Zero Hedge

70% Of All Crypto 'Wrench Attacks' Happen In France: Report

70% Of All Crypto 'Wrench Attacks' Happen In France: Report

About 70% of all wrench attacks, physical attacks against crypto holders and their families, carried out in an attempt to steal digital assets, occur in France, according to Bitcoin journalist Joe Nakamoto. 

There have been 41 crypto-related kidnappings in France so far in 2026, Nakamoto said, or about one attack every two and a half days, he added. 

As CoinTelegraph's Vince Quill reports, Nakamoto attributed the rise in wrench attacks to know-your-customer data collection, which is stored in centralized servers that were compromised in several high-profile data leaks, including the 2020 leak of hardware wallet provider Ledger’s customer data.

That data leak disclosed the identities, home addresses and emails of more than 270,000 customers worldwide, he added. Jameson Lopp, the CEO of crypto wallet and key management company Casa, said:

“France is the canary in the coal mine, demonstrating how financial regulations create a surveillance apparatus that causes direct harm to bitcoin holders.”

An overview of wrench attacks in France so far in 2026. Source: Joe Nakamoto

Opposition to know-your-customer data collection is mounting inside the crypto and Bitcoin communities, as digital asset holders continue to be targeted with physical attacks and kidnappings, prompting a need for increased security measures.

Don’t become a target: Bitcoiners offer advice to safeguard against attacks

The attacks are typically orchestrated by criminals living abroad, who contract young people living in France to carry out the physical attacks, Nakamoto said.

Users can stay safe by using crypto custody services that offer security features like a pre-agreed-upon word or phrase that lets a custodial or key management company know the holder is being actively attacked.

A database of known wrench attacks. Source: GitHub

The company can then freeze the assets, making sure they are not accessed by the attackers, and can even alert law enforcement authorities, he said.

He also suggested keeping a “decoy” crypto wallet with a small amount of funds to hand over to criminals in the event of an attack. 

Finally, crypto holders should keep a low profile and not discuss crypto topics online or make it public knowledge that they hold digital assets, he added.

At least 88 individuals have been arrested in connection with crypto wrench attacks in France, according to Vanessa Perrée, the country’s national prosecutor for organized crime.

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/25/2026 - 04:35

"The World Is Losing Trust": Foreign Investment In Germany Plunges To Lowest Level Since 2009

"The World Is Losing Trust": Foreign Investment In Germany Plunges To Lowest Level Since 2009

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Foreign companies are continuing to shy away from investing in Germany, with the number of new projects falling last year to its lowest level since 2009, representing an eighth consecutive annual decline.

An analysis by the auditing and consulting firm EY, reported by the German Press Agency, found that foreign investors announced 548 new projects in Germany in 2025. That was 10 percent fewer than the year before.

Henrik Ahlers, the head of EY in Germany, said the figures were a “warning sign for Germany as a business location. Germany is falling behind, and other European locations are developing significantly better.”

He said Germany has talked for years about the need for reform, but has done too little, while other countries have made government services more digital, simplified their tax systems, and made it easier for companies to do business.

“In Germany, high taxes, high labor costs, expensive energy, and at the same time, paralyzing bureaucracy are stifling investment,” Ahlers noted.

“Germany’s inability to reform has now become known worldwide. Unfortunately, little remains of its image as a strong, high-quality location and an economic rock in turbulent times,” he added.

The fall in investment comes at a difficult time for the German economy. Last month, the Halle Institute for Economic Research said company bankruptcies in Germany had reached their highest level since 2005.

The institute recorded 4,573 bankruptcies among partnerships and corporations in the first three months of the year. That was higher than the level seen during the 2009 financial crisis.

The last time the figure was higher was in the third quarter of 2005, when 4,771 bankruptcies were recorded.

The rise was especially sharp in March, when bankruptcies were 71 percent above the average for the same month between 2016 and 2019.

Germany’s industrial sector is also under pressureA Reuters report last August said 245,500 industrial jobs had been lost in Germany since 2019, before the coronavirus crisis.

Volkswagen has become one of the clearest examples of the problems facing German industry. The carmaker plans to cut around 50,000 jobs in Germany by 2030 after reporting a sharp fall in profits.

Its net profit fell 44 percent in 2025 to €6.9 billion, the lowest level since the fallout from the emissions scandal. Revenue was almost unchanged at just under €322 billion, while global deliveries slipped slightly to just under 9 million vehicles.

Volkswagen blamed the fall in profit on problems at Porsche AG, U.S. import tariffs, and the cost of restructuring the business. Porsche’s operating profit fell from more than €5 billion to just €90 million in a year.

Volkswagen finance chief Arno Antlitz said the company’s current level of profit was not good enough, explaining the drop had been “shaped by geopolitical tensions, tariffs, and intense competitive pressure” but noting that the company’s current operating margin was “not sufficient in the long run.”

Across wider Europe, EY said foreign investors announced 5,026 new projects last year, down 7 percent from the year before.

France remained in first place with 852 projects, followed by the United Kingdom with 730. Germany was third.

AfD co-leader Alice Weidel said the figures showed that international confidence in Germany was falling.

“The world is losing trust: Foreign companies are investing less and less in Germany,” she wrote on X. “In 2025, the number of investments fell by 10% to the lowest level since 2009. Germany can no longer afford the reform refusal of the Black-Red coalition!”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/25/2026 - 04:00

Shurk: Prominent Democrats Must Go To Prison

Shurk: Prominent Democrats Must Go To Prison

Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,

Until then, it’s open season on all of us...

Reports last week confirmed that former special counsel Jack Smith “secretly arranged” to preserve evidence in his criminal cases against President Trump in order to maintain the threat of future prosecution once the president leaves office.  This is not a big surprise.  

Democrats have thrown every civic norm out the window in their ruthless efforts to target Trump’s businesses and send him to prison for life.

In his quest to imprison an American president, Jack Smith accused Trump of engaging in a conspiracy to “overthrow” the 2020 election, as well as retaining possession of classified documents after leaving the White House.  Both allegations are ridiculous, and Smith’s own words make him sound like a lawfare hitman and anti-MAGA zealot.  He told members of Congress in January, “Our investigation revealed that Donald Trump is the person who caused Jan. 6, it was foreseeable to him, and that he sought to exploit the violence.” 

 Smith stated emphatically that Trump committed “serious crimes.”

Serious crimes?  You mean like using the FBI to spy on all the Republican presidential primary candidates in 2015 and 2016?  Oh right, that was President Obama.  Or fabricating intelligence in order to justify a counterintelligence operation against candidate Trump?  Oh, that was Obama’s corrupt CIA director, John Brennan.  Or paying British Intelligence operatives to manufacture a fake “Russia collusion” dossier implicating Trump?  Oh, that was Hillary Clinton.  Or using the FBI and CIA to frame President Trump as a Russian spy?  Oh, that was Obama and Clinton, too.  Or sabotaging President Trump’s administration by using a Democrat spy on the National Intelligence Council to construct a false story about an innocuous phone call in order to trigger a bogus impeachment?  Oh, that was Intelligence Community Democrats attempting to hide Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine by, again, framing President Trump for a quid-pro-quo “crime” he never committed.  Or submitting fraudulent documents to the FISA Court in order to maintain spying operations against President Trump?  Oh, that was corrupt James Comey, corrupt Robert Mueller, corrupt Andrew Weissmann, corrupt Norm Eisen, corrupt Mary McCord, and their Democrat accomplices in the FBI and DOJ who covered up Obama’s illegal spying operations while framing President Trump as a criminal, spy, and traitor.

Listening to Jack Smith call President Trump a “serious” criminal sounds ridiculous when serious criminals Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Comey, and legions of their Democrat colleagues, subordinates, and co-conspirators in the DOJ, FBI, CIA, D.C. courts, and FISA Court (see Judge James Boasberg’s impeachable offenses) have never been properly investigated or punished for undermining President Trump’s election, sabotaging his administration, and framing him for treason.  The most powerful Democrats in the country organized a coup d’état in broad daylight and dragged the country through a barbed-wire field of partisan propaganda for the last ten years, and Jack Smith wants Americans to be upset that President Trump retained documents that he was entitled to possess?  It’s just such lunacy.  The constant gaslighting from D.C. operatives is equally infuriating and exhausting.

Glossing over the Democrats’ monstrous Russia Collusion Hoax, their relentless efforts to subvert the Trump-led government, and their continuing obsession with tossing the president in prison for imaginary crimes is bad enough, but Jack Smith does what all Democrats do: He pretends that the January 6, 2021, protest for election integrity was an attempt by Trump and his supporters to overthrow the government.  This lie is so brazen that it’s astonishing how Democrats can keep telling it with straight faces.

The people who showed up at the Capitol that day had one objective: to express their strong belief that mail-in-ballot fraud, violations of multiple states’ electoral statutes, and numerous voting discrepancies had tainted the 2020 election.  Several senators intended to make these very arguments before the certification of the election’s results.  The people who gathered outside the Capitol were exercising their First Amendment right to assemble peaceably.  They were unarmed.  Most had no criminal records.  A large number had served their country in various capacities.  Most who entered the Capitol walked around as tourists, took pictures, interacted in a friendly manner with Capitol Police, and posed no threat to anyone.

Only after law enforcement officers chose to fire flash-bang grenades on the assembled crowd did a section of the protest turn into something that could be described as a riot.  Trump supporters — not police officers — died on January 6.  Ordinary Americans exercising their constitutional rights were thrown into a state of fear of being hurt or killed.

Nevertheless, Smith continues to propagate the lie that the three-hour event at the Capitol was somehow the greatest threat to the country since 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and the Civil War (real comparisons that Democrat propagandists continue to make).  Smith and his fellow Democrats desperately wish for Americans to believe that a hot-chocolate-drinking gathering of grandparents, revelers, and veterans was somehow going to topple the government of the United States.  If a crowd of retirees is capable of overrunning Washington, what’s the point of a trillion-dollar military budget?

