Individual Economists

Texas AG Paxton Pledges Crackdown On 'Leftist Terror Cells'

Zero Hedge -

Texas AG Paxton Pledges Crackdown On 'Leftist Terror Cells'

Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton just announced an undercover investigation into “leftist terror cells” in his home state, citing the “political assassination of national hero Charlie Kirk” and the rise of “leftist violence” nationwide as reasons for the operation.

Leftist political terrorism is a clear and present danger. Corrupted ideologies like transgenderism and Antifa are a cancer on our culture and have unleashed their deranged and drugged-up foot soldiers on the American people,” Paxton said in a statement.

The operation will focus on the identification and infiltration of radical groups that have “incubated an environment where political violence is not only justified but celebrated,” he said.

“To those demented souls who seek to kill, steal, and destroy our country, know this: you cannot hide, you cannot escape, and justice is coming.”

Kirk’s accused killer, Tyler Robinson, is said to have exchanged messages with a significant other about what he perceived as problems with the conservative commentator’s views.

Similarly, just days after Kirk’s Sept. 10 assassination, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Dallas was targeted by a shooter who sprayed the building and nearby vehicles with bullets, killing two detainees.

The gunman, who died of a self-inflicted wound, had penned anti-government and anti-ICE writings that were found by law enforcement in the course of their investigation.

A shooting at an ICE facility in Alvarado, Texas, was linked to the Antifa extremist group.

On April 9, Paxton announced he will run for the U.S. Senate, facing off against Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who has held the seat since 2002.

On Sept. 22, President Donald Trump designated Antifa a domestic terrorist organization. He called on his administration to “utilize all applicable authorities to investigate, disrupt, and dismantle any and all illegal operations—especially those involving terrorist actions—conducted by Antifa.”

Paxton, in announcing the operation, referenced Kirk’s shooting, saying: “The martyrdom of Charlie Kirk marks a turning point in America. There can be no compromise with those who want us dead.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 08:25

Stabbed German Mayor Knew Her Attacker, Remained Silent; Adopted Kids In Custody

Zero Hedge -

Stabbed German Mayor Knew Her Attacker, Remained Silent; Adopted Kids In Custody

Via Remix News,

The newly elected Social Democrat (SPD) mayor of the German city of Herdecke, Iris Stalzer, was stabbed multiple times yesterday inside her home. The woman’s two adopted children, a 15-year-old son and a 17-year-old daughter, were taken into custody after the incident. Photos of the son being led away in handcuffs were also published in a variety of German media outlets.

Stalzer’s life remains in danger, but according to Focus, she was briefly awake and was able to answer police questions. However, although she signaled she knew who her attacker was, she refused to provide any further details to police.

An investigation remains underway, and so far, it does not appear anyone has been charged in the attack. However, the two adopted children appear to be the focus of the investigation and were actively questioned following the stabbing attack. According to Focus, the 15-year-old son is the focus of the investigation now, with the youth featuring a history of “mental health” problems.

Stalzer’s life is still in danger, a spokeswoman for the Hagen police said Wednesday morning.

Crime scene investigators were active inside the home and on the street yesterday, securing evidence. Both children were also checked for forensic evidence. Investigators believe the crime has a family background and is not politically motivated. According to a report from Spiegel, police were called to the residence just a month earlier, after the 17-year-old daughter threatened the mother, also allegedly with a knife.

Security sources told Welt that neighbors reported hearing a loud argument between the 15-year-old son and his mother before the stabbing. The father was not home at the time, only returning home later that evening after a trip abroad.

Police press officer Tino Schaefer answers questions from journalists in Herdecke, Germany, Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2025, after the newly elected mayor of Herdecke, Iris Stalzer, was found critically injured in her apartment. (AP Photo/Martin Meissner)

There has been much back and forth among media outlets over whether the son or the daughter might be responsible for the crime, but so far, police have left open whether either of them are suspects. There were also reports that the son told police his mother was attacked by a “group of men” on the street, but all reports confirm she was found bloody inside her home.

Stalzer suffered multiple stab wounds to her upper body and received first aid at the scene. She was later transported to the hospital by helicopter.

The newspaper Westfalenpost learned from security sources that Stalzer was awake during a brief moment of police questioning. She told police she knew who committed the crime but declined to further comment.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz also wrote about the attack on X, stating, “We have received news of a despicable act in Herdecke. It must now be solved quickly. We fear for the life of the mayor-elect, Iris Stalzer, and hope for a full recovery.”

Read more here...

*  *  * 2-Day Emergency Survival Backpack // Free Shipping

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 08:15

Ferrari Shares Crash Most On Record After 2030 Outlook Disappoints

Zero Hedge -

Ferrari Shares Crash Most On Record After 2030 Outlook Disappoints

Shares of Ferrari NV crashed 16% in Milan trading, marking the biggest intraday decline since 2016, after the exotic carmaker delivered a cautious long-term outlook that fell short of Wall Street expectations. Analysts, including Tom Narayan's team at RBC Capital Markets, said Ferrari's updated 2030 guidance came in below consensus estimates. The cautious forecast comes as UBS warned last week that softness in U.S. consumer demand has spread from low-income to middle-income buyers.

Ferrari executives told investors at Capital Markets Day in Maranello that the 2025 guidance has been slightly revised higher, now targeting revenue of at least 7.1 billion euros and adjusted EBITDA of 2.72 billion euros, up from the previously announced target of at least 2.68 billion euros. 

However, the underwhelming 2030 forecast disappointed investors, according to UBS analyst Narayan. He pointed out that management forecasted revenue of 9 billion euros and EBITDA of 3.6 billion euros, implying a CAGR that is well below the 10% growth trajectory forecasted in 2022

Here's the snapshot of the 2025 Forecast (courtesy of Bloomberg):

  • Sees adjusted Ebitda at least EU2.72 billion, saw at least EU2.68 billion, estimate EU2.73 billion (Bloomberg Consensus)

  • Sees adjusted Ebit at least EU2.06 billion, saw at least EU2.03 billion, estimate EU2.07 billion

  • Sees adjusted diluted EPS at least EU8.80, saw at least EU8.60, estimate EU8.90

  • Sees industrial free cash flow at least EU1.3 billion, saw at least EU1.2 billion, estimate EU1.41 billion

  • Sees revenue at least EU7.1 billion, saw above EU7 billion, estimate EU7.09 billion

Headlines from Capital Markets Day (courtesy of Bloomberg): 

  • To Increase Div Payout to 40% of Net Starting From 2025

  • Sees 2030 net revenue of about EU9 billion

  • Sees 2030 adj. Ebitda of at least EU3.60 billion

  • Says exceeding the 2026 business plan's profitability targets one year in advance

  • Sees 2030 adj. Ebit of at least EU2.75 billion

  • Sees 2030 adj. EPS of at least EU11.50

In Milan, Ferrari shares plunged 16%, the largest decline on record, with data dating back to January 2016, when the stock first began trading. In New York, Ferrari shares fell 14%; those shares have been listed on the market since October 2015.

Back to Milan trading, shares are down 15% year-to-date, a multi-year bull run that began in 2022 now appears to be correcting.

Meanwhile, cracks began to appear among low-income consumers; now, UBS sees those cracks spreading to middle-income ones. 

. . . 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 08:05

Bank Of England Warns AI Valuations "Stretched" As Potential Data Center "Bottlenecks" Could Spark "Sharp Corrections" 

Zero Hedge -

Bank Of England Warns AI Valuations "Stretched" As Potential Data Center "Bottlenecks" Could Spark "Sharp Corrections" 

By now, readers have grasped, through several notes, how the AI bubble is inflating, primarily driven by the "circle jerk" vendor-financing scheme at the heart of the system. As for its scale, we noted last night that the AI bubble has morphed into a debt bubble as well, quietly surpassing the entire banking sector to become the largest segment of the market. And just last week, we laid out the "shocking math" showing that AI CapEx will require approximately $1 trillion in new debt within the next two years.

So far... 

The Nasdaq 100's 18% rally year-to-date, trading at 28x forward earnings versus a 10-year average of 23x, has drawn comparisons to the late-1990s dot-com bubble by AI industry leaders and some of the most notable market watchers.

To begin the week, Amazon founder and executive chair Jeff Bezos told the audience at the Italian Tech Week in Turin that AI investment might look like a bubble, it's the good kind - an industrial bubble that drives progress rather than financial destruction.  

"This is kind of an industrial bubble as opposed to financial bubbles. The ones that are industrial are not nearly as bad - they can even be good. Society benefits from those inventions," Bezos said, adding, "Investors don't usually give a team of six people a couple of billion dollars with no product, and that's happening today."

