Lessons From The Longest-Living Among Us

Authored by Amy Denney via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Sister Pacis Bao spent 31 years longing for revenge against the communists who murdered her family—then made a decision at age 79 that may have added 25 years to her life. The 104-year-old nun turned from hatred to forgiveness, which put her mind and body at ease.

Sister Pacis Bao embodies many traits of a "superager," keeping her days busy with prayer, artwork, and social connections in the convent where she lives. Amy Denney/The Epoch Times

Bao is thriving as part of the fastest-growing demographic worldwide: centenarians—people who live past 100.

Life expectancy is generally on the rise, with one in six people worldwide age 60 and over—a rate expected to double by 2050, according to the World Health Organization. Among older adults, those who reach 80 and whose cognitive and physical abilities exceed typical age-related decline are called “superagers.”

Sue Wright, a 98-year-old Midwestern woman with little in common with Bao, is also thriving as a superager.

The two women are quietly practicing the very insight researchers are racing to understand—what helps humans thrive beyond 100.

Aim for Goldilocks Sleep

Both women maintain consistent sleep schedules. Bao goes to sleep by 8 p.m. every night, wakes at 5 a.m., and rests every afternoon—a rhythm that reflects best-practice data and her own needs. Wright follows a similar pattern.

Their routines reflect what researchers call “Goldilocks sleep”—not too much, not too little, and of good quality.

Sleeping less than seven hours a night has been associated with a 14 percent increased risk of all-cause mortality, according to a meta-analysis published in GeroScience.

The biological effects are significant: chronic low-grade inflammation, impaired immune function, hormonal imbalances, increased blood pressure, and reduced clearance of proteins linked to Alzheimer’s disease.

“While this study focused on sleep duration, sleep quality is another critical factor influencing mortality risk,” the authors wrote. They added that poor sleep—marked by frequent wake-ups and restless nights—has been linked to heart problems, memory decline, and other brain disorders.

Maintain a Healthy Weight

Bao has never been overweight, though she indulges in potstickers and egg rolls on occasion, and enjoys a few bites of ice cream after dinner. Wright, who weighs 119 pounds now, never weighed more than 130 pounds outside of her two pregnancies.

Being overweight or obese is associated with all causes of mortality, even among those who never smoked or had chronic disease, according to a study of nearly 4 million people spanning four continents published in The Lancet. Another study published in JAMA found that people who gained more than 66 pounds between early and middle adulthood had higher rates of heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, and obesity-related cancer.

The authors noted that while people and their doctors often dismiss excess weight gain in midlife, it has serious longevity implications.

A meta-analysis of 15 studies published in Medicine found that weight fluctuations elevate the risk of all-cause mortality, lending credibility to the scale as a way to monitor and maintain a healthy weight.

Flex Your Brain

Just as weight can begin causing problems before the golden years, so can issues like memory, attention, and perception.

“Longitudinal studies have shown that midlife is a critical period for the beginning of the pathology of cognitive disorders,” wrote the authors of a review on successful aging published in Acta Biomedica. They noted that frequent use of memory and attention, as well as challenging the brain in other ways, may explain why some older people experience higher cognitive functioning.

Those who enjoy a range of brain-stimulating activities—reading, writing, and playing games—across their lifetimes may prevent the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease, a leading cause of death worldwide, according to a study published in JAMA Neurology.

Both Bao and Wright have kept active schedules, even after stopping 9-to-5 work, and keeping busy hands. They read, play games, and help others in need.

They also both surround themselves with a positive social circle—another factor that can protect the brain. A study published in Alzheimer’s Dementia found that those with strong midlife relationships had a lower dementia risk compared to those with poor relationships.

Flex Your Muscles, Too

Centenarians don’t need to lift weights, though retaining muscle mass leads to better heart function, mobility, and balance, and prevents Type 2 diabetes.

An article about the blue zones noted that the world’s longest-living people often move because of necessity, fun, and function. They grow gardens, don’t rely on mechanical conveniences, and accumulate thousands of steps each day without a formal plan or tracking.