Smith’s perpetuation of the Democrats’ J6 propaganda is bad enough, but the fact that he treats that day as equivalent to the Civil War is all the more preposterous given that Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and their fellow Democrats openly encouraged Black Lives Matter domestic terrorists to burn down neighborhoods, loot businesses, and murder civilians throughout the summer of 2020.  If President Trump “caused Jan. 6” and the events of that day were “foreseeable” to him, then the violence and mayhem of 2020’s so-called “summer of love” were certainly foreseeable to Democrats.  The BLM riots of 2020 were the most costly in American history, and Vice President Harris encouraged Democrats to donate money to a bail fund that put arsonists, rapists, and murderers back on the street.

Were the Democrat-organized riots of 2020 “foreseeable”?  

Of course.  

Did prominent Democrats “exploit the violence,” as Smith accuses Trump of doing with January 6?  

They absolutely did. 

Biden and Harris ran for the White House on the message that the violence would end once they were elected.  

Will preening, self-righteous Jack Smith investigate, harass, arrest, or prosecute any of these Democrats?  Of course not.  Will Democrat rioters be tossed into pre-trial solitary confinement and refused bail by partisan prosecutors and judges?  Definitely not.  To this day, Democrats celebrate BLM and Antifa domestic terrorists as champions for civil rights.  When Democrats burn cities to the ground, the arsonists get statues.  When MAGA Americans protest for free and fair voting, they are condemned for crimes they never committed.

Unfortunately, this is how leftists all over the world now operate.  

Brazil’s communist President Lula has imprisoned his predecessor, President Bolsonaro, for supposedly trying to overthrow the government.  French President Macron has permitted his political opposition, Marine Le Pen, to be prosecuted and convicted for similarly bogus “embezzlement” crimes.  Germany has flirted with designating the popular anti-immigration party, Alternative for Germany, a “terrorist” organization and banning its candidates from running for office.  When the “wrong” candidate won Romania’s presidential election eighteen months ago, the country’s Constitutional Court annulled the outcome by blaming “Russian interference.”

If President Trump hadn’t possessed the financial resources and sheer grit to face down the onslaught of malicious and meritless prosecutions against him, he would likely be in a courtroom or a prison today.  If he hadn’t been re-elected a third time, January 6 defendants would still be awaiting trial or serving time in prison for an imaginary “insurrection.”

Screw Jack Smith.  He’s no lawman, and he has no principles.  He’s nothing but a corrupt propagandist, partisan hack, and lawfare assassin.

Nothing will change until prominent Democrats are prosecuted and convicted for their crimes.  Until then, it’s open season on all of us.

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

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 23:20

Which US States Gained The Most Residents In 2025

Which US States Gained The Most Residents In 2025

Nearly 15 million Americans moved in 2025, with many relocating across state lines in search of lower costs, job opportunities, and warmer climates.

This map, via Visual Capitalist's Gabriel Cohen, shows net migration per 10,000 residents across all 50 states in 2025, revealing where population inflows were strongest and which states saw the biggest outflows.

The data comes from HireAHelper.

Southern and Mountain West states dominated the rankings for inbound migration, while several high-cost coastal states continued to lose residents.

The data reflects large-scale shifts happening in the country’s population distribution, both from the Eastern half to the Western half, as well as shifts away from more expensive states to cheaper, often inland ones.

The Mountain West Over the West Coast

In 2025, the Western half of the U.S. saw a continuation of post-COVID trends as people left behind coastal states like Washington (-10.7) and Oregon (-9.0) in favor of more inland Mountain West states like Wyoming (+26.0), Utah (+7.3), and especially Idaho (+63.2).

The data table below highlights the net migration loss/gain per 10,000 inhabitants in 2025:

The more populous coastal states, which have long been hubs for key economic sectors like tech and aviation, have seen a number of moves in recent years owing to jobs either relocating or shifting to remote work.

Nowhere on the West Coast saw a bigger drop than California, which saw a net migration loss of -25.1, as nearly 100,000 residents left behind the increasingly unaffordable state in favor of cheaper neighboring states like Nevada, which lacks a state income tax.

The Cost of Living Factor

California is not alone in losing people over affordability issues. If net migration trends are any indication, other high cost of living states such as New York (-28.2) and Massachusetts (-37.9) also increasingly shed residents.

A majority of the Northeast fared similarly, with all states but Delaware, Maine, and New Hampshire seeing more people leave than arrive in 2025.

And in the immediate region surrounding the nation’s capital, the states of Maryland (-27.4) and Virginia (-13.7) also saw negative net migration, likely reflecting in part the large reduction in the federal workforce seen over the course of the year.

The Rise of the Sunbelt

If one region is seeing across-the-board growth, it’s the South, led by states like South Carolina (+79.7), Tennessee (+43.6), and Alabama (+36.6).

Long one of the more economically depressed regions of the country, a combination of lower costs of living and nicer weather has led to rapid growth for southern “Sun Belt” states such as Arkansas and Oklahoma, to say nothing of massive favorites like Texas and the Sunshine State of Florida.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The Decline of Housing Affordability in the U.S. on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 22:45

The Inherited IRA 10-Year Rule Is Fully Enforced In 2026 - What Beneficiaries Need To Do Now

The Inherited IRA 10-Year Rule Is Fully Enforced In 2026 - What Beneficiaries Need To Do Now

Authored by Adam H. Douglas via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

If you inherited a traditional IRA from someone who was already taking required minimum distributions (RMDs), you may have to take annual withdrawals for the next decade, and the account must be empty by the end of the tenth year.

Many inherited IRA beneficiaries must now take annual RMDs. Vitalii Vodolazskyi/Shutterstock

The Internal Revenue Service waived penalties for missed withdrawals from 2021 through 2024 while the rules were being finalized. That grace period is over. Starting with the 2025 tax year, the rules are fully enforced. If you missed a 2025 RMD, a 25 percent penalty applies unless you take corrective action now.

Who Does The 10-Year Rule Apply To?

The SECURE Act, passed in 2019, eliminated the "stretch IRA" for most non-spouse beneficiaries. Under the old rules, you had an option to spread withdrawals across your own lifetime. That option is gone for most people who inherit today.

If you are a non-eligible designated beneficiary (NEDB), which covers most adult children and other non-spouse heirs, the 10-year rule is probably going to apply to you. In general, you are exempt if you fall into one of these categories:

  • The surviving spouse of the deceased
  • A minor child of the deceased, though the 10-year rule applies once you reach adulthood
  • A beneficiary who is chronically ill or disabled
  • A beneficiary who is not more than 10 years younger than the original owner

What if none of those apply to you? Then the 10-year rule is likely to be your framework.

When Do Annual Withdrawals Have To Start?

The answer depends on whether the original IRA owner died before or after their required beginning date (RBD), generally April 1 of the year following the year they turned 73.

  • If the original owner died before their RBD and was not yet taking RMDs: No annual withdrawals are required, and the account must be emptied by end of year 10.
  • If the original owner died on or after their RBD and was already taking RMDs: The general rule is that annual withdrawals are required every year, and the account must be emptied by end of year 10.

If your parent was already taking RMDs when they passed, you must take a distribution every year from year one through year 10 - you cannot skip years and take everything in year 10.

The 10-year clock starts the year after the original owner's death. If you inherited the IRA in 2022, your deadline to fully empty the account is Dec. 31, 2032.

How Much Has To Come Out Each Year?

There is no fixed percentage. Your annual RMD is calculated using two inputs:

  • The account's balance as of Dec. 31 of the prior year
  • Your life expectancy factor from the IRS Single Life Expectancy Table in IRS Publication 590-B

The calculation:

Prior year-end balance ÷ life expectancy factor = Your RMD for the year

Your life expectancy factor is based on your age as of Dec. 31 of the current distribution year. Look up that number in the IRS table each year; it changes as you age. You recalculate annually using the updated factor and the prior year's Dec. 31 balance.

Your IRA custodian can often provide this calculation directly. A tax professional can verify it, which is worth doing in your first distribution year.

What Happens If You Missed Your 2025 RMD?

The penalty for a missed RMD is 25 percent of the amount you should have withdrawn. The IRS reduces that to 10 percent if you take the corrective distribution and file Form 5329 within the two-year correction window.

Here is what to do if you missed a 2025 distribution:

  • Take the missed distribution now. Withdraw the full amount you should have taken in 2025 as soon as possible.
  • File Form 5329. This IRS form reports additional taxes on qualified retirement plans. You will attach it to your tax return or file it as a standalone form.
  • Request penalty abatement, if applicable. If this is your first missed RMD and you have a reasonable explanation, the penalty might be waived by the IRS. Attach a written explanation to Form 5329 when you file.

Rather than risk it not being waived, act now. The two-year window for the reduced 10 percent penalty is already running.

FAQs About The Inherited IRA 10-Year Rule What Is The Difference Between An Eligible Designated Beneficiary And A Non-Eligible Designated Beneficiary?

An eligible designated beneficiary includes surviving spouses, minor children of the deceased, disabled or chronically ill individuals, and beneficiaries not more than 10 years younger than the original owner. These individuals can spread withdrawals over their lifetime instead of following the 10-year rule. Everyone else is a non-eligible designated beneficiary subject to the 10-year rule. Most adult children who inherit a parent's traditional IRA fall into the NEDB category.

Can I Wait Until Year 10 And Take Everything Out At Once?

It depends on when the original owner died. If they died before their required beginning date and had not yet started RMDs, you are not required to take annual distributions and may take the full balance in year ten. If they had already started RMDs, annual withdrawals are required throughout the 10-year period. Taking everything in year ten in that case does not avoid penalties for missed annual distributions in earlier years.

How Do I Find My Life Expectancy Factor For The RMD Calculation?

Your life expectancy factor comes from the Single Life Expectancy Table in IRS Publication 590-B, available at irs.gov. Find your age as of Dec. 31 of the current distribution year and read the corresponding factor. Divide the account's prior December 31 balance by that factor to get your RMD amount. Your IRA custodian may also calculate this for you. Verifying it independently is advisable, particularly in the first year of distributions.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 22:10

$150 Humanoid Robot House Cleaning Service Threatens To Undercut Maid Services

$150 Humanoid Robot House Cleaning Service Threatens To Undercut Maid Services

It's no secret that some humanoid robotics companies are training their machines for work on factory floors, while others are positioning their bots to enter homes in the coming years.