Given the mechanics surrounding the AI bubble, the Bank of England warned on Wednesday, following its most recent Financial Policy Committee meeting (Oct. 2), that AI-related valuations are "stretched." The irony, of course, is that central banks are almost always late to the game when they start warning about inflated valuations or emerging cracks in markets and economies.

"On a number of measures, equity market valuations appear stretched, particularly for technology companies focused on Artificial Intelligence (AI). This, when combined with increasing concentration within market indices, leaves equity markets particularly exposed should expectations around the impact of AI become less optimistic," the BoE wrote in the report. 

The BoE noted that "material bottlenecks to AI progress" such as "power, data, or commodity supply chains" could "also harm valuations, including for companies whose revenue expectations are derived from high levels of anticipated AI infrastructure investment," adding, "The risk of sharp corrections in asset prices remained high." 

In recent weeks, Goldman analysts identified the power grid as a "vulnerable link" at the epicenter of the energy security debate and warned it could be the next chokepoint. It's not just a lack of spare power capacity on the grid or a backlog in data centers connections to local grids; there's also the water component (for cooling data centers), which Morgan Stanley analysts recently outlined as yet another emerging issue. 

In the markets, the AI bubble has single-handedly pushed stocks to their highest valuation since the Dot-Com bubble. 

Separate from the AI valuation warning, the BoE also warned about central bank independence with President Trump's attempts to change the Federal Reserve's board, as well as his repeated criticism of Fed Chair Jerome Powell's monetary policy stance. 

At the start of the year, Bridgewater Associates founder Ray Dalio told the Financial Times that there was already a "bubble" similar to 1998 or 1999 while Greenlight Capital founder David Einhorn said recently that expenditure on AI infrastructure is "so extreme" that there is a "reasonable chance that a tremendous amount of value destruction is going to come through this cycle".

As a reminder, here is economist John Maynard Keynes' famous quote, "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent," which only suggests that with circle jerking vendor finance schemes and a full-of-government approach, this bubble can keep inflating. Yet there is an unpredictable nature of the bubble, because there could be another 'Deep Seek' scare or, as the BoE put it, "material bottlenecks to AI progress" that scares market participants. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 07:45

Surprising Surge: Trucking Spot Market Rates Climb Overnight

Zero Hedge -

Surprising Surge: Trucking Spot Market Rates Climb Overnight

By Craig Fuller, CEO of FreightWaves

There’s something happening here
What it is ain’t exactly clear
There’s a man with a gun over there
A-telling me I got to beware

That’s the song that’s playing in my head as I try to make sense of what I’m seeing in the freight market.

The spot market heat map in SONAR, which tracks sudden shifts in spot market rates, has turned extremely blue, indicating that spot rates are suddenly surging well beyond recent trends.

It’s happening all over the country, and it happened overnight. What makes this unusual is that a sharp market development such as the one we’re currently experiencing is happening without tender volumes or rejections indicating market stress.

In fact, trucking volumes are anemic, and tender rejections are sitting at 5.5%.

As we continued to investigate, our channel checks confirmed what we’ve been talking about for months: the administration’s recent immigration enforcement efforts are starting to have a significant psychological and behavioral impact on immigrant truck drivers and carriers that hire truck drivers with questionable immigration status.

In an article in the Serbian Times, an immigration lawyer warned Serbian truck drivers to stay off the roads for fear of being detained or deported, risking a permanent ban.

He says, “I advise my clients who drive trucks that even if they have a valid work permit, they should not go on the roads.” The article describes that being deported might not be the worst thing. He goes on to describe dire conditions in immigration holding cells and, because of the significant backlog of cases, that hearings may be postponed indefinitely and bail is unlikely, so they may stay behind bars for a long time.

The question on everyone’s mind in trucking is whether this is a temporary blip or the start of a spot market squeeze that could result in much higher rates and a capacity scramble.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 07:20

Macron Will Name New Prime Minister, Averting Snap Election & Further Political Turmoil 

Zero Hedge -

Macron Will Name New Prime Minister, Averting Snap Election & Further Political Turmoil 

What a wild week it's been for French politics. Let's dive right into the latest development: overnight news that President Emmanuel Macron will appoint a new prime minister by Friday evening, avoiding (for now) a snap election that could spark even more political turmoil. 

UBS analyst Aditi Samajpati updated clients with the latest: 

French President Emmanuel Macron will reportedly name a new prime minister by Friday evening, having avoided the need to call a snap election for the time being. Outgoing Premier Sebastien Lecornu told local television that sufficient progress had been made to allow work to begin on forming a new cabinet along with possibilities for a compromise in parliament.

The new PM will face significant challenges, including forming a cabinet and navigating a split parliament with three deeply antagonistic blocs, as well as the looming 2027 presidential election.

Lecornu, who resigned after less than a month in office, expects a new premier to be named rather than early legislative elections or Macron's resignation to resolve the crisis. He emphasized that the prospects for snap legislative elections had "receded" and insisted that Macron should serve out his mandate until 2027, adding, "Let's not make the French believe that it's the president who votes the budget."

There's no indication yet on who could be the new premier - unless Lecornu is reappointed, his successor will be the eighth PM of Macron's presidency since 2017. Lecornu suggested that a more technocratic government could be named, with people in the new cabinet not having "ambitions" to stand in the 2027 presidential elections. He highlighted the need for a team that decides to "roll up its sleeves and solve the country's problems until the presidential election."

Macron's path forward for any new administration is fraught with hazards, given that parliament is deeply divided among three parties with no interest in compromising, and each is highly focused on positioning itself for the presidential election in less than two years. Meanwhile, National Rally leader Marine Le Pen, a leading contender for 2027, has vowed to censure any government backed by Macron in an effort to force fresh elections. 

UBS analyst Simon Penn noted:

The bigger concern now is how long this goes on for. Most of the conversation late Wednesday wasn't actually about who would be the new PM, but rather that the rinse/repeat continues until 2027 and the presidential election. In other words, French politics and parliament is essentially in a holding pattern until Macron is required to ask the country the big question on the political slant of its next president.

Despite the turmoil, French 10-year yields fell five basis points to 3.51% on today's news, while the CAC 40 has nearly erased its losses from earlier in the week.

Reporting from earlier in the week:

Important. 

Earlier in the week, UBS analyst Penn provided clients with the three possible pathways for Macron to move forward

  1. He can try another technocrat type

  2. He can call a general election

  3. He can quit and call a full presidential election

The Bloomberg Economics team provided readers with the visualization. 

So, a new Prime Minister it is, then?

And by the way, we'll end with Macron's imploding popularity: his approval rating tumbled to a record-low 14%, according to an Oct. 7-8 Elabe poll. 

Let's not forget elsewhere...

. . . 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 06:55

10 Thursday AM Reads

The Big Picture -

My morning train WFH reads:

A “Fairly Highly Valued” Market”: The Fed Chair Opines on Stocks, but should we listen? (Musings on Markets)

A New Wall Street Trade Is Powering Gold and Hitting Currencies: Investors are pouring money into dollar alternatives like bitcoin and precious metals. (Wall Street Journal) see also Why Corporate Bonds Are on a Tear: The yield premium offered by investment-grade bonds has shrunk to an almost three-decade low. (Wall Street Journal)

How Costco, Sam’s Club, and BJ’s Won Over America: Walmart is leveraging its scale and technology to make Sam’s Club even more appealing to its loyal shoppers. Why all three warehouse-club chains stand to win. (Barron’s)

Impact of Trump tariffs is beginning to show in US consumer prices: Trade levies are starting to drive up costs for goods from cans of soup to car parts. (Financial Times)

Global renewable energy generation surpasses coal for first time: Record solar expansion and steady wind growth driving world’s shift away from fossil fuels in 2025, report finds. (Guardian)

• “You have 18 months” The real deadline isn’t when AI outsmarts us — it’s when we stop using our own minds. (The Argument)

We Finally Have Free Anti-Robocall Tools That Work: A new feature for iPhones screens calls, similar to a technology available for Android users. Here’s how to activate it. (New York Times)

Six surgeons general: It’s our duty to warn the nation about RFK Jr. We took an oath to declare dangers when we found them. We’re doing that again today. (Washington Post)

Russia Cleanses Its Spy Agencies: Something odd and largely unnoticed is happening to Russia’s spies. (Wall Street Journal)

• NASA’s Voyager 1 Revealed A Stunning Discovery At The Edge Of Our Solar System: Voyager 1, launched in 1977, has traveled farther than any spacecraft in human history. After more than four decades of silent endurance through space, it now sails beyond the orbit of the outer planets of the solar system. Its mission has transcended planetary flybys; it’s now humanity’s first direct way to explore interstellar space. NASA has used radio to talk to Voyager 1 as it stumbled upon something astonishing hiding at the farthest reaches of our solar system: a mysterious “wall of fire.” (BGR)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business this weekend with Jurrien Timmer, Director of Global Macro at Fidelity Investments, which manages $16 trillion in for 20 million clients. Timmer, a Chartered Market Technician (CMT), is part of Fidelity’s Global Asset Allocation (GAA) group, anf specializes in asset allocation and global macro strategy.

