reactors worth of power, if not much more, according to utility Dominion Energy.

On Thursday, Chief Executive Officer Bob Blue told investors on a company earnings call that "economic growth, electrification, and accelerating data center expansion" is boosting power demand across the area. 

Blue said, "The data center industry has grown substantially in northern Virginia in recent years," noting, "We've connected 94 data centers with over 4 gigawatts of capacity over the last approximately five years." 

Blue expects his utility company to connect another 15 data centers to the local power grid this year. 

He said, "This growth has accelerated in orders of magnitude, driven by one, the number of data centers requesting to be connected to our system, two, the size of each facility, and three, the acceleration of each facility's ramp scheduled to reach full capacity." 

He provided some context about rising power demand, pointing out:

"A single data center typically had a demand of 30 megawatts or greater. However, we're now receiving individual requests for demand of 60 to 90 megawatts or greater, and it hasn't stopped there. We get regular requests to support larger data center campuses that include multiple buildings and require total capacity ranging from 300 megawatts to as many as several gigawatts." 

Blue told analysts that Loudoun County is home to the "largest data center market in the world, and we have had an opportunity to work with our data center customers for 15 or more years."

He said the electrification of the economy, in combination with data centers, will only mean "substantial load growth driven by electrification in data centers for the foreseeable future." 

With substantial load growth coming down the pipe, the local media outlet The Frederick News-Post reported earlier this year that billions of dollars in "regional power grid upgrades" are being proposed to "increase data center power demands in Northern Virginia." 

Recently, media outlet LoudounNow reported that "hunger for energy continues to grow, especially in the data center industry with new large-scale projects adding hundreds of megawatts of demand." The paper said that this has led government officials to propose "small modular reactors."

Putting this all together plays into our latest investing theme, 'powering up America' and the upgrade of the nation's grid for AI data centers, electrification of the economy, and reshoring of manufacturing. We titled the notes "The Next AI Trade" and "Everyone Is Piling Into The Next AI Trade." Nuclear will be a big part of power generation as it's the only clean and reliable source for data centers, as Blackrock's Larry Fink pointed out last week. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 18:05

US Demands Qatar Expel Hamas If Group Rejects Israeli Truce Deal

Via The Cradle

US officials have told Qatar to expel Hamas’ political leadership if the Palestinian militant group rejects the latest proposal for a ceasefire with Israel, The Washington Post reports Saturday. A US official speaking on the condition of anonymity with The Post said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken delivered the message to Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani in April.

Three diplomats familiar with the matter said Qatari officials have expected the request for months, as ceasefire talks mediated by Qatari and Egyptian officials have repeatedly failed. Qatari officials have advised Hamas officials to prepare to depart for another country should they be forced to leave, one of the diplomats told The Post. Some have speculated that Turkiye may be a possible future host of the group.

Emir Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani (R) in a meeting with Hamas official Khaled Mashal in Doha, Qatar govt handout

Doha has hosted Hamas’ political leadership, including Ismail Haniyeh, at the US’ request since 2012 and provided billions in cash to the Hamas authorities governing Gaza in recent years with the approval of the US and Israel. 

However, Qatar has come under criticism from US and Israeli officials since Hamas launched Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October. During the operation, Hamas attacked Israeli military bases and settlements to break the 17-year siege on Gaza. Some 1,200 Israeli civilians and soldiers were killed, including some by Hamas and others by Israeli forces, which used attack helicopters, tanks, and drones in their own settlements (kibbutzim) to respond to the operation.

Hamas also took some 240 Israelis captive, of which roughly 100 remain alive in Gaza, to exchange for some of the thousands of Palestinians held captive in Israeli jails. 

The White House has sought to use the threat of expelling Hamas from Qatar as leverage in ceasefire negotiations. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants the return of the Israeli captives without offering a permanent end to the war in return. 