One of the first real signs of humanoids entering homes today is a new cleaning service in San Francisco that uses what appear to be Unitree humanoid robots trained to clean everything from floors and countertops to stovetops, mirrors, and nearly any surface in the house.

Called "Gatsby," the new service deploys humanoid robots to homes for a flat service charge of $150.

"We just made U.S. history. Today, Gatsby ran the first-ever consumer cleaning by a humanoid robot in the United States," Gatsby wrote in a press release earlier this month.

The company noted, "We picked someone random off our SF waitlist, they booked a cleaning, we delivered the robot, and it cleaned their entire apartment on its own. No humans inside. This is the first of its kind in the U.S., and we're proud to be the pioneers writing this line in the history books today."

For the average deep clean of a typical U.S. home, the price ranges between $200 and $400, and for much larger homes, $500 or more, according to Angi List. This means the robotic cleaning service can even undercut an independent cleaner or a professional cleaning company, which often employs migrant workers.

News of Gatsby's cleaning service comes as shipments of humanoid robots are expected to ramp up this year and accelerate by the end of the decade, according to a recent UBS note.

The goal of tech firms is very clear: deploy these bots first on factory floors, in warehouses, and at logistics hubs, then move into consumer markets once the machines become reliable enough for home use.

Once these bots enter the consumer market, they will begin to chip away at demand for migrant labor and drive down household costs for services such as cleaning, cooking, laundry, and other chores, which have traditionally required human labor and can cost hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars per month.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 21:35

Trump Indicates He'll Sign Bill Making Daylight Saving Time Permanent

Trump Indicates He'll Sign Bill Making Daylight Saving Time Permanent

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has indicated he would sign a bill to make daylight saving time permanent as a House of Representatives committee advanced a measure that would codify the change.

U.S. President Donald Trump returns to the White House in Washington on May 15, 2026. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

"Big Vote today (48-1!) in the Energy and Commerce Committee on a Bill including The Sunshine Protection Act, which will be making Daylight Saving Time Permanent! This is so important in that Hundreds of Millions of Dollars are spent every year by people, Cities, and States, being forced to change their Clocks. Many of these Clocks are located in Towers, and the cost of renting, or using, Heavy Equipment to do this twice a year is prohibitive!" Trump wrote on Thursday in a Truth Social post.

The president said that there is considerable "work and money that is spent on this ridiculous, twice yearly production," referring to the changing of the time. He also said that "it will also be a very nice WIN for the Republican Party."

"We are going with the far more popular alternative, Saving Daylight, which gives you a longer, brighter Day - And who can be against that - This is an easy one!" Trump added.

Known as the Sunshine Protection Act, the bill was proposed by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), who released a statement saying that it would "bring us one step closer to ending the outdated and unpopular practice of changing our clocks twice a year."

"Floridians and Americans across the country are tired of the biannual time change, and the evidence is clear that permanent daylight saving time can improve public health, reduce traffic accidents, lower crime and encourage more outdoor activity," he said in the statement.

In a social media post last year, Trump urged Congress to address the issue.

"The House and Senate should push hard for more Daylight at the end of a day. Very popular and, most importantly, no more changing of the clocks, a big inconvenience and, for our government, A VERY COSTLY EVENT!!!" he wrote in April 2025.

For years, advocates have called for the United States to stop making the twice-yearly changes. Among those urging that the country stick to one time for the entire year are the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

A poll from The Associated Press and NORC released in October 2025 also found that only 12 percent of Americans favor the current daylight saving time system. Around 47 percent are opposed to the current system and 40 percent are neutral, it also found.

The United States first started using the time shift more than a century ago, during World War I, and again during World War II. Congress passed a law in 1966 that allowed states to decide whether to participate but required their decisions to be uniform across their territories. All states except Arizona and Hawaii make the time shifts, and those two states remain on standard time year-round.

According to Buchanan's office, the Sunshine Protection Act was included in an amendment to a larger bill, the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 21:00

Colbert Blames Trump, But Massive Profit Losses Killed His Show

Colbert Blames Trump, But Massive Profit Losses Killed His Show

Progressive ideologues in entertainment are well known for avoiding responsibility for their failures at any cost, which is what makes them incredibly dangerous.  Scapegoats are targeted for destruction while activists elude scrutiny so that they can bungle another project or institution, and another, and another.  On and on it goes; like a bacteria they travel from one organ to the next, breaking it down from the inside.  

This is what people like Stephen Colbert represent.

From 2019 to 2025 The Late Show lost approximately 25% of its peak viewership.  Much like Jimmy Kimmel and other midnight comedy programs obsessed with politics instead of telling jokes, Colbert lost any ability to make fun of his own side.  Instead, he became a propaganda mouthpiece for the establishment and a complete disgrace as a conduit for Covid hysteria and vaccine mandates. 

Whatever esteem he might have had as an entertainer was lost.  His career was now tied to woke activism and running interference for the "elites".  He likely believed that in a town like Hollywood this would cement his position and keep him safe from cancellation.  However, despite their grand theatrics as "soldiers of the revolution", Hollywood executives still love money. 

Colbert's show was losing around $50 million per year.  His bloated production crew of 200 people and ludicrous salary of $20 million per season created an annual filming cost of over $100 million.  Ad revenues for the show dropped from $121 million in 2018 to $70 million in 2024.  Keep in mind, there are thousands of creators on YouTube that do essentially what Colbert does with almost no budget, and they bring in a far larger audience.

There's no doubt that Colbert will go on to other productions well after the cancellation of his disastrous Late Show.  Hollywood has pedestalized the former comedian as a martyr for the great woke cause.  The corporate media has done the same, suggesting that the death of the Late Show will be looked on by historians as "Exhibit A" of Trump's "attack on democracy".  But, it's still a fact that he lost his show because he was losing vast amounts of money for CBS. 

The key to satire, and most comedy in general, is to shine a spotlight on hard truths while suppressing one's inherent bias.  The ability to throw one's own sacred cows on the pyre is what makes satirists famous.  One cannot be a propagandist and be a successful satirist at the same time.  One cannot be a court jester and be afraid to take the risk of making fun of royalty.

The royalty in Colbert's case is not Trump, but the progressive elite and Big Pharma.  Attacking Trump in Hollywood or New York presents no risk.  Poking fun at the woke mafia presents incredible risk.  Colbert has long been a coward in this regard.  He has, though, thrown perhaps the biggest toddler fit in recent memory over the end of The Late Show in an attempt to make the event as political as possible.    

Colbert will never be out of work completely.  Recent announcements have him writing on the script for Peter Jackson's next Lord of the Rings spin-off film (which is shaping up to be a disaster).  He also made a surprise appearance on the cable access show "Only In Monroe" with an average audience of 12 people, which is perhaps a venue more suited to his talents. 

The idea that Colbert has been censored by a vengeful White House is complete fantasy.  The claim that this is an "attack on democracy" is merely designed to inflame more leftist madness.  No one is entitled under the Constitution to their own late night TV show, especially when they're burning $50 million a year. 

Losing the respect of a large swath of the American public, though, makes it unlikely that Colbert will do well in any future project.  In the end, he will fade from memory as just another establishment shill.    

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 20:25

Child Safety Groups Urge FTC To Investigate Roblox

Child Safety Groups Urge FTC To Investigate Roblox

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

Two child safety groups filed a complaint against online interactive gaming platform Roblox with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on May 20, alleging that children face sexual and financial harm on the platform.

A boy poses for a photo while holding a game pad in front of a screen displaying the logo of the children's gaming platform Roblox, in this illustration taken on Dec. 8, 2025. Ramil Sitdikov/Illustration/Reuters

Filed by nonprofits National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) and Fairplay, the complaint claims that certain Roblox features are "developmentally inappropriate for the platform's massive young user base and pose a substantial risk of harm." Such features include engagement-maximizing design features, a complex virtual currency system that can result in more user spending, and chat and communication features that expose children to sexual exploitation.

These components "capitalize on young users' developmental vulnerabilities, exploit their desire for authentic self-expression, monetize their lack of impulse control, and turn in-game purchasing power into a form of social status," the complaint states.

"As a result, young users say they feel a constant pressure to keep up with their peers on the platform, and are thereby driven to buy and spend Robux in order to enjoy Roblox's experiences.

"At the same time, the voice and text chat features that make the platform social repeatedly expose children to sexual content and harmful adults, resulting in sexual exploitation and abuse."

According to the complaint, Roblox requires users to be at least 5 years old to open an account.

Last month, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford said at a press conference that Roblox, which has roughly 151.5 million daily active users, is used by almost half of all American children under 16. Around 42 percent of the platform's users are children under the age of 13.

The nonprofits asked the FTC to investigate Roblox for violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and check whether the company is in compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act.

Meanwhile, Roblox's share price has crashed. On July 31, 2025, the company's share price hit its year-high of $150.59. On May 21, 2026, prices closed at $46.14, a decline of nearly 70 percent. Since Sept. 29, Roblox's market capitalization has tumbled from $98.7 billion to $32.8 billion as of May 21, a loss of almost $66 billion.

Design, Currency, Communication Issues

Regarding the platform's design and marketing features, the complaint alleged that the company leverages them to "capitalize on child users' vulnerabilities."

For instance, one tactic used by the company is making users' game inventories of virtual assets visible to each other.

"By allowing children to investigate who owns what, Roblox takes advantage of their developmental proclivity for social comparison, which involves measuring their self-worth relative to others," the complaint reads.

To take part in Roblox's in-game economy, users must navigate a wide range of virtual currencies, including the platform's primary currency, Robux, and other currencies issued by developers.

To calculate the real-world dollar costs of the items, users must perform complex calculations that greatly surpass children's mathematical skills, making them susceptible to financial harm, according to the complaint.

As for chat and communication on Roblox, the complaint raises concerns that these features could facilitate "predation and abuse by enabling adult contact with minors."