 

Top 10 S&P 500 companies by market capitalization

Source: J.P. Morgan

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

UK's Green Party Demands Abolition Of Private Landlords

Zero Hedge -

UK's Green Party Demands Abolition Of Private Landlords

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

On Sunday, the Green Party in the United Kingdom voted to “abolish” private landlords in a move that reaffirms the party as a largely socialist movement.

For some environmentalists, it is a sad hijacking of a cause by far-left elements that moves it away from its original environmental priorities.

The motion passed at the Greens’ conference in Bournemouth calls for the  “effective abolition of private landlordism.”

That would impact roughly three million people in Britain who rent out properties, including at least one high-ranking Green official, Adrian Ramsay, who is one of the Greens’ four MPs.

Ramsay insisted that he is not making a profit on his rental and would soon stop being a landlord.

The Green Party is committed to effectively eliminating private landlords through rent controls, a “land value tax,” and other means.

The move is reminiscent of Zohran Mamdani’s call to seize unoccupied luxury condos in New York and give them to the homeless. He has also called for Democratic Socialists to “seize the means of production” in America.

Ironically, this week former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo called out Mamdani for hypocrisy as a landlord of vacant valuable land in Uganda.

The Green Party motion states:

‘The private rental sector has failed, it is a vehicle for wealth extraction, funnelling money from renters to the landlord class…

This motion makes it clear that Green Party policy is to seek the effective abolition of private landlordism and to support the building of council housing.

…The Green Party believes the existence of private landlords adds no positive value to the economy or society, that the relationship between landlord and tenant is inherently and intrinsically extractive and exploitative.”

Carla Denyer, Green MP for Bristol Central, insists that the call to end private landlords as “inherently and intrinsically extractive and exploitative” does not actually mean an outright ban: “While the motion to confidence had an eye-catching name, it does not actually ‘abolish’ landlords.”

Once again, the Green Party has been steadily moving toward an openly socialist agenda, leaving many environmentalists at odds with the party.

Polls show that socialism is now more popular than capitalism in Great Britain, with a shocking increase in favor of communism.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/09/2025 - 06:30

Victor Hanson Exposes Reactionary, Neo-Confederate Portland

Zero Hedge -

Victor Hanson Exposes Reactionary, Neo-Confederate Portland

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

In blue cities across America - Portland, Oregon, especially - often violent protesters now seek to surround ICE facilities to stop federal officers from fulfilling their assigned and legal duties of arresting illegal aliens.

Some 10 million or more illegal aliens were allowed to enter the U.S. during the Biden years—illegally and thus without criminal or health checks.

Neither Antifa nor liberal urban America objected to such a flagrant disregard for the law. But both are now as intent on obstructing the legal enforcement of the law as they were earlier in favor of its illegal non-enforcement.

Much less did they care about the consequences of sending millions of foreign nationals into cities and counties where they swamped social services, spiked crime, and flooded emergency rooms and schools.

ICE has repeatedly presented data that show in its first rounds of deportations, it is concentrating on removing either criminal illegal aliens or those who have already been processed with deportation orders, somewhere between 70 and 90 percent of all current apprehensions.

No matter.

Left-wing protesters are swarming ICE headquarters in Portland to violently oppose all deportations, even those of known criminals and those who have already exhausted efforts to remain here illegally.

Why?

The Democratic Party apparat knows that the public wants both secure borders and deportations of illegal aliens. Indeed, in part, it lost an election by its open-borders advocacy.

But Democrat officials feel that if street thugs like Antifa can surround and besiege ICE facilities in Portland, Oregon, then deportations will stop. Then, a de facto amnesty will follow for millions who entered the U.S. illegally—and will soon become Democratic constituents.

As a result, they do not fully enforce the law when thugs attack federal law enforcement. Antifa and its spin-off groups favor the night, when they try to block all entries and exits of ICE vehicles and personnel, and can commit their violence with greater anonymity.

The masked rioters assault anyone in their way. They count on exemption from punishment for committing violence against federal officers through the goodwill or indifference of kindred local and state officials who hate the Trump administration more than they respect the law. An Orwellian scenario follows in which federal officers are attacked by Antifa, which in turn counts on the non-intervention of local police.

Summed up: the city of Portland’s armed officers are in a de facto proxy war with their federal counterparts—in our version of something out of 1860, on the eve of a real civil war.

Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and Oregon Governor Tina Kotek feel their constituents want open borders and thus should have the right in their own city and state to do as they please—and federal law be damned.

But by doing so, both the Democrat Party officialdom and the street armies of Antifa are on the proverbial wrong side of history.

America for almost 200 years has already decided, in formal law and court rulings, that no local or state entity can disrupt the enforcement of federal laws or usurp Washington’s powers. To do so with impunity would unravel the American nation in short order.

We know that from our own violent history. Andrew Jackson, in 1832, like Trump, threatened to send troops to stop South Carolina’s nullification of federal tariff laws.

America fought a Civil War over Confederate states’ efforts to ignore federal law and confiscate or occupy federal property within their state jurisdictions.

As late as 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace thought he could nullify federal law by using his state guard to deny black students’ enrollment in the University of Alabama—until the Kennedy administration federalized all state troopers and sent in additional federal troops.

So what we are witnessing in Portland—and elsewhere—is a neo-Confederate attempt to supersede federal law and, in reactionary fashion, invoke states’ and cities’ rights.

Oregon and Portland believe that they are more moral than the federal government and thus have a natural right to side with street mobs by both not enforcing their own laws against Antifa violence and ignoring the innate civil rights of ICE personnel.

The latter are denied freedom of movement, association, and the ability to fulfill their job duties by what has turned out to be a near city-sanctioned siege of their facilities.

The Democrats are fine with all this. They think the violence against ICE will be portrayed daily as general chaos by their allied media. Thus, the proverbial people who keep clear of the siege and its detritus will simply want all the bother to go away—and supposedly blame those enforcing, not breaking, the law. In sum, the Democratic Party is the official face of the left. Antifa provides the street shock troops, and the media serves as its propaganda arm.

So, the left-wing logic is to allow the violence and siege to continue in a “safe space” for Antifa. A strapped ICE will supposedly eventually shut down operations and move on. And any violence that occurs can be chalked up to Trump’s federal government “baiting” Portlanders.

The reigning moralistic assumption is that ceding territory to terrorists, not enforcing local and state laws, and nullifying federal statutes are all small prices to pay for the larger projection of chaos and violence that can be blamed on Trump.

Such thinking entails utter indifference to any Portlanders who live near the siege and are nightly subjected to constant disruptions, harassment, and occasional violence. Do these law-abiding residents have fewer civil rights than the lawbreaking armies of the night?

In contrast, the use of federal troops to stop the siege of ICE facilities will remind the violent protesters of the left that their neo-Confederate tactics will not work, but instead subject them to arrest and federal indictments.

Bringing in federal forces to uphold the law will also protect the rights of ICE personnel and neighborhood residents to live in peace and security and have their constitutional protections secured. Not all American citizens are Portlanders, but all Portland citizens are Americans.

In other words, both Antifa and the appeasing Oregon officials are our new neo-Confederate secessionists. They feel that their states are now autonomous entities that are still entitled to federal money but not obligated to follow federal laws.

Portland also reminds us of the recent utter incoherence of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. On the one hand, she pleads for federal dollars to restore her city’s burned-out neighborhoods due to her own incompetence and neglect, while on the other hand actively obstructs the federal government from enforcing immigration laws in her own city.

For a party that has been quick to shout “insurrection,” it is ironic that Democrats and their useful, though violent, Antifa insurrectionists are in rebellion against the federal government and its agents.

It is hard to know which is worse - the Antifa thug who nightly tries to injure a federal officer, or the sanctimonious neo-Confederate official who empowers him to keep trying?

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 19:15

"I Don't Want This On Camera": Leading Candidate For California Governor Throws Tantrum Over Simple Question

Zero Hedge -

"I Don't Want This On Camera": Leading Candidate For California Governor Throws Tantrum Over Simple Question

The leading candidate to replace Gavin Newsom in California's upcoming gubernatorial election threw a complete tantrum during an interview because she was asked how she'd appeal to the 40% of residents who voted for Trump. 