Netanyahu has long insisted that Israel only agree to a temporary ceasefire in exchange for the return of the Israeli captives, after which the army would be allowed to resume the war on Gaza, which he claims is meant to eliminate Hamas. Hamas has rejected the idea of a temporary ceasefire in hopes of ending the war permanently and winning the return of displaced Palestinians from northern Gaza to their homes, though many have been destroyed by Israeli bombing.

After seven months of war, the Israeli army has succeeded in killing a reported over 34,000 Palestinians, including over 14,000 children according to Gaza Health Ministry casualties, and has laid waste to large swathes of Gaza’s cities and farmland. However, the army has not defeated Hamas, whose fighters continue to carry out operations against occupying Israeli troops. 

Netanyahu has also used the threat of an all-out invasion of Rafah, the city on the Egypt border where over 1 million displaced Palestinians are sheltering, as leverage to force Hamas to agree to a ceasefire and prisoner exchange on Israel’s terms. 

Blinken returned to Israel this week in hopes of pressuring Hamas to agree to the latest Israeli proposal. "We are determined to get a ceasefire that brings the hostages home and to get it now, and the only reason that wouldn’t be achieved is because of Hamas," Blinken said Wednesday in Tel Aviv. "There is a proposal on the table, and as we’ve said: no delays, no excuses. The time is now." A Hamas delegation is expected to visit Cairo this weekend, potentially to respond in writing to Israel’s latest proposal, Reuters reported Friday.

Major Israeli strike have continued to rock Gaza this week:

BREAKING: MAJOR ISRAELI AIRSTRIKES ON NORTHERN GAZA RIGHT NOW pic.twitter.com/pxoc2eFhqb

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) May 3, 2024

As negotiations have dragged on, US officials and lawmakers have blamed Qatar for its failure to force Hamas to agree to a deal. Some US lawmakers have called on the White House to force Qatar to not only expel the Hamas leadership but to cut ties with the group entirely.

However, some analysts say expelling Hamas from Qatar will not assist Israel. "Applying pressure to Hamas in Doha is ineffective pressure," an official briefed on the talks said. "The problem is the guys making the decisions are in Gaza, and they don’t care where the political office is located," this person said.

Patrick Theros, a former US ambassador to Qatar, told The Post that kicking Hamas out of Qatar would simply sabotage the current talks further. "We’d be cutting off our nose to spite our face," he said.

Qatari officials have expressed frustration for the criticism they are receiving, simply for doing what the US had requested of them. "We did not enter into a relationship with Hamas because we wanted to. We were asked by the U.S.," Majed al-Ansari, adviser to the Qatari prime minister and spokesperson for Qatar’s Foreign Ministry, stated last week to Israeli media.

"Qatar is being used as a political punching bag for those who are looking either to safeguard their political futures or to find more votes in the next elections," he said in response to US and Israeli criticism.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 17:30

Bitcoin ETFs See Buying Resurgence; 'Mr.100' BTFD As Grayscale Sees First Inflow Since Jan

For the first time since spot bitcoin ETFs were launched, Grayscale's Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) saw a daily net inflow on Friday (of $63 million)...

Source: Bloomberg

GBTC has dominated the outflows since inception (adding up to around $17.5 billion) since the 11 spot ETFs were launched on Jan 11. The inflow coincided with a sudden surge in aggregate net inflows to ETFs overall of $378 million on Friday (which came two days after a record net outflow of $563 million)...

Source: Bloomberg

CoinTelegraph's Ciaran Lyons reports that pseudonymous crypto investor DivXman told his followers that the GBTC was the “primary source” of sell pressure across all spot Bitcoin ETFs, but “the tides” could be turning.

“That effectively means a significant decrease in sell pressure and additional increase in demand while ETFs collectively are buying more BTC than miners can create,” he explained to his 20,800 X followers in a May 3 post.

Crypto trader Jelle predicted to his 80,300 X followers on the same day that Bitcoin’s new all-time high is on the horizon.

“60 million dollars worth of inflows for Grayscale’s ETF. The halving chop will come to an end, and 6-figure Bitcoin will follow shortly after.”