Wright grew up playing basketball and baseball with her brothers, golfed regularly as an adult, and was even spotted dancing without her walker at the assisted living home where she moved a year ago after a COVID-19 infection left her with leg weakness.

“We used to go dancing all the time—went every weekend,” she said, smiling at the memory.

Fill Your Calendar

Wright’s dancing came with a lot of socializing—another hallmark of longevity. A robust social life ranked right behind good health when surveyed adults described what successful aging means to them. The findings were reported in The Gerontologist

The adults pointed to having friends and family, feeling supported, not being lonely, participating in social activities, and being involved with younger generations.

While Wright misses her neighborhood friends, she is enjoying regular company and staying active in her assisted living community. “I like everyone here. It’s nice to be around people you can visit with,” she said. “I do like to help others when they need help, too.”

Wright will soon be moving to a new state to be close to her son and other family. Her nieces are already planning a party for her 100th birthday.

Don’t Dwell on Your Age

Aging isn’t just an ongoing celebration. Wright has outlived two husbands and all of her friends, and suffered through the loss of a son when he was age 3.

“You think a lot about it and wonder why, but you have to accept losses and go on with life,” she said. “You just have to cope with it and try not to think about it, because we all have to go.”

Accepting aging and dying are important to living a fulfilled life, according to about one-quarter of participants in the successful aging survey. While many said reaching 80 and beyond was a lofty goal, some noted it’s important not to wish to be young again or to view aging as a punishment.

Take It Easy

Overthinking aging—or anything, for that matter—increases stress, and stress is linked to numerous diseases. The solution: regularly find a way to relax both emotionally and physically.

Although everyone experiences stress, the world’s longest-lived people have routines to shed that stress, wrote Dan Buettner and Sam Skemp, authors of the blue zones article. “Okinawans take a few moments each day to remember their ancestors; Adventists pray; Ikarians take a nap; and Sardinians do happy hour.”

In addition to praying, Bao draws and paints hummingbirds and flowers. Her hand isn’t as steady as it used to be, but that doesn’t matter. Not only does it improve her mood to make them, but it also delights her to give away her creations.

“Sometimes the people, they need cheer,” she said, adding that she likes to bless the staff at the convent. “They take good care of us, and we are sure grateful.”

Disease Can’t Always Be Avoided

Aging trends have spurred interest and research in centenarians—often considered models of aging well because they’ve managed to delay disease. Within the demographic, however, some are long-suffering with disease, while others seem to avoid disease altogether.

Researchers categorize centenarians as:

• Escapers: About 15 percent who show no sign of disease at age 100.
• Survivors: About 42 percent who had disease before reaching age 80.
• Delayers: About 43 percent who had no age-related diseases until reaching age 80 or beyond.

Wright has kidney disease and struggles to drink enough water. She’s lost some weight and said that while she'd like to live to 100, she doesn’t plan to undergo dialysis treatments if her condition advances.

Bao moved from the independent wing of her convent to be near the nurse’s station two years ago—but not because she’s ill. The oldest resident, Bao figured it only made sense, though a convent administrator said she’s the healthiest of the residents.

Despite the rapid increase in centenarians, reaching 100 remains rare. There are about 2.6 per 10,000 people in the United States, up from 2.1 in 2020 and 1.42 in 1980.

“Day by day, Jesus is always the same to me, giving me extra help,” Bao said.

“I say to myself every day when I get up, ‘I’m grateful, and today’s going to be a good day.’”

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 22:35

New Mexico Is The State Most Dependent On Food Stamps

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the largest federal food assistance initiative in the U.S., supporting roughly one in eight Americans. The program helps low-income households purchase groceries, with monthly benefits averaging around $180 per person nationwide.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Bruno Venditti, highlights the states most reliant on food stamps, based on 2025 data from SmartAsset. While participation rates vary widely, the figures reveal stark contrasts in economic need and cost of living across states.