The company gives parents control over how their children can communicate on the platform. However, Roblox's webpage on parental controls clarifies that these settings "do not apply to chat features developed independently by developers."

In a statement to The Epoch Times, a Roblox spokesperson said that the company "strongly disputes" the claims made in the complaint.

"Our platform is designed to provide a positive, healthy, and enjoyable experience - we build for fun and connection, not short-term engagement. While no system can be perfect, we have a set of safeguards designed to support a safe and civil environment, and clear policies for game creators that require fair treatment of players," the spokesperson said.

"Most games on Roblox are free to play, and no one is required to purchase Robux.

"In addition, we have clear policies prohibiting both actual and simulated gambling, and a set of rules governing how game creators can use gameplay mechanics like paid random items."

Lawsuits, International Scrutiny

Roblox is facing several lawsuits from states such as Iowa, Louisiana, Texas, Kentucky, and Florida, citing child safety issues.

In December 2025, Iowa sued the company, accusing the platform of being the "perfect environment for child predators, pornographers, scammers, fraudsters, online sex rings, and inappropriate content."

Amid growing concerns about child safety, Roblox announced age-based accounts and expanded parental controls for users under 16 on April 13.

Under the policy, users aged 5 to 8 and 9 to 15 will have separate accounts subject to stricter censorship of adult content.

"All content uploaded to Roblox goes through their existing moderation systems, including AI asset scanning, ongoing user report review, and multimodal moderation that evaluates scenes in real time for potential policy violations," the company said in a statement.

In addition to the United States, Roblox has faced bans and scrutiny in other nations.

The platform has been banned in Turkey and Iraq. Russia blocked Roblox in December 2025, accusing the platform of enabling "LGBT propaganda" and the dissemination of extremist materials.

In January, the Netherlands announced opening an investigation into the platform, citing potential risks to minors. Last month, Australia issued formal notices to major gaming platforms, including Roblox, asking the companies to describe how they prevent the radicalization and grooming of children.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 19:50

My Retirement Accounts Fail In The World I Actually Live In

My Retirement Accounts Fail In The World I Actually Live In

Authored by Patrick Brenner via RealClearMarkets,

I remember the first time I logged into my retirement account as a young professional. It felt like a milestone: proof that I had entered the world of adulthood, of long-term thinking, of ownership. I work in the nonprofit sector, so technically it's a 403(b), not a 401(k). The distinction is academic; the promise is the same: contribute consistently, invest wisely, and over time, build financial independence.

The longer I've contributed, the more I've realized something uncomfortable: my retirement plan isn't built for the world I actually live in.

Like many in my generation, I came of age during a period of profound economic change. Companies stay private longer. Technology, infrastructure, and energy companies increasingly raise capital outside public markets. The most dynamic growth in the economy often happens before a company ever reaches a stock exchange. When I look at my retirement options, I'm locked out of that world.

Instead, we see a familiar menu consisting of a handful of mutual funds and some index options that quietly steer me toward a standardized allocation. These are not bad investments, but they represent only a fraction of real economic growth.

For my younger peers just entering the workforce, this gap is even more consequential. The directions are thus: start early, take advantage of compounding, and think long term. If we each had a dollar for every time we got the lecture about the "time value of money," we'd all retire tomorrow. But we are also being funneled into portfolios that exclude entire categories of assets like private equity, private credit, real estate, and infrastructure that have historically delivered higher long-term returns and meaningful diversification.

Brett Arends at Market Watch incorrectly asserts that opening retirement plans to these assets would expose workers to high fees, illiquidity, and complexity. He misses a more important question: compared to what?

There's real asymmetry. Institutional investors regularly allocate 20 to 30 percent of their portfolios to private markets. They do so because these assets offer diversification, illiquidity premiums, and exposure to parts of the economy unavailable in public markets. Ordinary workers are confined to a narrower universe because litigious zealots neutered the system, compelling fiduciaries to avoid risk at all costs.

This narrowing of investment options originates in the legal environment surrounding employer-sponsored retirement plans. Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), plan sponsors face an onslaught of litigation. The risk of lawsuits compels employers to increasingly default to the safest legal options rather than to the best outcomes for participants, thereby directly limiting potential returns.

Even if you set aside litigation, the deeper issue is structural. The retirement system hasn't kept pace with the evolution of capital markets.

The proposed rule from the Department of Labor deserves serious attention. At its core, the rule introduces a safe-harbor framework for evaluating "designated investment alternatives" in defined-contribution plans. The definition encompasses everything from traditional mutual funds to more complex vehicles, including those that can incorporate private assets.

The framework is asset-neutral. It outlines how fiduciaries should choose. Plan sponsors are obligated to evaluate investments using a set of common-sense factors: fees, performance, liquidity, valuation, benchmarks, and complexity. If they do so objectively and analytically, they are presumed to meet their fiduciary obligations.

The White House's Council of Economic Advisers suggests that younger participants could benefit from allocating up to 30 percent of their portfolios to private markets. Institutional investors have approached portfolio construction using private markets for decades.

Yet parts of the proposed rule undermine that very goal. A 15 percent cap on private assets, derived from SEC Rule 22e-4, would limit exposure, a particular problem for collective investment trusts, which are regulated differently and historically operated without such constraints.

Angela Antonelli offers helpful insights. Georgetown Univerisity's research from the Center for Retirement Initiatives and other CRI analysis, even relatively modest exposure to private real assets, private credit, and private equity has the potential to boost outcomes by 7% to 8%, not just for the "average" DC participant but also across a range of more real financial savings patterns that DC participants too often find themselves in over the course of their working years.

Large institutions, from university endowments to public pension funds, routinely invest in private markets and reap the benefits of diversification and higher returns. We've created two classes of retirement savers: those with access to the full spectrum of capital markets, and those without.

That divide is the difference between participating in today's economy and being stuck in a version of it that no longer exists. Retirement policy should be about equipping workers to build wealth in the modern world.

Right now, my 403(b) originated on a promise that has become so antiquated it might be unattainable. Instead of "taxing the rich," can't we just be allowed to invest like them?

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 18:40

Newsom Declares Emergency In Orange County; EPA Head Says Chemical Tank Will "Likely Fail"

Newsom Declares Emergency In Orange County; EPA Head Says Chemical Tank Will "Likely Fail"

The head of the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) said Sunday that a chemical storage tank in Southern California that has forced officials to declare an emergency and prompted evacuation orders for tens of thousands residents is likely to fail.

Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the EPA, told CNN’s “State of the Union” program on Sunday that the “most likely scenario” is a “low-volume release” of the tank, where officials will be able to “monitor, neutralize, and contain the threat.”

“The Orange County Fire Authority is working to keep the temperature of the tank down. That is very important,” he said on CNN, referring to the fire department in the Southern California county.

He said keeping the temperature under 85 degrees F is key.

But, as Jack Phillips reports for The Epoch Times, Zeldin warned:

“We’re being told that the tank will fail, but there are different scenarios as to what that means, the most catastrophic scenario being an explosion that results in other tanks to explode. That’s the reason why you see such a big evacuation that’s been done in the surrounding areas.”

“You have all levels of government, local, state, federal, working together. EPA has personnel on the ground, air monitors deployed in the local community,” Zeldin also said.

“We have been involved in the modeling of different scenarios.”

Drones were monitoring temperatures at 10-minute intervals to watch for any spikes and planning was underway to ensure a possible leak could quickly be prevented from spreading into waterways or the ocean, Covey said in a video released online.

“Sitting back and allowing these tanks to fail is unacceptable,” Covey said, adding there was no guarantee tanks will not breach and leak.

“Our goal is to protect your homes—no damage to them—and protect the environment.”

As of Sunday morning, Zeldin said: “This is an emergency response. This isn’t yet an environmental response, and the scale of that environmental response will be determined based off of what happens when that tank fails.”

As a result of these warnings, Phillips reports that California Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency in Orange County.

“The safety of Orange County residents is the top priority. We are mobilizing every state resource available to support local responders and make sure the community has what they need to stay safe,” Newsom said.

The malfunctioning tank holds approximately 5,000 to 7,000 gallons of methyl methacrylate, a flammable and volatile chemical used in plastics manufacturing for aerospace applications.

The tank, located at a manufacturing facility in Garden Grove, first started displaying signs of instability on Thursday.

On Friday, there were increased fears of an explosion, according to Orange County Fire Authority interim Chief TJ McGovern.

Approximately 50,000 residents were evacuated in Garden Grove, which is home to around 172,000 people and located 30 miles south of Los Angeles.

The governor’s proclamation directs all state agencies and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services to support Orange County and impacted areas, and unlocks additional emergency response resources and authorities.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 18:05

Bubble-Wrapped World: How Safety Culture Has Destroyed Our Sense Of Adventure

Bubble-Wrapped World: How Safety Culture Has Destroyed Our Sense Of Adventure

Authored by Murray Lytle via The Epoch Times,

Are Canadians less adventurous than they once were? It’s hard to argue otherwise.

Alexander Mackenzie was only 24 when the North West Company named him chief fur trader at Fort Chipewyan, in what is now Alberta. A few years later, in 1789 he travelled north along what is now known as the Mackenzie River to become the first European to reach the Arctic Ocean overland. Four years later he crossed the Rocky Mountains and was the first European to reach the Pacific Ocean, beating Americans Merriweather Lewis and William Clark by a full dozen years.

In 1898, Martha Purdy arrived in Dawson City to escape a failed marriage and make her fortune in the Klondike Gold Rush. It was while climbing the notorious Chilkoot Pass that she discovered she was pregnant with her third son. She later remarried and, as Martha Black, was the second woman to be elected to Canada’s Parliament. She was also a successful entrepreneur and a world-renowned expert on wild flowers.

Canadian history is filled with tales such as these. Explorers, soldiers, settlers, and other restless souls who endured great hardships and did great things.

There is a natural sense of awe that arises when retelling such lives filled with adventure. To our modern selves, they appear as fascinating aberrations, gifted men and women with unusual appetites for risky or dangerous undertakings. Their willingness to set out into the unknown strikes us today as thrilling, unnerving, and more than a bit foolhardy. But while their accomplishments may be striking, they lived in more adventurous times.