Bitcoin's price responded to this sudden inflow surprise and rallied back above $64,000, erasing the outflow-driven plunge from last week...

Source: Bloomberg

This price rise corresponded to a big short liquidation in the past 24 hours...

Source: CoinGlass

Additionally, CoinTelegraph reports that bitcoin whale entity nicknamed “Mr. 100” has bought the Bitcoin dip for the first time since the Bitcoin halving.

Meanwhile, multiple market analysts suggest that the local Bitcoin bottom may be in as the price bounces from $56,000 lows.

The Mr. 100 whale wallet has added over 4,100 BTC worth over $242 million, around the $58,000 mark, according to on-chain data from Bitinfocharts, as noticed by X user HODL15Capital.

This represents the wallet’s first Bitcoin purchases since April 19, the day before the 2024 Bitcoin halving.

The wallet has been adding at least 100 BTC nearly every day since Feb. 14, except for the post-halving period.

Mr. 100 is currently the 12th-largest Bitcoin holder, with over 65,155 BTC, according to Bitinfocharts data.

Finally, another even-larger 'whale' is Michael Saylor at MicroStrategy, delivered a masterclass on corporate finance and the power of bitcoin to supercharge corporate balance sheets. Saylor made a point to emphasize Bitcoin as the single solution for capital appreciation in an inflationary environment.

The MicroStrategy Executive Chairman noted key differences between Bitcoin and alternative cryptocurrencies like Ethereum, expressing the importance and necessity of proof-of-work-based consensus in creating a digital commodity.

“You could see the writing on the wall when the spot ETF of Bitcoin was approved in January. By the end of May, you'll know that Ethereum is not going to be approved. And when Ethereum is not going to be approved, sometime this summer it'll be very clear to everyone that Ethereum is deemed a crypto asset security, not a commodity. After that, you're going to see that [for] Ethereum, BNB, Solana, Ripple, Cardano – everything down the stack.”

Saylor’s conviction and use of physics-based metaphors were present as ever as he spoke on Bitcoin’s price appreciation and continued monetization.

“It's never declining. The chart's not ever decreasing. It only goes one way. Bitcoin is a capital ratchet. It's a one-way ratchet. Archimedes said, give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can move the world. Bitcoin is the place to stand.”

“There's no more powerful idea than the digital transformation of capital… No force on earth can stop an idea whose time has come. This is an idea. Its time has come. It's unstoppable. And so I'm going to end with the observation that Bitcoin is the best. The best what? The best.”

Saylor is an outspoken proponent of BTC and a leading force behind MicroStrategy acquiring the cryptocurrency as a reserve asset. As of April 30, the firm held 214,400 BTC - worth more than $13 billion at the time of publication.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 16:55

Governments Cause Inflation And Hurt Bond Investors

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

The Fed’s preferred inflation measure rose 2.8% in March from a year ago. This is the core personal consumption expenditures price index, excluding food and energy, which should be less volatile than the consumer price index and a better indicator of the real process of disinflation.

This figure is not only concerning, considering the propaganda that repeats that the fight against inflation is nearing its conclusion, but it becomes even more so when we observe the upward trend over the last three and six months. Inflation has accelerated on a quarterly and half-year basis.

As E.J. Anthony, PhD economist, points out, “there was never any indication we were heading to the 2.0% inflation target, let alone the pre-pandemic 1.8% average; we’ve arrived at 3%+ with no indication we’re going significantly lower anytime soon, not with the current levels of Treasury borrowing and Fed allowing money supply growth.”

We need to understand why inflation is not falling as promised and announced.

There is no such thing as cost-push inflation

Fiscal policy has been reckless, and enormous deficit spending is fueling inflationary pressures through unnecessary government consumption of newly created currency.

Government spending is printing new units of currency and inflation is caused by issuing more than what the private sector demands, thus making the purchasing power of money decline.