New Mexico Leads in SNAP Dependence

New Mexico stands out as the most SNAP-dependent state, with 21.5% of residents receiving assistance, nearly double the national average. The average monthly benefit there is $176.51 per person, totaling over $80 million in monthly aid. Persistent poverty rates and rural isolation help explain the state’s high reliance on federal food assistance.

Oregon follows closely at 18.1% enrollment, while Louisiana ranks third at 17.5%. In each case, elevated unemployment and cost pressures have contributed to continued demand for benefits.

Coastal and Urban States See Higher Benefit Amounts

States like New York ($218.44), Massachusetts ($215.64), and Hawaii ($361.78) report some of the highest average benefits per person. These higher payments reflect steeper living costs in dense urban and island economies.

Rank State Population with SNAP Avg benefit per person Number of beneficiaries Total monthly benefits 1 New Mexico 21.5% $176.51 457,699 $80,790,060 2 Oregon 18.1% $182.17 772,893 $140,797,421 3 Louisiana 17.5% $186.90 803,988 $150,268,544 4 Oklahoma 16.9% $186.85 692,477 $129,386,266 5 W. Virginia 15.5% $167.74 273,566 $45,886,908 6 Nevada 15.2% $171.80 496,848 $85,360,880 7 Massachusetts 15.1% $215.64 1,076,187 $232,066,810 8 Pennsylvania 15.0% $181.70 1,958,047 $355,777,154 9 New York 14.9% $218.44 2,962,913 $647,210,404 10 Illinois 14.8% $195.94 1,879,564 $368,278,250 11 Michigan 14.5% $175.44 1,473,832 $258,575,524 12 Alabama 14.3% $193.08 736,178 $142,142,795 13 California 13.9% $190.25 5,494,318 $1,045,310,679 14 Kentucky 13.0% $178.94 595,155 $106,498,834 15 Rhode Island 12.8% $200.95 142,726 $28,680,737 16 Florida 12.6% $181.97 2,943,012 $535,551,777 17 North Carolina 12.5% $174.75 1,378,291 $240,858,724 18 Ohio 12.2% $186.03 1,450,955 $269,917,495 19 Georgia 12.1% $186.08 1,356,493 $252,417,633 20 Mississippi 12.1% $180.46 357,042 $64,432,174 21 Arizona 11.7% $182.25 887,253 $161,705,602 22 Maine 11.6% $176.55 163,520 $28,869,975 23 Wisconsin 11.6% $163.89 689,315 $112,973,934 24 Washington 11.4% $184.51 905,471 $167,068,578 25 Hawaii 11.3% $361.78 163,576 $59,178,123 26 Delaware 11.2% $180.54 118,209 $21,340,950 27 Texas 11.0% $177.82 3,455,085 $614,386,464 28 Maryland 10.7% $182.49 667,981 $121,902,010 29 Missouri 10.5% $196.10 655,940 $128,629,589 30 South Carolina 10.4% $186.42 567,895 $105,867,349 31 Colorado 10.3% $195.97 614,843 $120,493,408 32 Vermont 10.0% $188.75 64,633 $12,199,424 33 Connecticut 9.9% $192.89 363,524 $70,118,853 34 Tennessee 9.6% $203.20 690,545 $140,318,213 35 Virginia 9.4% $173.84 824,866 $143,392,688 36 Alaska 9.0% $364.31 66,377 $24,181,479 37 New Jersey 8.7% $194.63 826,094 $160,778,766 38 Indiana 8.5% $195.71 586,403 $114,763,019 39 Iowa 8.2% $169.04 267,158 $45,159,537 40 South Dakota 8.1% $198.24 75,282 $14,923,544 41 Minnesota 7.8% $158.45 451,966 $71,616,027 42 Arkansas 7.8% $172.82 239,748 $41,434,391 43 Nebraska 7.5% $181.00 150,600 $27,258,920 44 North Dakota 7.2% $174.33 57,129 $9,959,141 45 Montana 7.1% $170.68 80,523 $13,743,731 46 Idaho 6.7% $179.01 133,545 $23,906,189 47 Kansas 6.3% $177.23 186,036 $32,971,957 48 New Hampshire 5.4% $169.56 75,717 $12,838,748 49 Utah 5.1% $192.17 177,087 $34,030,139 50 Wyoming 4.6% $183.81 27,122 $4,985,385

In contrast, benefits tend to be smaller in lower-cost Midwestern states such as Wisconsin ($163.89) and Minnesota ($158.45), where overall food prices and housing costs are lower.