Today, society shrinks from adventure and the unknown.

Through a combination of practical circumstances, changing social standards, and dramatic shifts in individual risk tolerance and government behaviour, opportunities for adventure have been drastically curtailed.

How can Canadians get that sense of adventurousness back?

“An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered”, G.K. Chesterton once wrote. “An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered.” There is a case to be made that adventures are simply harder to come by these days.

There are no more blank spaces left on maps, and hence no places for modern-day Mackenzies to discover.

The omnipresence of the internet and GPS similarly makes it almost impossible to get truly lost anymore. And if you do, help is usually close at hand.

Beyond these practical limitations, however, it seems incontestable that society today is less interested in promoting, facilitating, or participating in adventurous life experiences.

No one talks of running away with the circus or joining the French Foreign Legion anymore, even in jest. According to Statistics Canada, twice as many millennials are still living at home as was the case with previous generations. And if any of these young adults do go away, it’s more than likely to be an adventureless “gap year” holiday between graduate degrees recorded in minute detail on Snapchat and Instagram.

The perpetual childhood of today’s younger generations contrasts sharply with the youthful accomplishments of past eras. William Wilberforce, for example, was elected to the British Parliament at age 21 and then proved instrumental in ending the trans-Atlantic slave trade. His friend William Pitt became Prime Minister at 24, and spent his career fighting the French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, who became a general at 24. Quite a lot can be accomplished when one starts early.

Other factors that limit the availability of adventure in our post-modern era include the suffocating impact of the welfare state. When Mackenzie left his family home at 15 to become an apprentice in the fur industry, it was because he had little choice. He needed to make his way in the world as a teenager. The same urgency applied to Black when she decided to escape a failed marriage by travelling to the Yukon. With no government to hold your hand, adventure follows. Popular culture in earlier eras also did its bit as well by celebrating explorers and adventurers as celebrities in the same manner that we laud singers and athletes today.

Just as adventure was once regarded as a social virtue to be admired, society today aggressively enforces the opposite expectation—that it is our duty to avoid risk at all costs. In their 2021 book “The Coddling of the American Mind,” social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and lawyer Greg Lukianoff take a close look at the impact of a creeping safety culture on the behaviour of younger generations.

Children, the authors observed, are now deliberately shielded from any sense of risk or uncertainty. How can anyone—young boys most of all—learn about the world around them when school principals announce at the onset of every snowfall that “all snow must stay on the ground.” The ideal of adventure and resilience has been replaced by a debilitating sense of fragility and risk-avoidance.

So is the dream of looking over an untravelled horizon that animated people like Alexander Mackenzie or Martha Black completely dead in the 21st century? Not exactly.

Adventure should properly be considered a spirit, not a place.

It is driven by a powerful mixture of curiosity, necessity, and an openness to experiencing new things. And it can be found wherever uncertainty reigns. Today, that might entail travelling to strange lands, meeting new people, or even engaging in uncomfortable discussions about whether Alberta should remain part of Canada forever.

Wherever the unknown lies, adventure can be found.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 17:30

Two Billboards In New York Capture The Conflict Of Our Time

Two Billboards In New York Capture The Conflict Of Our Time

Authored by Kay Rubacek via The Epoch Times,

Two billboards went up in New York City recently. This is a city of advertising, where images appear when someone wants the whole world to see them. One billboard is selling artificial intelligence, and the other is warning about it. The juxtaposition between these two advertisers, who most likely wouldn’t have seen the other’s message in advance, captures the conflict of our times and cements the uncertainty about the future within an artificial intelligence world.

The selling billboard is dark, purple, and almost cinematic.

An AI-generated face with artificial perfection stares out. Three words above her say: “Stop Hiring Humans.” The Era of AI Employees Is Here. The company is Artisan. The company says it “is a provocation. It works because it’s uncomfortable.” It is real. It wants your payroll budget, and it is not embarrassed to say so.

The warning billboard is light, purple, and funny in the way that grief sometimes is. A sad stick figure holds a small sign: Will Create 4 Food. Mock chat bubbles float across it like a corporate memo from a future that has already arrived: “Thank you artists for donating your life’s work to our AI. Your generosity hasn’t gone unnoticed. Just uncompensated.”

The organization’s name is Replacement.AI. It is also real, but it is not selling anything. It is run by anonymous artists who spent their own money to tell you the truth. Their website calls itself “the only honest AI company.” Its homepage reads: Humans no longer necessary. Stupid. Smelly. Squishy. It’s time for a machine solution.

The quotes on the site are genuine, such as one from OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman: “AI will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there'll be great companies.” And another from OpenAI’s charter, “To build ‘highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work.’”

On the page dedicated to artists, the site reads: “If you’re one of the millions of artists, musicians, writers, journalists, scholars, or other creatives whose work we’ve stolen to train our AI, we want to thank you. We couldn’t have achieved a $100 billion valuation without all of your hard work, just sitting on the internet for us and our other AI company friends to scrape. Unfortunately for you, financial compensation is out of the question. Just because we’re making money from your copyrighted material doesn’t mean you’re legally entitled to any of it.”

It is satire. It is also accurate. In a submission to the House of Lords, OpenAI admitted, “It would be impossible to train today’s leading AI models without using copyrighted materials.”

The courts are beginning to agree too that something was taken. Well over thirty copyright infringement lawsuits have been filed by creators against AI developers. Visual artists sued Stability AI and Midjourney. Getty Images sued, arguing that over twelve million photographs were scraped without license. The New York Times sued OpenAI. Universal Music filed a $3.1 billion lawsuit against Anthropic in January 2026, alleging its AI was built on a foundation of piracy. None of these cases have reached final verdicts. The legal system is moving at human speed through a problem that was created at machine speed.

What passed through a million years of accumulated human experience—the knowledge handed from mind to mind, generation to generation, the grief and wonder pressed into stories and paintings and films and arguments on the internet at three in the morning—was consumed by hungry algorithms. There was no purchase or licensing. The great ingestion happened in server rooms, while the rest of us were clicking I Agree to ever-lengthening terms and conditions that no one ever bothers to read. And that phase is now over.

Yet predictions for our future keep rolling in, each one confident, and each one contradicting the last. Goldman Sachs estimates AI could replace the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs. The World Economic Forum projects 92 million jobs displaced by 2030, offset by 170 million new ones created, which is a net gain, on paper at least. Anthropic CEO, Dario Amodei, warns AI could replace half of all entry-level office jobs within five years. Jensen Huang says greater productivity creates more hiring, not less. In 2025 alone, Amazon eliminated 14,000 corporate roles, Microsoft cut 15,000, and Salesforce reduced its customer support workforce by 4,000. Like the billboards in Time Square, both are right, yet neither agree. What the experts ultimately share is uncertainty.

And the AI models are hungry again. This time, media organizations are making sure they require payment from AI giants for their content. New York Times is partnering with Amazon’s AI, Meta with News Corp, and Google with Reddit. But human-made internet content is finite and cannot keep up with the voracious appetite of AI models that do not need time to sleep or metabolise. So the machines have no choice but to prompt themselves, and generate new content upon previous content, with less and less human origin, leading us down a spiral of infinite iteration with less human touch, less human spirit, and less human soul. The only thing the “experts” seem to agree on is that the business potentials are both exhilarating and terrifying.

Meanwhile, Artisan’s billboard promises relief from the burden of human employees. Lower payroll. No sick days. No long hot showers a person needs to feel like a person again. The face on that billboard doesn’t need to ground herself. She doesn’t need anything. What is being sold is not intelligence, but the absence of need. It is a cold world to advertise, and the advertisers seem not to fear the cold.

Two billboards in New York City, and the same ones are popping up in other major cities across the nation. Between them is the argument that is yet to be resolved: whether what is being built is a tool or a replacement, a future or an ending. The experts cannot agree. The lawyers are still filing. The models are still hungry. And somewhere in Times Square, a sad stick figure is still holding his sign, hoping someone walking past will stop long enough to read it.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 16:20

Resident Floats Surefire Way Of Getting Potholes And Trash Cleaned Up In Shithole LA...

Resident Floats Surefire Way Of Getting Potholes And Trash Cleaned Up In Shithole LA...

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Los Angeles residents have had enough of living in a crumbling, graffiti-covered wasteland where basic services have collapsed under years of Democrat mismanagement.

In a display of pure ingenuity, citizens are fighting back by tagging over blighted areas with "Vote Pratt," betting that Mayor Karen Bass will rush to erase any sign of support for her political rival far faster than she addresses the endless decay.

This clever workaround shines a harsh light on the priorities in a city drowning in filth, where open drug markets and rat-infested encampments flourish while taxpayers foot the bill for billions in ineffective "solutions."

The idea took off after one resident pointed out the obvious: if neighborhoods are blanketed in graffiti that the city ignores, simply spray "Vote Pratt" over it and watch the cleanup crews mobilize within minutes.

One post noted, "This could possibly do the trick," while others highlighted how quickly political messaging gets scrubbed compared to everyday blight.

Videos and images circulating on X show the extent of the problem and the creative response, with AI-generated visuals encouraging more residents to test the theory.

The same tactic could target potholes, now mockingly dubbed "Bass-holes" due to the mayor's reluctance to release funds for basic road repairs.

The citizen hack represents more than a workaround - it exposes the deep dysfunction where political optics trump governance. In a city blessed with resources and climate, decades of open-border-friendly policies, soft-on-crime approaches, and unchecked spending have produced predictable decay.

This grassroots push to elect Pratt comes as no surprise to anyone following LA's descent. Just days ago, reports painted a grim picture of massive homeless encampments overrun by rats, open-air drug markets operating brazenly near police stations, and public spaces rendered unusable by tents, trash, and crime.

Helicopter footage has captured post offices swallowed by encampments, blocking mail access and parking. Residents describe navigating urine-soaked doorways blocked by belongings just to enter their own apartments, with police unwilling or unable to intervene under current policies.