"What do you say to the 40% of California voters, who you’ll need in order to win, who voted for Trump?" asked CBS News correspondent Julie Watts in an interview recorded last month. 

Porter, flabbergasted, insisted she could win without the 40% - before getting nasty.

"I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?" Porter snapped.

"Every other candidate has answered this question," Watts replied. "This is not argumentative." 

Porter then started removing her microphone.

"I don’t want to keep doing this. I’m going to call it," she said. "I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation … And if every question, you’re going to make up a follow-up question, then we’re never going to get there."

"I don't want this on camera," Porter said later - claiming "I've never had to do this before." 

Watch:

As Not the Bee notes, Porter is a radical Dem known for promoting abortion as an inflation buster, dismissing the murder of Laken Riley, and for being an election denier (when she's the loser), and being an accused "abusive and racist boss," apparently has no idea how to be on the receiving end of an interview.

*  *  * 2-Day Emergency Survival Backpack // On Sale // Free Shipping

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 18:50

Gut Changes Persist Years After Stopping Certain Medications

Zero Hedge -

Gut Changes Persist Years After Stopping Certain Medications

Authored by Rachel Ann T. Melegrito via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The body clears medicines within hours to weeks. However, a recent study suggests that drugs you took years ago may continue to affect your gut—and the more frequently and the longer they’re used, the greater their effect.

Troyan/Shutterstock

Nearly nine out of 10 commonly used medications leave permanent changes in gut bacteria - including drugs never before linked to digestive effects, according to the study.

This holds true not only for antibiotics but also for drugs used to manage high blood pressure, anxiety, and stomach hyperacidity.

We may be underestimating the impact of common medications on gut health,” Kara Siedman, nutritionist and director of partnerships with resbiotic Nutrition, who wasn’t involved in the research, told The Epoch Times.

Your Gut Remembers

The findings extend far beyond antibiotics, which doctors already know disrupt gut bacteria. The study showed that even medications targeting human cells—including antidepressants, beta-blockers, acid reflux medicines such as omeprazole, benzodiazepines, and metformin—reshaped the gut microbial composition.

We often think of medications as acting only on human cells, but they also interact with the gut ecosystem—the microbes, the intestinal barrier, and the immune system,” said Siedman.

The study found that many drugs left lasting effects on the gut, still visible more than three years after people stopped taking them. To test whether the drugs themselves were responsible, the researchers tracked a smaller subgroup over time. In this group, starting a drug caused predictable gut shifts, and stopping it often reversed them, supporting a causal link.

Findings showed that common drugs had similar effects to antibiotics. Benzodiazepines, commonly prescribed for anxiety, changed the gut as much as certain broad-spectrum antibiotics by reducing microbial diversity. Antidepressants also left patterns similar to those seen with antibiotics.

Gut Microbes Affected

A common bacterial type that increases with drug exposure, such as antidepressants and beta-blockers, is the Clostridium family. Some of these bacterial species are linked to rare cases of infections in humans.

Benzodiazepines are linked to increases in Dorea formicigenerans and Ruminococcus torques. Dorea formicigenerans are linked with obesity and metabolic syndrome in some human studies, though it can also produce beneficial metabolites. Ruminococcus torques is a bacterium that breaks down the mucus in the gut lining and is linked to gut conditions such as Crohn’s disease, irritable bowel syndrome, and metabolic disorders when present in abundance.

Drugs used for the same condition didn’t always affect the gut in the same way. For instance, within benzodiazepines, alprazolam (Xanax) led to a greater loss of gut microbial diversity than diazepam (Valium).

Proton pump inhibitors are linked to increased levels of oral bacteria such as Streptococcus parasanguinis and Veillonella parvula, both linked to periodontal disease and dental cavities.

Perhaps most striking was the cumulative nature of these changes. People with a history of antibiotic use never fully regained the same gut diversity as those who had never taken them, regardless of how long ago their last course was prescribed.

Past use added up: higher doses and longer durations left stronger, longer-lasting shifts in the microbiome. This additive pattern was seen with benzodiazepines, steroids, and beta-blockers.

How Drugs Affect the Gut Microbiome

There are several mechanisms by which medications might affect gut bacteria.

Drugs can slow or stop the growth of some gut bacteria while letting others thrive, shifting the microbiome’s balance. Some directly kill or suppress beneficial microbes, while others alter stomach acid, influence immune responses, or weaken the gut lining.

Antidepressants can disrupt how gut bacteria make and use energy, sometimes killing them directly. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can irritate the gut lining, making it leakier and more inflamed, which changes which microbes can thrive.

Beneficial microbes make short-chain fatty acids that help calm inflammation. Elimination of these microbes can lead to gut inflammation and breakdown of the gut barrier as short-chain fatty acid levels drop.

Gut inflammation and breakdown of the gut barrier can contribute to metabolic problems such as fatty liver, insulin resistance, and possibly higher cardiovascular risk.

Microbes can bounce back after stopping a drug, especially if the gut was diverse to begin with or if the diet supports regrowth. Although some may vanish completely if wiped out and not replenished.

A 2024 review noted that recovery isn’t always complete. Even when diversity returns, the mix of bacteria can stay changed for months because some species never come back or are replaced.

Babies are highly vulnerable to gut microbial changes.

A 2022 study found that infants who were given proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for more than 400 days had a less diverse, less balanced gut microbiome—and these changes persisted even after one month of stopping the medication. The researchers concluded that longer PPI use may disrupt the microbiome more than shorter courses.

Early-life exposure to antibiotics is also linked to increased risks of metabolic and atopic disorders, as well as higher risks of allergies, asthma, and metabolic diseases later in life.

Recovery Is Personal

While drugs affect the gut in predictable ways, the extent varies widely.

“Diet is the strongest driver of microbiome health and resilience. What we eat shapes microbial diversity, fiber fermentation, and bile acid production, all of which interact with drugs,” Siedman said.

A high-fiber diet helps restore balance after antibiotic use, while a low-fiber diet can weaken the gut barrier and fuel inflammation, slowing microbiome recovery. Gut inflammation can also change how quickly drugs are absorbed, and shifts in bile acids can alter how fat-soluble drugs are processed.

A person’s baseline microbiome composition is another key factor. “Two people can take the same medication and see very different microbiome shifts and recovery times depending on how diverse or robust their gut community was to begin with,” Siedman added.

How to Protect Your Gut

For patients who require ongoing medication, Siedman suggested practical ways to build resilience and support the gut ecosystem:

  • Focus on Fiber Diversity: Eat a variety of whole grains, legumes, fruits, and vegetables to promote microbial diversity and support recovery.
  • Add Polyphenol-Rich Foods: Eat berries, drink green tea, and include cocoa to help feed beneficial bacteria and reduce inflammation.
  • Include Fermented Foods: Eat yogurt, drink kefir, and include sauerkraut and kimchi in your diet to add live microbes and compounds that nurture a healthy gut ecosystem.
  • Take Targeted Supplements: Use certain probiotics to support microbial balance. Add prebiotics (fiber that feeds good bacteria) and postbiotics (beneficial compounds produced by microbes) to strengthen the gut barrier and modulate inflammation.

*  *  * Click Pic, Buy Filter, Enjoy free shipping, Live longer *  *  *

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 18:25

Goldman's Conversation With Top Execs Reveals What's Ahead For Single-Family Rentals

Zero Hedge -

Goldman's Conversation With Top Execs Reveals What's Ahead For Single-Family Rentals

The Single-Family Rental (SFR) space has become the de facto middle-class housing market across America. With elevated 30-year mortgage rates and high home prices, affordability has collapsed, sidelining multiple generations of Americans from homeownership.

For expanded visibility into the SFR market, as well as homeownership affordability, demand fundamentals, supply dynamics, rental growth expectations, and the transaction environment, Goldman analysts hosted a private webinar on Tuesday with executives from several of the largest owners of single-family homes in the U.S, including David Todd (Managing Director in Brookfield's Real Estate group as well as CEO of Maymont Homes, Brookfield's SFR business), Chris Avallone (Amherst's CFO & Head of Merchant Banking), and Dave Feldman (Co-President of Progress Residential). 

One of the key takeaways from the webinar is that the SFR market remains resilient, driven by high homeownership costs that continue to fuel strong rental demand, particularly in the Midwest and interior Southeast, while softer conditions persist in Florida, Texas, and Phoenix. 