Low Participation in Western States

Wyoming has the lowest SNAP participation rate at just 4.6%, followed by Utah (5.1%) and New Hampshire (5.4%). Still, even in these states, food stamps remains a crucial safety net for tens of thousands of residents. Utah alone distributes more than $34 million in benefits each month to about 177,000 people.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The Longest Government Shutdown in U.S. History on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 22:10

Trump's Unpredictability Keeps Beijing Off Balance: Analysts

Authored by Terri Wu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Since day one in office, President Donald Trump has taken Beijing on a roller coaster ride of tariffs and export controls. For a regime that is already struggling with a stagnant economy and an international market increasingly wary of Chinese dumping, Trump’s actions have added an extra layer of uncertainty.

President Donald Trump and CCP leader Xi Jinping leave after their talks at the Gimhae Air Base in Busan, South Korea, on Oct. 30, 2025. Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

Both sides went through multiple rounds of escalation and de-escalation. Last month, they entered a tentative one-year truce.

Tariff levels are down—overall about 47 percent on Chinese goods and 33 percent on U.S. goods. China will pause its extensive rare earth export control, curb the flow of fentanyl precursor chemicals into the United States, and will also buy soybeans from American farmers. In return, the United States will suspend its port fees on Chinese ships and the 50 percent rule—barring exports to any companies owned 50 percent or more by entities on the restricted list.

Before the Trump-Xi meeting on Oct. 30, China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs called Trump a “world-class statesman.” At the meeting in Busan, South Korea, Xi referred to Trump as a “helmsman.” Xi also said China’s development is “parallel and not contradictory to” Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign.

Coping with Trump’s unpredictability is challenging for Beijing, said Dennis Wilder, a former senior U.S. national security official on China affairs who served under both Republican and Democratic presidents.

“It was interesting how Xi Jinping flattered Trump this time, and I haven’t heard him flatter an American president before,” Wilder told The Epoch Times. “That was quite striking, and it shows that the Chinese are a little scared of Trump and the fact that he doesn’t play by the traditional rules.”

Alexander Campbell, a global macro investor, estimated that due to the property crisis, China’s banks need a lifeline of $1 trillion each year, which is supported by its trade surplus of the same size. Therefore, he thinks the importance of exports to the regime and the threat of high tariff rates are underappreciated. He previously worked as the head of commodities at U.S. investment management firm Bridgewater Associates.

In his view, Trump’s volatile approach forced China to reveal its hand in rare earths, creating a sense of urgency for the United States to achieve supply chain independence.

Chaos as Strategy

According to game theory, unpredictability is what the stronger player in a competitive situation wants, said Campbell. He added that the weaker player in this case needs predictability for central planning—making unpredictability an existential threat to the authoritarian regime.

“Trump is playing what we call a mixed strategy like a poker player, where you don’t know when they’re going to bluff or call, and you don’t know when they have a good hand or a bad hand,” Campbell told The Epoch Times.

“And that’s explicitly how he approaches negotiations and how he approaches these kinds of competitive dynamics.”

It all goes back to “Liberation Day,” the macro investor said, when Trump “separated friends from enemies.”

On April 2, Trump imposed reciprocal tariffs on nearly all countries, including China. Many came to the table to negotiate with the United States; China was among the few that retaliated.

A key vulnerability of China is that it wants to appear strong, Campbell said; therefore, through several rounds of escalations, China revealed its best card: rare earths.

Beijing’s near-monopoly on the critical minerals essential for modern manufacturing, from cars and electronics to advanced weapon systems, underscores the strategic importance of rare earths in the global economy.