There is no such thing as cost-push inflation, greedflation, or commodity inflation.

None of those factors can make aggregate prices rise, consolidate, and continue increasing on an annualized level.

Furthermore, if cost-push or supply chain disruptions were the cause of inflation, we would have deflation today, not rising aggregate prices every month.

Governments created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit

Governments are destroying the purchasing power of money and perpetuating inflation. They created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit.

“An upsurge in money growth preceded the inflation flare-up, and countries with stronger money growth saw markedly higher inflation,” concluded Claudio Borio in a scholar paper in 2023 (“Does money growth help explain the recent inflation surge?”, BIS Bulletin No. 67, January 26, 2023).

Doctors Juan Castañeda and Tim Congdon already warned as early as June 2020 that “the policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic will increase budget deficits massively in the world’s leading countries. The deficits will largely be monetized, with heavy state borrowing from both national central banks and commercial banks. The monetization of budget deficits, combined with official support for emergency bank lending to cash-strained corporates, is leading to extremely high growth rates of the quantity of money,” and these “will instigate an inflationary boom” (Inflation: The Next Threat? Institute of Economic Affairs, Briefing 7, June 2020).

Inflation is a policy

Inflation is not a coincidence or a fatality; it is a policy. Governments tend to announce large-scale spending programs to combat inflation.

These policies accelerate money velocity in a recovery, particularly after a shutdown like the one of 2020, as well as the quantity of money in the system.

Thus, inflation rises rapidly. The only way to contain the inflation burst is to cut spending and reduce the quantity and growth of money. However, although central banks have announced so-called restrictive policies, reality has shown the opposite.

The quantity of money in the system has not been reduced. Money supply measured as M2 has declined, and the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve has diminished, but these forces have been entirely offset by net liquidity and money market funds.

As government spending and deficit have not fallen at all, but rather the opposite, the economy has been flooded with the post-waves of the first money growth impact (2020), its market and net liquidity effect, and rising public expenditure with annual deficits close to $2 trillion.

The quantity of money has not been reduced

The Federal Reserve has increased rates, but that only helps moderate the growth of money, not eliminate inflationary pressures.

Furthermore, as markets immediately discounted large rate cuts in 2024, the real effect on money growth has been just to postpone the inevitable future monetization of such enormous deficits. It has become a Call option on a forthcoming new quantitative easing program.

We cannot forget that the quantity of money has not been reduced due to another relevant factor.

The Federal Reserve has multiplied its support for the troubled banking sector via the discount window, which offsets the modest reduction in the Fed balance sheet.

Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued

By purchasing the sovereign bonds in the banks’ balance sheets at par despite the collapse in price, the Fed was inadvertently printing new money and sabotaging its own restrictive measures.

The misguided Keynesian policies implemented by the US government have cancelled out the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet reduction and rate hike efforts.

The Treasury injected more than $2 trillion per annum in liquidity, creating new money, counteracting the net $1.6 trillion that the Fed retired in three years from its balance sheet.

Therefore, the impact on the purchasing power of the currency through inflation has been negative. Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued.

The impact on markets

The impact on markets has been phenomenal. The yen, once a stable currency perceived as a haven for investors, has fallen to a 35-year low versus the US dollar.

The Bloomberg index of globally expanded major currencies and the emerging markets indicator have both fallen.

The result of the 2020–2024 “free money” wave was a very expensive destruction of real wages and deposit savings.

Furthermore, bonds have been obliterated and the latest data shows that the aggregate US and euro area bond indices have not recovered from the past years’ slump, and even going back to 2020, the indices are showing negative returns.

Only the high yield index has shown a positive performance in the past four years, albeit a meager 4.5%.

Governments are destroying the currency that they issue in all possible ways. Through persistent inflation, making wage earners and middle-class deposit savers poorer, with rising taxes to try to reduce a budget deficit that was bloated by unnecessary spending in a recovery, and through the destruction of the safest asset, bonds, that have become a bad investment for the most conservative investors, pension funds.