The executives told Goldman that tenant credit quality and occupancy remain high, at nearly 96%, with average lease terms around three years. They said rent growth is moderating, as renewal spreads average 3% to 4% and new leases soften slightly, though smaller, more affordable homes are seeing renewed demand.

Here are the top takeaways from the webinar, which were presented in bullet-point format to clients by a team of analysts led by Julien Blouin:

Demand: Still Healthy but More Market Dispersion

  • Demand: remains solid given elevated homeownership costs, which continues to benefit top and bottom of demand funnel for SFR.

  • Regional performance: relative strength in the Midwest and interior Southeast markets; market softness exists in parts of Florida, Texas, and especially Phoenix.

  • Quality of demand: SFR tenant credit and income profiles remain very strong, high quality applications, portfolio occupancy near 96%, with subdued levels of turnover.

  • Wage growth is now outpacing home-price appreciation while mortgage rates should ease somewhat, modestly improving homeownership affordability — but not enough to materially convert renters to buyers.

  • SFR continues to represent by far the most affordable way to access a home for families priced out of ownership.

Rent Trends & Leasing Dynamics: Softer New Leases But Renewals Holding up for now

  • Our panelists characterized 1H25 as normal, but with signs of moderation in operating trends in 2H25 (to differing extents).

  • Blends remain healthy mostly underpinned by renewals (~75% retention).

  • New leases softer in recent months, slightly positive as of September.

  • Renewal spreads: averaging 3–4%, consistent with low/mid-single-digit total revenue growth outlook for 2026.

  • Length of stay: >3 years on average; tenants less price-sensitive due to frictional move costs. Infill vs. outer-ring: infill portfolios (mature neighborhoods) show greater resilience and lower rent volatility. Outer-rings proving more vulnerable to supply impacts.

  • Smaller homes at lower rents rebounding the most in terms of demand, reversing prior preference for large 4–5BR homes.

  • Stronger markets: Midwest, inland parts of Southeast.

  • Weaker markets: Florida coast, Phoenix, Dallas.

Supply Environment: Managing Through BTR & Shadow Inventory

  • Favorable demand–supply imbalance still exists, but incremental supply (BTR and shadow) is giving renters more choice, softening new-lease pricing.

  • BTR pipeline: skepticism around execution and funding continuity; institutional capital flows choppier — more limited near-term threat.

  • Builder tapes: some for-sale pivoting to rental, but selective participation due to absorption dynamics.

The full note is available in the usual place for ZeroHedge Pro Subs and includes additional commentary on the capital markets and transaction environment within the SFR space.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 18:00

Consumer Sentiment Cracking Amid Gov't Shutdown; 17% Of Americans Delay Major Purchases, Survey

Zero Hedge -

Consumer Sentiment Cracking Amid Gov't Shutdown; 17% Of Americans Delay Major Purchases, Survey

The government shutdown has entered its eighth day, with Republicans and Democrats still at an impasse over a resolution. Earlier this week, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett warned that the shutdown could cost the U.S. economy $15 billion per week. If it drags on for several more weeks, the economic disruption could become far more widespread.

Before consumers make decisions, their sentiment is usually affected. To gauge the current sentiment impact of the shutdown, real estate company Redfin conducted a survey last Friday - just several days into the shutdown - that found 17% of respondents are delaying major purchases, such as a home or vehicle, because of the political turmoil in Washington, D.C.

Roughly one in six (17%) Americans are delaying a major purchase like a home or car because of the federal government shutdown, according to a new Redfin survey. Another 7% are canceling plans for a major purchase altogether. The majority of Americans (65%) said the government shutdown has no impact on their purchasing plans.

This is according to a Redfin-commissioned survey conducted by Ipsos on October 3, 2025. The nationally representative survey was fielded to 1,005 U.S. residents. The combined results have a credibility interval of +/- 3.8 percentage points.

The report continued: 

Some people are canceling or delaying big purchases because they're directly impacted by the government shutdown; i.e. they're a federal government employee or contractor who is not currently getting paid, and they may be worried about getting laid off. But most Americans aren't in that position. People whose incomes aren't directly dependent on the federal government's budget may be rethinking a major purchase because the shutdown is one more in a long line of events making Americans feel unstable about their finances.

Adding to the economic gloom of the shutdown, an Axios report on Tuesday, citing a draft White House memo, said the 750,000 furloughed federal employees aren't guaranteed compensation for their forced time off

Redfin Chief Economist Daryl Fairweather noted:

"A government shutdown doesn't just stop paychecks for some federal employees–it shakes the financial confidence of Americans. People across the country are taking in the news and thinking, 'we've faced inflation, tariffs, job losses, a volatile stock market, and now a government shutdown–what's next?' It's understandable that some people are reconsidering buying a home or a car when the economy feels uncertain."

Redfin data was not broken down by geographical location, which would have been helpful given that 15.12% of all federal civilian employees, according to OPM, are located in the D.C.–MD–VA–WV metro area.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 17:20

78% Of Americans Favor Deportation Of Criminal Illegal Immigrants; New Poll Finds

Zero Hedge -

78% Of Americans Favor Deportation Of Criminal Illegal Immigrants; New Poll Finds

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

Nearly 80 percent of Americans favor the deportation of immigrants who are in the United States illegally and have committed crimes, and a clear majority favor deporting all immigrants who are here illegally, according to a new poll.

President Trump’s policy of deporting criminal illegal aliens is his second most popular policy according to the Harvard Caps/Harris poll, just under lowering prescription drug prices for Medicare recipients and low income patients.

The survey was conducted online within the United States on October 1-2, amid loud and often violent left-wing protests outside of ICE facilities in cities like Portland and Chicago.

The vast majority of respondents—78 percent—said they favored “deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have committed crimes.”

Even among Democrats, 69 percent said they favored the policy, while 77 percent of independents and  87 percent of Republicans do.

“Deporting all immigrants who are here illegally” garnered 56 percent support among all respondents.

The majority of Republicans and Independents favor the policy by 76 percent and 54 percent respectively, while only 36 percent of Democrats do.

“President Trump’s efforts to Make America Safe Again are very popular!” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt commented on X, Tuesday, in response to the poll.

The surprising results come as Democrat politicians in blue cities and states continue to resist the president’s deportation efforts, with far-left Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on Monday signing an executive order designating “ICE-Free Zones,” and governors JB Pritsker  and Gavin Newsom ) suing the Trump administration to block National Guard deployments in Illinois and California.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 17:00

78% Of Americans Favor Deportation Of Criminal Illegal Immigrants; New Poll Finds

Zero Hedge -

78% Of Americans Favor Deportation Of Criminal Illegal Immigrants; New Poll Finds

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

Nearly 80 percent of Americans favor the deportation of immigrants who are in the United States illegally and have committed crimes, and a clear majority favor deporting all immigrants who are here illegally, according to a new poll.

President Trump’s policy of deporting criminal illegal aliens is his second most popular policy according to the Harvard Caps/Harris poll, just under lowering prescription drug prices for Medicare recipients and low income patients.

The survey was conducted online within the United States on October 1-2, amid loud and often violent left-wing protests outside of ICE facilities in cities like Portland and Chicago.

The vast majority of respondents—78 percent—said they favored “deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have committed crimes.”

Even among Democrats, 69 percent said they favored the policy, while 77 percent of independents and  87 percent of Republicans do.

“Deporting all immigrants who are here illegally” garnered 56 percent support among all respondents.

The majority of Republicans and Independents favor the policy by 76 percent and 54 percent respectively, while only 36 percent of Democrats do.

“President Trump’s efforts to Make America Safe Again are very popular!” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt commented on X, Tuesday, in response to the poll.

The surprising results come as Democrat politicians in blue cities and states continue to resist the president’s deportation efforts, with far-left Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on Monday signing an executive order designating “ICE-Free Zones,” and governors JB Pritsker  and Gavin Newsom ) suing the Trump administration to block National Guard deployments in Illinois and California.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 17:00

Washington Burns Through $34BN Backing Israel In Post-Oct.7 Wars: Brown University

Zero Hedge -

Washington Burns Through $34BN Backing Israel In Post-Oct.7 Wars: Brown University

A new study has tried to assess the total amount the United States has spent on military aid to Israel since the Oct.7, 2023 Hamas terror attack.

The US has provided Israel with $21.7 billion since the start of the Gaza War, policy analyst and senior Quincy Institute research fellow William D. Hartung wrote in a paper for the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University.

Image source: USAF

"This figure does not include the tens of billions of dollars in arms sales agreements that have been committed for weapons and services that will be paid for and delivered in the years to come," the paper, which is part of the "Cost of War" project, reads. 