On Oct. 9, China announced that it would restrict exports of any rare earth products containing 0.1 percent or more of Chinese rare earth content or manufactured using Chinese technology.

“They overplayed it, because what they did was, instead of keeping this bilateral, they made it global. And they scared the whole world by these new restrictions that were supposed to go into place at the end of the year,” said Wilder.

“And that just brings everybody over to the U.S. side. I think that was a big mistake by the Chinese. They should have kept it bilateral.”

In Campbell’s view, Trump baited China into using its rare earth card, showing the world that if China would use it as leverage for tariffs, it could also use it on other issues. Through Beijing’s actions, the pain of being subject to what the Chinese call a “rare-earth chokepoint” has become real.

Alexander Campbell sees the sense of urgency created by China’s actions as a catalyst for the United States to act swiftly and decisively.

“I think the West is actually very good at solving acute problems when they are actually perceived as acute,” he added. “Operation Warp Speed on rare earths would not have been possible in January.”

Closing Rare-Earth Vulnerability

Aside from meeting with Xi in South Korea, Trump also toured several Asian countries and reached framework agreements related to rare earths, including with Japan and Malaysia.

The president also signed a deal with Australia before his trip to Asia for greater access to Australia’s reserves and infrastructure.

Ian Lange, a professor at the Colorado School of Mines and an expert on critical minerals, told The Epoch Times that he believes the agreements with other countries are beneficial. Still, he thinks the U.S. domestic efforts are sufficient to achieve rare-earth self-reliance within two years.

Australian company Lynas Rare Earths Ltd. owns a refinery of heavy rare earth elements in Malaysia, the only one in the world that is not controlled by the Chinese, said Lange. And collaboration with Japan, a technology powerhouse, will also help, the professor said.

In addition, he said recycled rare earths could meet 20 percent of the U.S. market demand, and more deals like the one the Department of War struck with Las Vegas-based MP Materials would be forthcoming. The Pentagon guaranteed a minimum floor price for the products and a minimum profit for MP’s new magnet factory.

On Oct. 24, Brazilian company Aclara Resources Inc. announced that it would build a refinery for heavy rare earths in Louisiana. Construction is expected to be finished by the end of 2027.

Trump has said that the United States could end its dependency on Chinese rare earths within the next 18 months.

These critical minerals are going to drive the future competition between a market economy led by the United States and a non-market economy led by China, according to Yeh Yao-Yuan, professor of political science and international studies at the University of St. Thomas.

How Trump will persuade other countries to produce rare earths despite the high pollution in the refinery process will be key to watch throughout his term, Yeh told The Epoch Times.

What’s Next?

The professor at the University of St. Thomas said he thinks China will continue to use the rare earth card as a weapon, whether to counter U.S. tensions, pressure Taiwan, or distract Chinese people from domestic economic troubles.

But if China drags on, he said, it will lose because the Chinese market isn’t as large as the U.S. market and has less capacity to withstand negative impacts.

“What if one day overcapacity applies to rare earths as well?” he asked. “When other countries don’t need Chinese rare earths, what else does China have to hold the rest of the world captive?”

Wilder concurs.

Rare earth is the “best card” China has, he said, but the United States has other cards, such as high-tech restrictions and financial sanctions.

The current U.S.-China relations hang in a delicate balance.

Wilder sees the truce as a “tactical pause” with pending details. He said the discussed reciprocal state visits—Trump visiting China in April and Chinese leader Xi Jinping coming to the United States later in the fall—“help keep the trade war on pause.”

“There are expectations on both sides, and if they’re not met, it could spiral again. Trump could delay his trip to Beijing because he doesn’t have to go in April.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 21:45

Nearly One In Five Americans Still Work From Home Regularly

Many companies, particularly among the finance and tech sectors, have started calling employees back to the office.

Firms such as Microsoft have announced expectations for workers to spend more time on-site, while Amazon has gone further, requiring employees to return to the office five days a week.