The only way in which inflation will be reduced will be if the Federal Reserve abandons its decision to cut rates and starts to take measures that drain net liquidity.

Without the support of the Treasury, this is impossible because it floods the market with new money even if monetary policy is restrictive and investors simply discounts that all those newly issued currency units will be monetized somehow in the future.

It does not matter if Powell promises restraint when Yellen pushes excess. The most conservative bondholders will only start to see positive returns when the Treasury stops destroying the currency’s value. It does not seem likely anytime soon.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 16:20

Gaza Pier Delayed Over Rough Seas, Pentagon Calls Project "Extremely Challenging"

This week has seen statements and reports indicating the US military constructed humanitarian pier on Gaza's coast is expected to be complete by some point this weekend. 

But the $320 million project has hit another snag, as the Pentagon has said its soldiers and engineers were forced to "temporarily pause" the offshore assembly of the floating pier due to bad sea conditions in the eastern Mediterranean. So a finish date by this weekend appears unrealistic at this point, based on the Friday announcement.

US Navy personnel construct a ‘Joint Logistics Over-the Shore’ temporary pier. Image: CENTCOM via Reuters

"The partially built pier and military vessels involved in its construction have moved to the Port of Ashdod, where assembly will continue, and will be completed prior to the emplacement of the pier in its intended location when sea states subside," CENTCOM said in a statement. 

So now the US personnel constructing it have moved to Israel. Presumably once the floating pier is completed it will be moved by sea back to the northern Gaza coast in preparation for maritime aid deliveries. 

The pier is expected to allow “the delivery of large quantities of humanitarian aid from ship to shore by truck, with vehicles driving directly off ships and across the temporary pier to a marshaling yard ashore," per the US military statement.

According to more details of what could prove to be cause of more continued pauses and delays:

Defense officials previously hoped that the JLOTS system would be fully built by Friday. But officials told CNN that sea state conditions have been extremely challenging off the coast of Gaza over the last week, impeding the work of the personnel involved in building the pier. One of the key tasks, for example, involves military divers working underneath the pier to ensure all the parts are secured and stable — a difficult and dangerous task when the seas are rough.

The operation of the pier and causeway, which will also require US military personnel to be stationed at sea, will also depend on weather conditions, officials say. 

Meanwhile famine has hit parts of the Gaza Strip, USAID said starting last month. There are also still lingering fears that once complete the pier and personnel working it could come under attack by Palestinian militants.

On Tuesday Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin made a surprise admission for the first time. It came during a hearing of the House Armed Services committee, and specifically when Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida grilled him on whether US servicemen will be placed in harm's way during the construction of the project in Gaza.

Update on the Construction of the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore capability in Mediterranean Sea

Yesterday, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) temporarily paused offshore assembly of the floating pier in the vicinity of Gaza due to sea state considerations. Forecasted high winds and… pic.twitter.com/cIY2TUn7NX

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 3, 2024

Austin answered in the affirmative, and further said that troops erecting the pier will be armed and that they will be authorized to fire back if fired upon. It must be recalled that just last week a visiting delegation of UN officials came under mortar fire from Palestinian militants. Hamas has further warned that any foreign military presence on Gaza soil will come under attack. 

* * *

Below is more from the tense Congressional exchange: 

Gaetz: This is a very telling moment, Mr. Secretary, because you've said something that's quite possible, that could happen, right? Shots from Gaza on our service members, and then the response our armed service members shooting live fire into Gaza. That is a possible outcome here so that we can become the Port Authority and run this pier. Right?

Austin: That's correct. And I expect that we will always have the ability to protect themselves.

Gaetz: Don't you think that counts as boots on the ground? President Biden told the country that we weren't going to have boots on the ground in Gaza.

Austin: And we won't

Gaetz: Okay, but you guys parse the distinction between... Like when Americans think boots on the ground, they think Americans in harm's way or engaged actively in a conflict. You guys seem to be sort of saying that boots on a pier, connected to the ground, connected to service members shooting into Gaza doesn't count as boots on the ground?