Despite California dumping an estimated $24 billion into homelessness programs between 2018 and 2023 - with LA spending hundreds of millions annually - the results are nonexistent. The county reports around 72,000 homeless individuals, many unsheltered, with over half originating from out of state, according to critics of the system.

One man who moved to California openly admitted the appeal: easy access to food stamps, cash assistance, and a lifestyle where "they pay you to be homeless." These incentives have created what detractors call a Homeless Industrial Complex - a self-perpetuating system of nonprofits and bureaucrats motivated to manage the crisis rather than solve it.

Mayor Karen Bass has come under fire for broken promises to end street homelessness. When confronted on CNN about missed targets, she cited unanticipated "bureaucratic barriers." In another exchange, she advised residents not to trust their own eyes but official statistics instead, despite visible evidence to the contrary.

Enter Spencer Pratt, the mayoral candidate whose name is now central to this cleanup hack. Pratt has called for a no-nonsense approach: a short grace period after taking office followed by mass enforcement against crime, open drug use, and disorder. He has emphasized clearing streets and involving homeless individuals directly in cleanup efforts rather than feeding another layer of bureaucracy.

Real change requires rejecting the failed ideologies that enabled this mess: endless tolerance for lawlessness, incentives that import problems, and a bureaucracy that thrives on failure.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 14:00

Suicide Bomb Attack On Train In Pakistan Kills At Least 30, Over 100 Wounded

Suicide Bomb Attack On Train In Pakistan Kills At Least 30, Over 100 Wounded

A massive suicide car bomb attack blew up and derailed a train transporting security personnel in Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan.

The blast ripped through the train passenger cars, killing at least 30 people and leaving more than 100 others wounded, with the casualty count expected to rise as rescuers dig through the twisted metal.

via AFP

The Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), a separatist group operating in the mineral-rich region, immediately claimed responsibility for Sunday's coordinated strike.

Local officials and police told international outlets that at least three coaches and the engine had derailed after the explosion. Security forces have cordoned off the whole area amid ongoing search and rescue efforts.

The completely overturned and were immediately engulfed in massive flames. Authorities have condemned the heinous act of terrorism.

Soon after the attack, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif took to X to condemn the carnage: "Such cowardly acts of terrorism cannot weaken the resolve of the people of Pakistan," Sharif stated.

"We remain steadfast in our determination to eliminate terrorism in all its forms and manifestations," he added.

While Islamabad promises total elimination of the threat, the reality on the ground has long been of an insurgency capable of hitting high-value military logistics lines at will.

One source said that the "The blast occurred near a railway track as a train carrying Pakistani security personnel and civilians was travelling near Quetta’s cantonment area, according to officials and media reports." And so it seems the terror group knew that large numbers of military and security personnel would be coming through.

Over a year ago, there was a major hijacking of a train carrying 346 passengers in the same region, in March 2025. That attack resulted in the deaths of at least 21 passengers and at least four Pakistani soldiers involved in the security response.

Death toll expected to climb:

As we've featured before, the Baloch Conflict owes its origins to Balochistan’s contentious incorporation into Pakistan but has evolved in recent years to take on shades of "resource nationalism". What’s meant by this is that some locals believe that their resource-rich region, the largest in Pakistan at nearly half the country’s size, isn’t receiving its fair share of wealth.

The BLA and its supporters also accuse Pakistan of selling the region out to China. Pakistan denies these claims and has always blamed Afghanistan and India for the conflict.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 13:25

UAE State Oil Company Head Says Hormuz Bypass Pipeline Nearly 50 Percent Complete

UAE State Oil Company Head Says Hormuz Bypass Pipeline Nearly 50 Percent Complete

Authored by Evgenia Filimianova via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The head of the UAE's state oil company said on May 20 that a major new oil pipeline designed to bypass the Strait of Hormuz is nearly 50 percent complete, as regional tensions and competing maritime controls reshape global energy routes.

UAE Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, who's also the managing director and group CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, speaks via video during a presentation at the 44th annual CERAWeek by S&P Global conference at the Americas Hilton-Houston in Texas on March 23, 2026. CERAWeek by S&P Global

Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, chief executive of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, said during an interview at the Atlantic Council that the project is being accelerated toward a planned 2027 completion date.

"Right now, too much of the world's energy still moves through too few choke points," Al Jaber said. "That is exactly why the UAE made the decision more than a decade ago to invest in infrastructure that bypasses the Strait of Hormuz."

Al Jaber said the UAE's second west-east pipeline is already "almost 50 percent complete."

The project comes as the Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted following months of conflict involving Iran, Israel, and the United States.

The UAE said last week that it would accelerate construction of the pipeline to expand export capacity through Fujairah, a port city on the Gulf of Oman outside the Strait of Hormuz.

The country's existing Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline, also known as the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline, already allows the UAE to bypass Hormuz for a portion of its exports.

The new project is expected to significantly expand that capacity.

Al Jaber warned that global energy systems remain vulnerable because too much oil and gas infrastructure depends on narrow maritime chokepoints.

"Energy security is no longer just about your ability to continue to produce," he said. "It is about routes, access, storage, and redundancy."

He said global spare oil production capacity remains dangerously low while energy storage levels continue falling.

"In just two months, the world drew down around 250 million barrels from storage," Al Jaber said. "We have 30 to 35 days of effective cover. We need to at least double that."

The comments followed warnings from the International Energy Agency (IEA) that oil markets could enter a "red zone" this summer if disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz continue.

IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said on May 21 that more than 14 million barrels of oil per day had been removed from global markets because of infrastructure damage and restrictions linked to the conflict.

UAE Moves Beyond OPEC

The pipeline expansion also comes weeks after the UAE formally exited OPEC and the broader OPEC+ alliance.

The UAE announced on April 28 that it would leave the organization effective May 1, describing the move as a "sovereign responsibility in a new energy age."

Al Jaber said the decision would give the UAE greater flexibility to expand production and invest globally.

"Ultimately, real strength is not measured by the abundance of resources, but by how they are harnessed to serve the nation," he said.

The UAE said ongoing instability in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz influenced the decision.

"Outside OPEC, the UAE will remain what it has always been, a disciplined, responsible, credible, reliable, and a stabilizing force in the global energy markets," said Al Jaber.

He also described relations between the UAE and the United States as increasingly integrated across energy, infrastructure, defense, and technology sectors.

Iran Expands Strait Oversight

The pipeline expansion coincides with Iran's efforts to formalize oversight of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran announced in May the creation of the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, or PGSA, a new body tasked with supervising transit through the waterway and coordinating shipping permissions inside Iranian-designated control zones.

The PGSA said on May 20 that Iran had defined a maritime supervision area stretching from Kuh Mobarak in southeastern Iran to the southern coast of Fujairah in the UAE on the eastern side of the strait, and from Qeshm Island to Umm al-Quwain in the UAE on the western side.

The authority also said vessels operating within that area must coordinate transit frequencies and obtain permits from Iranian authorities before crossing the waterway.

Iranian Ambassador to France Mohammad Amin Nejad told Bloomberg on May 21 that Tehran and Oman are discussing a permanent tolling system for the strait.

Zones Of Control

The Iranian supervision zone appears to overlap at least partially with areas where U.S. naval forces are operating under Washington's blockade targeting Iranian ports.

U.S. Central Command said in an April 12 statement that American forces would blockade vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports beginning April 13.

It said the blockade applies to ships traveling to or from Iranian ports in both the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, while stating that U.S. forces would "not impede freedom of navigation" for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz to non-Iranian destinations.

Iran's newly declared PGSA supervision zone covers much of the same shipping corridor through which U.S. naval forces monitor and intercept commercial traffic linked to Iranian ports.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on May 21 that an Iranian tolling system would be unacceptable and warned it could derail negotiations between Washington and Tehran.

"It would make a diplomatic deal unfeasible," Rubio told reporters before departing for NATO meetings in Sweden.

Rubio described the proposed toll system as a "threat to the world" and "completely illegal."

Rubio said after meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte in Helsingborg, Sweden, on May 22 that Western allies hope to reach an agreement with Iran that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

He warned, however, that governments also need contingency plans if Iran refuses to restore maritime access.

Rubio said that if Iran continues restricting passage or threatens vessels that refuse to comply with Iranian demands, "something has to be done about it."

Several countries represented at the NATO meeting, he said, would be even more affected by prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz than the United States because of their dependence on Middle Eastern energy supplies.

Rubio added that NATO members must begin preparing for scenarios in which "Iran decides, 'We don't care, we're going to keep the Straits closed.'"

Motorists drive past an ADNOC Gas subsidiary of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company facility in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, on March 3, 2026. Ryan Lim/AFP via Getty Images Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 12:50

The Replacements: How US Helps Foreign Workers Take American Jobs

The Replacements: How US Helps Foreign Workers Take American Jobs

Authored by Steven Edginton via RealClearInvestigations,

Mary, a veteran Silicon Valley marketer who can't find a job, considers herself a victim of an H-1B visa program run amok.

Her story, a U.S. native replaced by a foreign-born employee who is willing to work at a significantly lower wage, has become commonplace, particularly in the tech industry. Adding insult to injury, she says, her CEO, who hails from India, told her to train the man he selected to replace her before laying her off.

Despite stints at Google and Cisco and two years of job hunting, Mary can no longer compete in a job market saturated with foreign-born H-1B visa holders. "I had experience. I should have walked right into these corporate jobs, but I didn't. Why? Because Silicon Valley is flooded with people who work for two-thirds of the price, or even half price," said Mary, who asked to be identified only by her first name.

U.S. tech workers like Mary are at the center of a battle brewing in Washington, D.C., over reforming the troubled H-1B visa program, which is designed to fill highly skilled positions when qualified American workers can't be found. The controversy pits tough-on-immigration Republicans and some Democrats against the most formidable of opponents - Big Tech, the primary beneficiary of a program considered by critics to be little more than a pipeline of cheap labor.

In the last few decades, the California dream has gone global as U.S. tech firms have filled their ranks and C-suites with employees born abroad. Intel is no longer the company of its founders, Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore, but of Malaysian-born Lip-Bu Tan, its CEO since March 2025. Microsoft is led by Satya Nadella; Alphabet Inc. by Sundar Pichai; Adobe by Shantanu Narayen; IBM by Arvind Krishna; YouTube by Neal Mohan; and T-Mobile US by Srinivas Gopalan - all of whom were born in India.