As Statista's Anna Fleck details below, according to data from Statista’s Consumer Insights survey, around one in five U.S. adults currently work from home on a regular basis.

You will find more infographics at Statista

This share has remained relatively stable since 2022, when Statista first began tracking the trend.

However, remote work is not the most common arrangement.

As shown in Statista’s recent findings, 43 percent of respondents said they regularly work in their company's office, while 16 percent reported working primarily in factories or production facilities.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 21:20

Americans Are Increasingly Alone, But Are They Really Lonely?

Authored by Christopher J. Ferguson via RealClearInvestigations,

In 2023, then-U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy released a bombshell report, “Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation,” that painted a bleak picture of citizens feeling “isolated, invisible, and insignificant.” Most provocatively, it stated that perhaps half of Americans face a personal crisis of aloneness that poses health risks “similar to that caused by smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day.”

The report received wide attention as it resonated with myriad data points – including declining marriage and birth rates and the rise of remote work – showing Americans are spending less face time with one another. But a RealClearInvestigations inquiry has found that its warnings of a loneliness epidemic are unsupported and that its claims of severe health risks stem from a misreading of the data. 

The University of Rochester’s Viji Kannan, whom Murthy partly relied on for his claims of a loneliness increase, told RCI her study focused on measurable declines in social connections and not more subjective feelings of loneliness. “YES!” she said in an email. “Loneliness is a different thing.” 

Daniel Cox at the American Enterprise Institute, whose research on loneliness was also cited by the surgeon general, had a similar take. He told RCI, “The evidence more strongly supports an epidemic of ‘aloneness’ rather than loneliness. We are spending more time by ourselves.” 

Hans IJzerman, who studies loneliness at the University of Oxford, concurred. “The biggest story may be how the surgeon general basically butchered the narrative by not relying on solid data,” he said.

Murthy, who now works outside of government, did not respond to request for comment. The Department of Health and Human Services, which still posts the loneliness report on its website, declined to comment, citing the government shutdown.

Critics say the former surgeon general’s questionable assertion of a loneliness epidemic – which has been amplified extensively in the media – reflects a larger pattern whereby science is invoked to make larger arguments about American culture. These include claims that systemic racism is a public health crisis or that technologies such as cell phones are increasing rates of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues among teens. These assertions take kernels of truth – racism exists, mental health problems were on the rise until the last few years – and then attach them to specific causes to add a patina of scientific credibility.

The alleged loneliness epidemic seems to stem in part from concerns over how technology in particular may be enabling people to choose to spend more time by themselves – which can seem counter to democratic ideas of community – and from a conflation of two very different phenomena: loneliness and being alone. Being alone is not the same thing as being lonely, and research shows social obligations in heavy doses can be as stressful for many as they are supportive. 

Research results have clarified that true feelings of loneliness only kick in at the extreme end of social isolation. Quality time with others is more important than simply time spent with others overall (sometimes other people are annoying!) Unsurprisingly, those who enjoy being alone are less likely to feel lonely when not around others.

More Time Alone

A wealth of data suggests that Americans are spending more time by themselves. The surgeon general’s advisory, for example, pointed to slow declines in family and friend engagement during the early 2000s, though the most serious drop-offs occurred after the COVID-19 pandemic due to lockdowns and social distancing.

More people are forgoing marriage and parenthood. We have fewer close friends. More Americans live alone than ever before, partly because we’re living longer. 

Source: National Vital Statistics, US Census Bureau and American Community Survey, and previous work by John Loo

According to Gallup Data, U.S. church membership has been on a steady decline since the 1990s, though that decline may have slowed or leveled off as of 2018.

Remote work, already slowly increasing, skyrocketed after the pandemic. Whether this is bad or not is debatable, given people seem eager enough for it.

While these trends are clear, their meaning and effect are harder to pinpoint. Even though people are alone more often, data for the period 2003-2019 shows a very small decline in social connection. Professor Kannan calculated that time spent with others declined by about 146 hours per year, or about 1.7% – a relatively slight decrease that hardly seems reflective of an epidemic. 