Austin: It does not.

Gaetz: I think you're gonna find the the American people have a different perspective on that. And if we're gonna have people shooting into Gaza, we probably should have a vote on that, pursuant to our war powers.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 15:45

Long Beach Hotel Housing 'Homeless' Sparks Tuberculosis Outbreak As Health Emergency Declared

A health crisis has emerged for Democrat officials in Long Beach, California, following a tuberculosis outbreak linked to a hotel housing 'homeless' people, according to Fox News. 

On Thursday, health officials declared a public health emergency after an alarming tuberculosis outbreak was reported at an unnamed hotel housing. 

The city has so far confirmed 14 cases of tuberculosis in people "associated with a single room occupancy hotel." Nine of them were hospitalized with one fatal case. Another 170 people were "likely exposed" to the deadly bacteria. 

"The outbreak is currently isolated to a distinct population and the risk to the general public is low," the city said, adding, "The population at risk in this outbreak has significant barriers to care, including homelessness and housing insecurity, mental illness, substance use and serious medical comorbidities."

The reason health officials declined to name the hotel or its location is to comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. 

One X user said, "I believe the name of the hotel SHOULD BE DISCLOSED in the interest of traveler safety. OR does this mean the hotel is used to house illegal aliens invading our border? Long Beach declares public health emergency after deadly tuberculosis outbreak." 

I believe the name of the hotel SHOULD BE DISCLOSED in the interest of traveler safety. OR does this mean the hotel is used to house illegal aliens invading our border? Long Beach declares public health emergency after deadly tuberculosis outbreak https://t.co/jTe7fpuR2R

— Judy Holiday (@msjudyholiday) May 3, 2024

The question now becomes if Long Beach officials were housing illegal migrants in the hotel... 

If so, this isn't the first time unvaccinated and undocumented illegal aliens have sparked infectious disease outbreaks in hotels and shelters nationwide. 

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 14:35

Hamas-Israel Truce To Free Hostages Said To Be Closer Than Ever

Rumors are flying Saturday that Hamas and Israel are closer than ever to finally reaching a truce deal that would center of the release of more Israeli hostages, and the freeing of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

"Negotiations for a potential hostage deal and truce in Gaza appeared to reach a critical moment Saturday, with Hamas set to offer its response to the latest proposal, and Israel indicating an offensive in the city of Rafah could be imminent if no agreement is reached," Times of Israel reports.

Separately Haaretz is reporting based on regional Arab sources that Hamas has in essence already accepted a deal. The last hours of Egyptian and Qatari mediated talks have reportedly seen significant progress.

However, this key caveat could make all of the current Saturday headlines premature: 

An Israeli official told Haaretz that 'Israel will, under no circumstances, agree to end the war as part of a deal' and is determined to enter Rafah.

But Haaretz is also saying that "Hamas was guaranteed by the U.S. for a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and that Israeli forces will not continue fighting once the hostages are released."

Picture Alliance via Getty Images

The problem with this is that given PM Netanyahu's latest and consistent rhetoric vowing to not halt the operation until Palestinian terrorists in the Strip are eradicated, a full IDF withdrawal still seems unrealistic.

Starting Friday Israeli leaders said they were giving Hamas one week to agree to the deal on the table or else a full-scale assault of Rafah will begin. 

Less than 40 hostages are expected to be freed as part of the deal - it would focus on the remaining children, elderly, and the sick.

One Israeli official told Haaretz that the government is "waiting anxiously to see Hamas' final position."

But the source cautioned, "The information has not yet arrived, but in light of past experience, even if Hamas says it's following the suggested framework, the small details and reservations it'll eventually present may dissolve the whole deal."

This is precisely what has happened to prior rounds of negotiations which were believed to be at the finish line. They blew up at the last moment over specific details, typically involving wrangling over the names on the hostage release list.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 14:00