All told, a remarkable two-thirds of the Valley's nearly 400,000 tech jobs are now held by those born abroad, according to a 2025 report from the think tank Joint Venture Silicon Valley. Today, more tech workers were born in India (23%) and China (18%) combined than in the U.S. (34%).

Low-Cost Talent

The influx of low-cost Asian talent has clearly helped fuel profits in one of America's most influential sectors. But there is a downside to this tech boom - the sidelining of U.S. workers thanks to the H-1B visa program that's no longer working as intended. Created in 1990, the federal program has morphed into a vehicle for employers, particularly in the nation's tech centers, to recruit much cheaper foreign labor at the expense of U.S. tech workers, according to Harvard economist George J. Borjas.

While the H-1B program spans multiple industries, it's overwhelmingly concentrated in tech. Last year, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Tata Consultancy, and Google were the biggest visa users, with Amazon alone recording more than 13,000 applications. These companies find the savings from hiring foreign workers hard to resist. The job of software developer, for instance, accounts for 38% of all H-1B visa workers, according to a 2026 paper by Borjas. And these foreign software developers earn about 30% less than their U.S. counterparts, the economist estimates.

Since many of these tech jobs pay six figures, the savings quickly add up. Borjas estimates that companies, on average, save nearly $100,000 per worker over six years by hiring an H-1B worker rather than an American. The arrangement "redistributes wealth from those who compete with immigrants to those who use immigrants," Borjas wrote in 2016. That, in turn, helps account for the soaring stock prices of Big Tech since the 2008 financial crash.

False Rationale

The vaguely written H-1B law has been easy for companies to exploit. Hassan Abdullah, an immigration attorney and H-1B advocate, said the supposed congressional basis of the law - to fill highly skilled jobs with foreigners if Americans aren't available - has always been a fiction. "The regulations don't necessarily say that," said Abdullah, who helps companies get the visas. "Throughout all my years, I've never had to even consider that as a factor."

One of the most glaring weaknesses of the law, critics say, is that most companies applying for these visas are not required to demonstrate that they were unable to find qualified American workers. Only companies with more than 15% of their workforce on H-1Bs must make small efforts to recruit U.S. citizens, such as publicly announcing open positions.

Companies are required to pay foreign workers at least the "prevailing wage" for the occupation and region, a provision that should theoretically reduce the incentive to hire employees from Asia. But the process relies on self-reporting and has been easy to manipulate because salaries are calculated using broad regional averages that often fail to reflect real market wages in the technology sector.

As a result, the number of H-1B visa workers has skyrocketed. When an annual cap of 85,000 new visas is combined with renewals, 2025 was a banner year with 406,348 approved visas, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Seventy percent of those visas were issued to Indians. That compares with a total of 275,317 visa approvals in 2015.

Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt, who's part of the MAGA wing of the GOP, reacted to these numbers on X, calling the program "a national security nightmare. Enough. No more flooding the market with 400k+ H-1B visas while our people and our sovereignty gets screwed."

With criticism of the visas dovetailing with broader anti-immigration sentiments, the Trump administration has made the most serious move yet to restrict the program. Six months ago, the USCIS announced a new $100,000 fee that companies must pay per new H-1B worker living outside the U.S. While official figures have not yet been released, some immigration experts estimate that the fee may lead to a 30% to 50% decline in new visa applications.

"This is the first year we have not filed any H-1B visas for people outside the U.S. because tech companies don't want to pay the $100,000 fee," said immigration attorney Navdeep Meamber, who is based in Silicon Valley.

But companies have found a workaround. Meamber said she has seen an uptick in the number of clients filing for the visas for workers already in the U.S., particularly those such as students who transferred from other visa types to H-1Bs.

"The $100,000 fee is not reducing the numbers because foreign students, especially those who get on the Optional Practical Training program, can move into the H-1B pipeline without paying that fee," said attorney Rosemary Jenks, a campaigner for immigration reform with the Immigration Accountability Project. "So there are still plenty of H-1B visas being issued every year."

American Ingenuity

Silicon Valley wasn't always dominated by foreigners. Some claim the true birthplace of Silicon Valley can be found in a garage at 367 Addison Avenue in Palo Alto. It was there that David Packard, a native of Colorado, and Bill Hewlett of Michigan founded Hewlett-Packard in 1939. Robert Noyce, a native son of Iowa and co-inventor of the integrated circuit, critically made from silicon, gave name to the valley after the substance. With his colleague, Gordon Moore of San Francisco, they founded Intel in 1968.

Throughout the post-war years, America's booming tech industry was largely pioneered by natives. By the 1980s, however, concerns were raised about the dwindling number of young people available to fill STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) jobs in the future. Erich Bloch, director of the National Science Foundation, told the American Council on Education in 1985: "The pool of potential students from U.S. schools will become smaller. Demographic projections, of which you are all aware, show the number of 18-to-24-year-olds declining by about 20% over the next decade."

The 1990 Immigration Act, signed by George H. W. Bush, created the H-1B visa, a temporary work visa lasting a few years aimed at filling the labor shortages Bloch had warned about. Since then, as in many industries, tech firms have sometimes struggled to find employees, particularly specialized engineers, during times of rapid growth. But whether the industry faces a persistent shortage of American workers is a matter of debate among economists and labor analysts.

Major technology companies reject the criticism that the H-1B system is primarily a source of cheap labor. Executives stress that the program allows American firms to recruit engineers and researchers with advanced technical expertise in areas such as artificial intelligence, semiconductor design, and complex software development, where qualified talent can be scarce. They also contend that many H-1B workers are paid high salaries and that access to global talent helps keep American companies competitive against rivals in China and elsewhere.

Critics of the visas point to waves of layoffs, today driven by AI, accompanied by the growth in H-1Bs, as evidence that a labor shortage is nothing more than a fig leaf. Michael Capuano of the Federation for American Immigration Reform wrote in a blog post last year that "Google laid off 951 U.S. employees in 2024, but found room for 1,058 new H-1B workers. Apple laid off 735 people in 2024, but signed on 864 new H-1B employees. Microsoft laid off 3,426 workers from 2022 to 2024 and hired 3,259 new H-1Bs during that same period."

A 2023 analysis by the Economic Policy Institute similarly found that the top 30 H-1B employers hired more than 34,000 new H-1B workers in 2022 while laying off at least 85,000 employees during the same period.

In addition to cheaper talent, critics say H-1B visas also provide a captive workforce. Because employers can sponsor visa holders for permanent residency, many workers become heavily reliant on keeping their jobs in order to remain in the United States. Critics argue this dynamic discourages employees from changing companies or demanding higher wages, with some likening the system to a form of indentured servitude.

Tribalism At Play?

Critics say favoritism has also contributed to foreign dominance of the tech sector. After foreign-born employees take on leadership roles, including CEO, they sometimes attract and hire more foreigners by tapping their own professional and social networks.

Kevin Lynn, executive director of the Institute for Sound Public Policy, argues that "professionalism doesn't exist in these IT departments anymore," adding that "when you look at the hiring, it becomes very tribal; It's really India versus the rest of the world."

Microsoft saw the number of decisions on H-1B applications rise from 2,983 in 2014, when Nadella became CEO, to 6,258 in 2025. Google's numbers jumped from 2,309 in 2015, when Pichai took the top job, to 7,868 in 2025. During these years, these companies also grew, making it hard to know if the percentage of foreign workers increased. At IBM, H-1B decisions have remained consistent since Arvind Krishna was named the leader.

Meamber, the immigration lawyer, disputes the idea that companies run by foreign-born leaders are more likely to rely on labor from their home country. "The CEO doesn't even know who is being hired. These decisions are being made at a lower level by the HR team and by the recruiters," she said.

Stephen Vivien, an engineer, said he witnessed Indian employees help each other get hired by sharing interview questions when he worked at Google. "There were a lot of H-1B workers and they created their own little network," he said. "[When] one Indian guy would be coming up for his interview, the other Indian guys who had [already] gotten hired would call and share the questions."

In April, a New York jury found New Jersey-based Cognizant Technology Solutions liable for $8.4 million after a former executive sued the company, which was founded in India, for discrimination against non-Indian and non-South Asian workers. The executive argued he was passed over for a promotion and was later fired for raising concerns about bias against non-Indian employees.

The decision follows a separate successful lawsuit brought by three other employees against Cognizant in 2017, all similarly claiming discrimination against non-Indian workers, though the company is appealing and denies all allegations. In both lawsuits, juries found in favor of claims that Cognizant had used the H-1B program as a tool to discriminate against American workers. Since 2009, the company has received tens of thousands of H-1B visa approvals.

Reformers Vs. Big Tech

While restrictions to the program, including last year's $100,000 fee, have yet to meaningfully slow its growth, some Republicans have called to abolish it. In February, Florida representative Greg Steube introduced the EXILE Act, which would end the H-1B visa program entirely.

A proposed reform that might gain more bipartisan support targets the ineffective prevailing wage requirement that allows firms to underpay foreign workers. One idea floated by Republicans would create a minimum salary requirement for H-1B workers that's much higher than the current pay scale, thus removing the financial incentive to replace U.S.-born workers.

Ro Khanna, the Democratic congressman representing much of Silicon Valley, said on the All-In podcast last year that "there's definitely abuse [that] needs to be corrected" in the H-1B program. Khanna said a new prevailing wage standard would be a reform he could support.

But legislation that would raise labor costs would be opposed by Big Tech, armed with its war chest of money and influence in Washington. Jenks, the lawyer, said H-1B reformers face a tough fight. "The donors on this issue include all of the high-tech companies, whether it's Microsoft, Facebook, all of them," she said. "They put millions and millions of dollars every year into lobbying."