And adding significantly in US costs was defending the Red Sea against attacks out of Yemen, which were more significant during the first year of conflict, Washington has further spent between $9.65 and $12.07 billion. This figure includes operations in "the wider region sparked by or in support of Israeli military operations" since Oct.7.

The conflict with Iran in June was a big one as well, where hundreds of US anti-air and defensive missiles were rapidly expended as inbound Iranian drones and ballistic missiles pummeled Tel Aviv and other locations in retaliation for the 'surprise' Israeli attack which started it all.

Adding all of these figures, the total stands at between $31.35 and $33.77 billion in "two years of post-10/7 wars" - the fresh analysis concludes.

The bulk of the cost has involved the US providing Israel with tens of thousands of bombs and other weaponry. While this trend is nothing "new" - it does underscore that Israel might quickly find itself in big trouble without its defense being propped up by Washington.

This trend was highlighted in an awkward portion of a Tucker Carlson interview with Matt Walsh:

Among the latest in Trump-approved arms deals, last month $6 billion arms for Israel was announced which will be paid for with US military aid.

This includes, as the WSJ reported at the time, $3.8 billion for 30 AH-64 Apache helicopters and $1.9 billion deal for 3,250 infantry assault vehicles.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 16:40

Washington Burns Through $34BN Backing Israel In Post-Oct.7 Wars: Brown University

Zero Hedge -

Washington Burns Through $34BN Backing Israel In Post-Oct.7 Wars: Brown University

A new study has tried to assess the total amount the United States has spent on military aid to Israel since the Oct.7, 2023 Hamas terror attack.

The US has provided Israel with $21.7 billion since the start of the Gaza War, policy analyst and senior Quincy Institute research fellow William D. Hartung wrote in a paper for the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University.

Image source: USAF

"This figure does not include the tens of billions of dollars in arms sales agreements that have been committed for weapons and services that will be paid for and delivered in the years to come," the paper, which is part of the "Cost of War" project, reads. 

And adding significantly in US costs was defending the Red Sea against attacks out of Yemen, which were more significant during the first year of conflict, Washington has further spent between $9.65 and $12.07 billion. This figure includes operations in "the wider region sparked by or in support of Israeli military operations" since Oct.7.

The conflict with Iran in June was a big one as well, where hundreds of US anti-air and defensive missiles were rapidly expended as inbound Iranian drones and ballistic missiles pummeled Tel Aviv and other locations in retaliation for the 'surprise' Israeli attack which started it all.

Adding all of these figures, the total stands at between $31.35 and $33.77 billion in "two years of post-10/7 wars" - the fresh analysis concludes.

The bulk of the cost has involved the US providing Israel with tens of thousands of bombs and other weaponry. While this trend is nothing "new" - it does underscore that Israel might quickly find itself in big trouble without its defense being propped up by Washington.

This trend was highlighted in an awkward portion of a Tucker Carlson interview with Matt Walsh:

Among the latest in Trump-approved arms deals, last month $6 billion arms for Israel was announced which will be paid for with US military aid.

This includes, as the WSJ reported at the time, $3.8 billion for 30 AH-64 Apache helicopters and $1.9 billion deal for 3,250 infantry assault vehicles.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 16:40

Only 48% Of US Adults Under The Age Of 30 Have A Full-Time Job

Zero Hedge -

Only 48% Of US Adults Under The Age Of 30 Have A Full-Time Job

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

I am so glad that I am not a young adult looking for a job in this very difficult economic environment.  

Every month, federal bureaucrats tell us that the unemployment rate in this country is low, but at this point everyone knows that the numbers that they give us are fake.  The reality of the matter is that it is now “the toughest time in years” to find a good job in the United States, and that is particularly true for our young people.

According to Mark Mitchell, a Rasmussen Reports survey that will soon be released will show that only 48 percent of U.S. adults under the age of 30 currently have a full-time job…

As the results of the last presidential election demonstrated, Rasmussen is typically very accurate.

So this is an extremely alarming development.

Vast numbers of our young adults are working low-paying part-time jobs right now because that is all they can get.

But as the employment market gets even tighter, there will even be intense competition for those jobs.

Day after day, large companies are slashing more high-paying positions.  For example, Exxon Mobil just announced that it will be eliminating 2,000 jobs

Oil giant Exxon Mobil is preparing to cut thousands of jobs worldwide in a corporate reshuffling.

A spokesperson for Exxon confirmed to Barron’s on Tuesday that the company plans to cut 2,000 jobs, representing 3% to 4% of the energy company’s global workforce.

But that is nothing compared to what has been going on in the tech industry.

Through September 15th, big tech companies had laid off 166,000 employees so far this year.

Sadly, I expect to see the pace of layoffs accelerate in the months ahead because so many industries are deeply troubled at this moment.

In recent days, we have been getting some extremely alarming warning signs from the auto industry

The warning signs are stacking up. First Brands, a manufacturer of filters, brakes, wipers, and lighting systems, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Sunday night.

Its collapse comes just two weeks after subprime auto lender Tricolor Holdings went bankrupt and shut down, and follows June’s Chapter 11 filing by Marelli, a supplier for Nissan and Chrysler.

Experts told the Daily Mail that these bankruptcies are another part of an auto industry flashing danger signals that could spill into the broader economy.

I have said this before, but I will say it again.

If you have a job that you highly value, hold on to it as tightly as you can, because finding a new job would not be easy.

Concerns about our rapidly deteriorating employment market caused U.S. consumer confidence to fall “sharply” this month…

Consumer confidence fell sharply in September on growing worries about the labor market.

The consumer-confidence index dropped to 94.2 in September from a revised 97.8 in the prior month, the Conference Board said Tuesday. This is the lowest level since April.

Nobody can deny which way things are going.

And now on top of everything else we could have an extended government shutdown on our hands

The federal government will likely shut down Oct. 1 after President Donald Trump and congressional leaders failed to reach a funding compromise on Sept. 30. The partial shutdown will likely start at midnight on Oct. 1.

The federal government will run out of money at the end of the fiscal year, unless members of Congress overcome partisan differences and agree to pass a funding bill, USA TODAY reported.

The federal government has closed down 21 times, with a total of 161 days since 1976. The pending shutdown primarily concerns health care spending.

This is not going to be good for the economy at all.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, it is being projected that approximately three-quarters of a million federal employees will temporarily be “furloughed” for the duration of the shutdown…

The Congressional Budget Office estimated on Tuesday that about 750,000 federal employees could be furloughed under a government shutdown, and the total daily cost of their compensation would be around $400 million. Furloughed employees receive back pay at the end of shutdowns.

The analysis came in a letter to Sen. Joni Ernst, an Iowa Republican who requested the figures. CBO noted that the number of furloughed employees could “vary by the day” due to some agencies opting to furlough more employees if a shutdown drags on, while others could bring back employees who were initially furloughed.

Of course any federal employees that are furloughed will return to their jobs once the shutdown ends.

But the same thing will not be true for approximately 100,000 federal workers that will be quitting their jobs this week as part of the Trump administration’s “deferred resignation program”…

The Trump administration is set to oversee the largest mass resignation in US history on Tuesday, with more than 100,000 federal workers set to formally quit as part of the latest wave of its deferred resignation program.

With Congress facing a deadline of Tuesday to authorize more funding or spark a government shutdown, the White House has also ordered federal agencies to draw up plans for large-scale firings of workers if the partisan fight fails to yield a deal.

So now the millions of Americans that are already searching for work will have a lot more competition for a steadily dwindling number of high-paying job opportunities.

As I have discussed in previous articles, there are some people that have applied for hundreds of jobs in recent months without any success at all.

In fact, one 64-year-old man that has decades of experience in accounting has been getting up at 3 AM in the morning to work on his job search, but after many months he hasn’t had any luck.

If you visit YouTube or TikTok right now, you can find thousands of videos of people complaining about the economy.

As I have carefully documented, the U.S. economy has been moving in the wrong direction for many, many years, and now our economic slide threatens to become an economic avalanche.

Of course our economic problems are accelerating at a time when our world is facing one unprecedented crisis after another.

I am extremely concerned about the months directly ahead of us.

Yes, conditions are not good now, but the truth is that what we are currently experiencing is not even worth comparing to what is eventually coming.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 16:20

At the Money: Farmland investing

The Big Picture -

 

 

At The Money: with Brandon Zick, Ceres Farmland Fund(October 8, 2025)

 

Full transcript below.

~~~

About this week’s guest:

Brandon Zick is Chief Investment Officer of Ceres Farmland Fund (now part of Wisdom Tree); the fund owns and manages about $2 billion in agricultural land assets

For more info, see:

Professional Bio

Masters in Business (coming soon!)

LinkedIn

~~~

 

Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple PodcastsYouTubeSpotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT:

Barry Ritholtz:  Have you ever thought about investing in farmland? Real assets have become increasingly popular, primarily accessed through alternative investments. Like private equity funds. Farmland has seen broad, non-correlated gains, and they show little signs of slowing down. After all, they ain’t making any more land.