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 10:30

With Commercial Real Estate Still Challenging, Lenders Offload Troubled Loans At A Loss

With Commercial Real Estate Still Challenging, Lenders Offload Troubled Loans At A Loss

Authored by Mary Prenon via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

While leasing activity and vacancy trends suggest the U.S. commercial real estate market is stabilizing, office values are still well below post-pandemic peaks, recent reports show.

The San Francisco skyline on Jan. 20, 2023. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

As owners scramble to make payments on under-occupied office buildings, many lenders are reluctant to foreclose to avoid the headache of taking ownership and reselling the properties, according to David Marino, cofounder of Hughes Marino, a San Diego-based corporate real estate advisory firm.

According to Cushman and Wakefield, a global commercial real estate services company, national office sublease inventory in the first quarter declined by 13.6 percent year over year, to 101 million square feet, while vacancy may have peaked. Sublease space peaked in January 2023, at 189 million square feet, according to the commercial real estate services firm CBRE Group.

A February report from the financial data and research company MSCI also shows that office prices are showing signs of stabilization, though they are still well below their post-COVID-19 pandemic peak. Commercial property prices rose by 0.3 percent year over year in January, but downtown office values declined by 1.3 percent, and were down by 40.2 percent from three years ago.

Massive Perks

Speaking recently with Siyamak Khorrami, host of EpochTV's "Market Insider," Marino said the commercial real estate market is still challenging, as the pandemic has made remote work a new normal. "The horses are out of the barn and never coming back," he said.

An April 1 report from job search platform FlexJobs shows that remote-job postings in the first quarter increased by 20 percent month over month, with 65 percent of positions targeting experienced workers. The platform predicts continued growth in the work model for the rest of the year.

An April 16 Bureau of Labor Statistics report shows that 22.6 percent of workers teleworked or worked from home, a measure commonly described as remote work, in March.

Marino said about 85 percent of companies in the United States have had their leases expire in the past six years and have been able to resize, leaving many office markets with 20 percent to 30 percent availability. As a result, commercial landlords have been offering potential tenants massive perks, including free rent packages.

"I just represented a client in an engineering firm for 14,000 square feet, which is basically space for about 7,065 people. And the landlord that just bought a building down the street was in escrow and wanted to win this deal," Marino said. "They gave us an eight-year lease with a year free. In other words, my client moves in at the end of this year and doesn't pay rent in all of 2027."

In addition, Marino said the landlord paid for all of the tenant improvements to remodel the space, plus a cash moving allowance.

'B' Loans

However, banks and lenders can face an even bigger problem when loans cannot be repaid. Rather than pursuing immediate foreclosure proceedings, many lenders are resorting to creative solutions that allow landlords to retain ownership of these buildings, he said.

Marino noted that there have been "hundreds and hundreds of foreclosures" throughout the country, in particular during the past three years. Typically, he said, commercial loans include a "balloon" provision, which requires repayment or refinancing within seven to 10 years, or the property must be sold.

"What's happened in the last three years is a lot of owners have hit that balloon mark and interest rates went from 3 to 6 percent, so if your occupancy goes from 90 to 60 percent, you're immediately underwater," he said. "Lenders in those situations have generally foreclosed on the properties and resold them at a big discount."

In some cases, lenders don't want to foreclose because they don't want to become landlords. As an alternative, Marino said, they may split an existing loan into two pieces. In this scenario, a lender could, for example, take a $100 million loan and set $30 million of that aside as a "'B' loan," treating it as a different loan.

"What I've seen in the last three years is the lending community getting very creative, trying to salvage what they can," he said. "The lenders don't want to foreclose on the real estate, nor do they want to put somebody into default unnecessarily."

According to Marino, some metro areas are affected more than others. In San Diego, he said, 11 high-rise office buildings have already been foreclosed or are going through a forced-sale process when the loan hit the balloon payment stage.

A couple of those buildings are being converted to residential use, which Marino describes as a "micro trend" and not a significant impact on office inventory nationwide. He noted that close to a third of quality buildings in the city have already transitioned through financial negotiations with lenders.

Downtown Los Angeles and San Francisco have also experienced their share of office building foreclosures, Marino said.

"There's still going to be more, and the developers that own these things, frankly, are handing the keys back," he said. "There [are] some really ugly tax consequences."

For example, he said, if a buyer purchased a building for $200 million with $150 million in debt and today the building is worth only $80 million, the owner would rather walk away.

"These are typically individual assets with their own individual Partnership Agreement, and they're collapsing all over the country," he said.

No Signs Of Systemic Fallout

To Khorrami's question about how this will impact banks and lenders, Marino said it would depend on the percentage of the lenders' assets allocated toward commercial real estate.

"The rollover of the debt is typically distributed over many, many years, so you don't have all these loans really expiring at the same time within one financial institution," he said. "My experience so far is that we're not going to see a collapse of the banking sector because of commercial real estate."

While the road could be bumpy, he said, it's not going to be a trigger effect like it was during the early 1990s. Many of the older vacant office buildings are being sold at land value, minus the cost of demolition to start over and convert them into residential projects.

RentCafe, a rental housing research platform owned by Yardi, estimated in a March report that about 90,300 apartment units were in the office-to-residential conversion pipeline nationwide at the beginning of this year, marking another record year for such projects.

The warehousing market, meanwhile, appears to be booming, Marino said. He noted that the rise of online shopping has created an escalating demand for huge warehousing space.

"You look at an Amazon distribution building, and some of these things are a million square feet," he said. "They're some of the biggest buildings in the country."

The issue is that construction, including land acquisition, permitting, and design, can often take up to three years, he said.

From 2020 to 2025, Marino noted, 1.2 billion square feet of warehouse buildings were being constructed across the country. In another five years, he predicts, the country could see an unprecedented amount of massive warehouse construction.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 09:20

1 In 4 Cars Sold Globally Is An Electric Vehicle

1 In 4 Cars Sold Globally Is An Electric Vehicle

Electric vehicle adoption continues to accelerate worldwide, reaching new milestones in 2025.

As Statista's Tristan Gaudiaut details below, according to the IEA Global EV Outlook 2026, published on May 20, global sales of electric cars, including plug-in hybrids, surpassed 21 million units last year, more than doubling since 2022, when annual sales first exceeded 10 million.

As the chart shows, EVs now account for roughly one in four passenger car sales globally, meaning their market share climbed to 25 percent in 2025, up from just 2 percent in 2018.

 One in Four Cars Sold Globally Is an Electric Vehicle | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

This rapid growth has been driven largely by China, which remains by far the largest market.

With more than 13 million electric vehicles sold in 2025, the country alone accounted for around 60 percent of global sales.

While adoption has also increased steadily in the rest of the world, with nearly 8 million units sold – largely in Europe and the United States – the data highlight China’s dominant role in shaping the global EV market.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 08:45

German Taxpayers Bled Dry: Mass Migration Cost €40 Billion In 2025

German Taxpayers Bled Dry: Mass Migration Cost €40 Billion In 2025

Via Remix News,

Migrants cost German taxpayers — just at the federal level — €24.8 billion in 2025, according to new data in the “refugee costs report” from the German Federal Ministry of Finance. However, the true sum is much higher.

The €24.8 billion is strictly the federal bill. The actual, combined national cost of migration for Germany is that €24.8 billion plus the massive, separate billions that the individual states and municipalities had to pull from their own local tax revenues to cover their own deficits brought on by mass immigration.

Welt notes that the total figure is indeed much higher, since it does not include states and local communes, but Welt does not provide this combined data.

Nevertheless, previous years indicate that this number is at least €15 to €20 billion. That means any total figure is likely well over €40 billion, but as in previous years, it may actually go as high as €50 billion.

The total costs cover several areas, including the federal government’s contribution to the refugee and integration costs of states and municipalities. One controversial issue is exactly how much money the federal government is transferring to the states and municipalities, which they argue is not enough to cover all their costs.

Essentially, the federal government only pays out a flat rate per initial asylum application, amounting to €7,500 from the federal government, allocated via a modification in the VAT distribution. This advance payment reached €1.25 billion for 2025. Additionally, the report assumes that the federal government holds a claim for repayment from the states totaling €250 million for 2025.

However, this only covers a fraction of the cost. The states indicate that the total costs in the area of flight and migration are significantly higher than the VAT resources available to them on the basis of the flat rate.

Of course, all of these expenses only cover specific areas like housing, direct social benefits, and integration courses. The true cost is still far higher than €40 billion to €50 billion.

The costs, for instance, do not cover expenses associated with the substantial foreign prison population. They also do not cover the need for the vastly increased police forces and counter-terrorism efforts. There are also “gray areas” that lead to other hidden taxes on Germans brought on by mass immigration. For instance, mass immigration has led to vastly higher housing prices, more road traffic, crowded hospitals, and longer wait times for medical treatments.

Germans are even paying higher health insurance premiums now due to mass immigration.

The head of the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds (GKV-Spitzenverband) has repeatedly criticized the federal government for creating a massive multi-billion-euro deficit that forces them to raise premiums, with the core of the complaint revolving around “non-insurance benefits.” These are social welfare benefits mandated by the government that are paid out to people who have not paid regular insurance contributions into the system. This includes long-term unemployed citizens and refugees.

When asylum seekers first arrive in Germany, they are not members of the statutory health insurance system. Under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act, their healthcare costs are covered, with local municipalities and state social offices paying their bills. 

The financial friction begins once a migrant’s asylum application is approved, or if they have been in the country for 36 months without a final decision. At this point, they transition into the standard welfare system, known as citizen’s money.

Once on welfare, they are fully integrated into the statutory health insurance system. This is where the GKV-Spitzenverband argues the math breaks down, with the government only paying €108 per person per month for welfare recipients, the majority of which are migrants and those with a migration background, when the care actually costs between €300 and €350 a month.

This has resulted in a multi-billion euro deficit, which the insurance companies say now needs to be passed on to Germans actually paying for their health insurance.

In short, Germans are being squeezed from all sides due to mass immigration, and despite claims that foreigners would pay the pensions of Germany’s aging population, this is clearly unrealistic. Instead, Germany’s elderly may now be expected to work even longer, with a strong movement in the government to raise the retirement age to 73.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/24/2026 - 08:10

Pages