I’m Barry Ritholtz, and on today’s edition of At the Money, we’re gonna discuss investing in farmland. To help us unpack all of this and what it means for your portfolio, let’s speak with Brandon Zick. He’s Chief Investment Officer of Ceres Farmland Fund, managing about $2 billion in ag assets. By the time you hear this, Ceres will have closed their sale to Wisdom Tree, where they’re going continue operating as an independent agriculture investing firms. And full disclosure, I’m also an investor in CS through my own personal investing.

So, Brandon, let’s just start with a basic question. What makes farmland a compelling addition? To any investment portfolio compared to other real estate assets.

Brandon Zick: Thanks Barry and farmland. It provides a lot of, uh, a lot of different things that help in a portfolio. So farmland will generate a good amount of income. Uh, it’s positively correlated with inflation and it’s also non-correlated with other things in your portfolio and becomes a diversifier and it’s a capital appreciating asset. It’s not a depreciation play,

Barry Ritholtz: So yield capital appreciation. And an inflation hedge.

Brandon Zick: That’s correct. Yeah. And that’s why investors have been investing in farmland for a long time, but it’s now becoming more, uh, broad based to the public markets.

Barry Ritholtz: So let’s talk about that historical pattern. If, if there’s rent and yields, is this potentially, if. Fixed income substitute, do dividends get paid out to investors?

Brandon Zick: Yeah, that’s the way that a lot of people look at it. It’s uh, the annual income could be paid off as a dividend. So you do see some public REITs and private REITs that are structured that way that would force that dividend out. Uh, but you can also just continue to reinvest as well. And you have that capital appreciation.

And if you think back over the last 70 years and look at data from the Chicago Fed, you’ll see that long-term appreciations averaged about 6% annualized, and the components of that are really just inflation plus gains in productivity. Because farms, these are living beasts where they’re actually growing crops every year, and, improvements in technology can help crop yields and increase the bottom line, you see a number of those benefits fall to the landowner.

Barry Ritholtz: So you guys have scaled up to $2 billion in farmland investing. How do you identify and source attractive farmland opportunities? What’s the current market like?

Brandon Zick: So there’s a number of ways to buy farms. There are public auctions that exist. They’re very localized, and we’ll attend two to 300 of those a year. But the majority of farmland is done through private transactions. And, and these aren’t listings you don’t see for sale signs on farms?

Barry Ritholtz: There’s no Zillow for agriculture?

Brandon Zick: Not yet. At least. To, uh, there are people trying to do something like that, but there are, there are ways to source farms kind of off market. And we do all of that through our farm tenant network. Even though I grew up on a family farm, we’re not operating the farms ourselves, we’re renting the properties to active family farmers. All of those farmers own ground. They rent land from us, but they rent a real large preponderance of their acres from other people.

And those other people are usually not institutional investors. They’re estates, trusts, non-farming heirs, people who, after two or three generations, will likely sell the land. And so we use our tenant network or our farmer network to try to source some of those opportunities privately.

Barry Ritholtz: You guys mostly invest in the us What regions or sectors do you find most attractive?

Barry Ritholtz: We’re the US only. Uh, our mandate is really anywhere. We invest in 12 states, but about two thirds of our acres are located in Indiana and Michigan, and almost 90% of our acres are in the Great Lake States. Add in Illinois, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Ohio, and Western New York. We think that’s our sweet spot because there’s fantastic market for, rental with farmers. It’s highly competitive. It’s very high quality soils, which are great for growing crops. We also have a lot of water resources, both underground and at rains when you’re trying to grow a crop. And these are commodities, so low cost producer winds and being closer to the population centers of the East coast, where all of these crops generally move is a huge benefit as well.

Barry Ritholtz: You mentioned inflation earlier. How does inflation and just generally macroeconomic trends affect farmland, values and investor interest?

Brandon Zick: Farmland is positively correlated with inflation, and that comes from a few in a few different ways. So, um, you know, clearly crop prices can increase and you know, that’s one of the bigger things that can help drive revenue on farms is increase in crop prices, crop yields.

But over time, farmland has a number of different uses. So whether it’s for development or other types of things, on top of just your typical farmland, you’ll see that increased value over time. So even with a booming economy, you can see farmland value is increasing as well, even if the actual ag production on that farm is not increasing.

Barry Ritholtz: So let’s talk about those other opportunities briefly. Mineral rights easements. You mentioned hunting, uh, when we were chatting about this earlier. Um, even data warehouse and ais are looking for property in those spaces. How, how significant. Um, add-ons are those to basic value of farms?

Brandon Zick: There’s really two different groups I would put that in. You can have, some of the ancillary income, so like harvesting, select timber on farms. Typically, when you’re buying a property, it’s not a hundred percent tillable. And even if it were to be a hundred percent tillable. And growing crops, there are off seasons and you want to continue to manage those properties.

We lease out farms for hunting. We harvest select timber. We like oil and gas rights or other types of minerals that can be incremental. We’ve had wind turbines on properties and those are all kind of incremental to your farm value.

Then there are other things like solar, where you’re taking the majority of the farm to convert it, and in that case, you may have a 30-year lease inflation-hedged income, of course, but the income is going to be anywhere from three to five times the farm income. So you could be generating 15 to 20% a year in gross income off of your, over your cost basis for solar.

And then there are, uh, other opportunities when you own real estate. When you own dirt, there’s optionalities, to your point around concert or around easements. So easements can be conservation easements, which we don’t really do much of. But they can also be easements for running fiber, for running power. And there’s a lot of, um, natural gas. There’s a lot of opportunity there. And then you can see for manufacturing, you can sell properties for that, for multiples of farmland value.

And now in the Midwest, we’re seeing a huge demand for data center development. And that’s anywhere from 8 to 20 times farmland value. Because when they identify a site that has great power resources, great water, hopefully few neighbors; It has fiber there. There’s a lot of ways to be able to you know, build these things that then. They’re gonna be willing to pay a strong price.

Barry Ritholtz: And this administration has been urging the, uh, owners of these, or builders of these to focus in the us. They’re not comfortable with the servers overseas, even if it’s cheaper to operate.

Brandon Zick: That’s definitely an issue that’s out there, and you really need to be within the US in areas where there’s capacity on the grid. You certainly need, favorable admin or favorable government in all these areas to be able to do it as well.

You will see a saturation in certain spots that then they have to move to others. So, uh, some of the largest data center campuses in the US or outside of Chicago and Columbus, Ohio, you don’t see much new development going on there because of lack of power, oversaturation. So we’re seeing much more demand in places where we have a big footprint like Indiana, Michigan, parts of Kentucky, parts of upstate New York.

Barry Ritholtz: So what are the risks unique to farmland investing? How much of this is climate change and weather, water access, and just government regulation and, and NIMBYism. What, what do you have to think about when you’re considering a risky business.

Brandon Zick: When you think of the climate side, those are the traditional risks to farmland. So droughts and floods and things like that. So we prefer to invest in areas where you have that natural rainfall, you have strong soils, good drainage. You don’t buy farms right next to big rivers, because they can flood.

And then as you think over time, okay, there’s climate change. Is there a warming happening? Is the grain belt moving farther north? So our position around the Great Lakes, we think mutes a lot of that risk.

Barry Ritholtz: In other words, this is an area that’s only gonna become more attractive for farming, not less.

Brandon Zick: That’s right. If the Great Lakes region is running outta water, then everyone else already did. So it’s uh, it’s an interesting dynamic. And so that’s where we focus our investment. But there’s farmland all across the US that has all different types of values. Different ways to manage risk.

In farmland you can do that through implementation of drainage structures. You can do it through irrigation to try to be able to have water when others don’t. So there are ways to mitigate some risk there.

To your other point about regulation. I mean the history of the US is agriculture, so there are a lot of regions agriculture’s encouraged and, development always brings pressure.

So when you think about what are the issues in farmland that farmers face today, it’s development pressure, it’s labor pressure. Input cost and things that come in. So if you’re in areas like California, where we don’t invest, there is a lot more regulation around water, around labor that makes it more difficult to be an operator when you’re growing a commodity crop.

There are places that we move away from or we don’t invest in generally. I’m not saying we never would, but we haven’t yet because we just don’t think it’s an attractive area.

Brandon Zick: Let’s talk about California for a second. Every time I’m on the West Coast. I marvel at how local and fresh the food is. Avocados are everywhere. The tomatoes are wonderful. They have a lot of really, good local crops.

But what I’m hearing from you is California may not be an attractive. Um, agricultural investment area. Is that taxes, is that regulation, is that water availability? What are the challenges of farmland in California?

Brandon Zick: Those local crops that are going to local markets, the produce you can get in California is second to none. I would agree with that. That’s not a scalable, large business from our standpoint. Now, while there are some very large owners of farmland that produce the California cutie oranges, the big pistachio growers and almond growers, they’re all large corporate groups that this is the only spot to grow that – the avocado. That makes sense.

But from the row crop standpoint, there’s a lot of water being used to grow crops that you kind of have this misalignment of incentives longer term around use it or lose it. Strategies around water. So you’ll see a lot of cotton and rice grown in California, which I would probably say is not where you should be growing that and using that water.

We look at regulation, it’s coming everywhere around water, because water will be, the next big battle that’s out there. Restriction is gonna come right after regulation. As things get restricted, we think it’s more prudent to be in areas where there’s an abundance of water or an aquifer recharge, as opposed to California where you have no new, infrastructure being built to capture water. No new reservoirs.

Ritholtz: What about desalination? You would think there’s the Pacific Ocean adjacent. They should have all the water they want.

Brandon Zick: Well for municipal that actually might make sense at some point. I mean, the cost is significant. The energy costs are significant as those costs come down for the highest and best use of water municipal, that would be the right answer.

And industrial agriculture is a low value use of water. It doesn’t mean in areas like California that they don’t have senior water rights. Agriculture actually does have senior water rights in parts of California and Arizona because the farmers were the first to settle out there.

So they’re actually ahead of cities in Arizona. Farmers are ahead of cities like Phoenix in terms of where they stack

Barry Ritholtz: And hence the water. Issues in places like New Mexico and Arizona. That’s right.

Brandon Zick: And, then you just have this, the actual climate is not, it’s not recharging aquifers. And if you’re not gonna build infrastructure to, um, to take advantage of when it does rain, then that’s a, that’s an area that we don’t find an attractive investment opportunity.

Barry Ritholtz: Let, let me ask another, California investing. Farm and land question vineyards, are these an investible asset or is that essentially a sort of vanity project that all these separate vineyards are running?

Brandon Zick: That’s an interesting question because, um, you know, wine consumption’s gone way down. And the same for craft beer. People have moved a non-alcoholic, they’ve moved to seltzers, High Noons, etc. So from that standpoint, it’s a little challenged on the macro level

The idea of investing in vineyards. Actually one of my brothers went to Cornell and he ran vineyards in California and other parts of the country. And he would tell you it’s just very difficult with labor. You have to be able to sell the bottles for a very high price. If you’re just producing grapes and then selling ’em to someone else that’s selling the retail product, that’s a difficult business to be in. So we don’t get excited about investing in vineyards.

Although in Michigan we do have one juice grape farm, and I think Welch’s will continue to produce grape juice for a while.

Barry Ritholtz: As a investor in farmland, how do you balance the two different forms of,  gains – annual income from rent and crops versus just long-term appreciation of the underlying land?

Brandon Zick: That’s really the benefit of farmland. If we look at our return series over time in areas of strong commodity prices. You tend to have much higher land appreciation and then an area in cycles. The parts of the cycle with low commodity prices, income comprises a bigger portion of your return.

And that high income actually mutes volatility over time because you’re gonna generate that 4 or 5% income every year. And that can really across cycles dampen the volatility you might see from changes in commodity prices.

Now, you would think if commodity prices are changing, your rents are materially changing. All of our leases – we like multi-year leases that are negotiated kind of three years at a time. So even if commodity prices are moving down, our rents aren’t really moving down, or only a portion would be negotiated down. And then as they go up, we try to build a call option into the lease that we can benefit somewhat along the way.

Barry Ritholtz: Final question, what are the most significant challenges emerging in farmland investing looking forward?

Brandon Zick: I think there’s gonna be a lot more competition because historically there really hasn’t been much institutional investment in this space. Only about 3% of US farmland is institutionally owned. And some of that is weighted much more heavily toward permanent crops like vineyards or orchards, areas of the country where you can put larger, dollar amounts to work. So the southeast or the west.

But I think a lot of people are identifying farmland as a great asset, especially for long term oriented investors. This is an asset you can hold for 30, 40, 50 years with some of that optionality around Solar, Wind, timber, even selling into manufacturing or data center construction. Infrastructure funds should have a lot of interest in this because it’s a long-term asset you can pair with these long-term goals and liabilities.

Barry Ritholtz: Really, really fascinating.

So to wrap up, if you’re looking for a non-correlated investment class, an alternative that’s a little different than. Multifamily or office space or other traditional real estate investing, consider farmland. You get regular income appreciation of the underlying land, and you’re somewhat hedged against rising prices and inflation.

I’m Barry Ritholtz, you’ve been listening to At the Money On Bloomberg Radio.

 

 

 

~~~

Find our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.

 

 

 

The post At the Money: Farmland investing appeared first on The Big Picture.

FOMC Minutes Signal Dovish Policy Tilt, But 'Majority' Fear Inflation Upside Risks

Zero Hedge -

FOMC Minutes Signal Dovish Policy Tilt, But 'Majority' Fear Inflation Upside Risks

Since the last FOMC meeting (when The fed cut rates by 25bps with one dissent for 50bps on Sept 17th), gold has gone to the moon, stocks are higher (as is the dollar) while bonds are down modestly...

Source: Bloomberg

As a reminder, at his post-meeting press conference, Chair Powell characterized the rate cut as a risk management decision, responding to meaningful downside risks to the labor market, but stressed that he does not feel the need to move quickly on rates.

Despite the lack of data (due to the government shutdown), the labor market is cooling, and now policymakers are turning their attention to that side of the mandate (though we note that housing data saw a huge upside surprise while soft survey data since the FOMC meeting has weakened)...

Powell said that moving rates down slightly supports a more neutral policy stance and balances risks to employment and inflation. 

The government shutdown is seen as complicating the Fed's data-dependent policy approach, with key employment and inflation releases (including weekly jobless claims, September payrolls, and CPI reports) delayed; analysts say this could cloud judgment for the October FOMC meeting, increasing uncertainty over further rate cuts amid the Committee's divided views on inflation, GDP growth, and labor market resilience.

Interestingly, the odds of a 25bps cut in Oct (29th) has risen from 75% to 95% since the last FOMC meeting while the odds of an additional cut in December has slipped to just above 80%...

Source: Bloomberg

The Fed Chair emphasized a meeting-by-meeting approach, guided by incoming data, and noted that markets are pricing in a path of cuts, but the Fed is focused on the data rather than market expectations. Current market expectations are for 44bps of cuts in 2025 (unchanged since the meeting) and 63bps of cuts in 2026 (hawkishly lower than the 73bps at the meeting).

Powell has spoken again after the FOMC meeting and said the Committee will continue balancing high inflation risks against a slowing job market in upcoming rate decisions, maintaining flexibility rather than a preset path.

So, what does The Fed want us to know it was thinking during the meeting?

Almost all participants supported 25bps cut to Fed funds rate at the September meeting.

“Most judged that it likely would be appropriate to ease policy further over the remainder of this year,” according to minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee’s Sept. 16-17 meeting.

One participant preferred a 50bps rate cut at last month’s meeting.

Some noted financial conditions suggested policy may not be particularly restrictive, those participants judged a cautious approach to future policy was warranted.

A few participants stated there was merit in keeping the federal funds rate unchanged at this meeting or that they could have supported such a decision,” the minutes said.

"Around half" of Fed officials saw another two interest rate cuts by the end of 2025 (which we already knew from the Dot Plot).

Most participants judged the downside risks to employment had increased, upside risks to inflation had either diminished or not increased.

The record of the meeting also showed “a majority of participants emphasized upside risks to their outlooks for inflation.”

A few participants noted the standing Repo facility would help keep the Fed funds rate in the target range and ensure money market pressures would not disrupt ongoing quantitative tightening.

Fed staff revised up the GDP growth projection for 2025 through 2028.

Equity prices continued to rise over the intermeeting period and stood very close to record highs despite the recent weaker-than-expected employment reports.

A few participants commented that the agricultural sector continued to face headwinds because of low crop prices and high input costs.

Read the full minutes below:

Tyler Durden Wed, 10/08/2025 - 13:46

Pages