That period was, of course, also marked by the rise of smartphones and social media, forcing researchers to ask new questions about connectivity: Is aloneness defined by physical proximity? If someone is playing Dungeons and Dragons online with friends all over the world, are they truly alone?

Loneliness By the Numbers

Loneliness is, of course, a common and universal human trait. It is a subjective feeling of unwanted aloneness that is accompanied by a sense of social emptiness. A connection is desired but missing. Feeling lonely from time to time is not a sign of a problem. Loneliness becomes a clinically relevant issue when it is chronic and becomes a precursor for persistent distress and dissatisfaction with life. 

Tracking loneliness over time can be trickier than time spent alone, perhaps one reason why so many conversations about loneliness seem to subtly shift to time spent alone instead. There appear to be few high-quality datasets tracking subjective loneliness over time. Though some data suggests a very small, gradual trend upward in loneliness among young adults since the 1970s, the increase is remarkably small over a 40- to 50-year period, hardly an “epidemic.” Data from Gallup suggests that loneliness has decreased since a high during the pandemic, although their data does not appear to extend back earlier. As one recent summary of the evidence put it, “There is an epidemic of headlines that claim we are experiencing a loneliness epidemic, but there is no empirical support for the fact that loneliness is increasing, let alone spreading at epidemic rates.”

As Bad as Smoking?

One of the surgeon general’s more dramatic claims was that “lacking social connection is as deadly as smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day.” 

This comparison appears to come straight from the research of Professor Julianne Holt-Lunstad at Brigham Young University, who was the lead science editor on the surgeon general’s report. However, this comparison appears to be for light smoking (defined as 15 cigarettes or less per day). Had comparisons been made with medium (15-25 cigarettes) or heavy smoking (25+ cigarettes), smoking would clearly come out far more dangerous. 

Further, the impact of smoking is pretty direct … lung cancer, heart attacks, strokes. Loneliness’s impact on mortality is clear. It could involve everything from more stress to fewer people around to help with medical issues. Causal claims are also tricky, given the degree to which the evidence relies on self-report correlational studies of subjective loneliness, associating it with mortality. In some cases, prolonged illness could prompt social abandonment, which would cause loneliness. Using correlational data to suggest that loneliness is causing illness is fraught, but that did not stop the surgeon general.

While Holt-Lunstad declined to address RCI’s questions about the surgeon general’s use of her study, her co-author, University of Arizona Professor David Sbarra, expressed some unease with the epidemic framing. “In terms of a loneliness epidemic, I think I am more skeptical than most…demographic changes that would establish an epidemic are really challenging,” he told RCI. “I think loneliness can spread through social networks…but what are the best data that loneliness and social disconnection are increasing? It's quite equivocal, in my opinion.” 

There is little disagreement that loneliness is bad and can be associated with declining health. This may be because the distress of loneliness can cause stress and related health problems such as high blood pressure. But also because close social connections can help people with their medications and medical complications. 

It’s less clear that, if the prevalence of loneliness has risen, it’s risen dramatically or that simple interpretations of loneliness = health risk are warranted.

IJzerman, who is also CEO of Annecy Behavioral Science Lab and an expert on loneliness, has been critical of the way Kannan’s data was used by the surgeon general. IJzerman noted that trends regarding time spent alone don’t tap into subjective loneliness and may be due to changes in how questions are asked over time. Further, they may simply reflect more people using technology for social interaction, which isn’t necessarily bad. IJzerman suggested we tend to get distracted by vanishingly small time trends and a tendency to look for technology to blame, such as social media or smartphones. Instead, we should be more concerned with the structural barriers some people face regarding social connection, for example, older adults and lower-income individuals.  

Children and Loneliness

Much attention has focused on the world of teens. Buffeted by COVID-19 lockdowns, with increasingly structured lives, and navigating new technology worlds, legitimate concerns have been raised about teen loneliness. Though some studies have suggested an increasing loneliness trend among youth, IJzerman has said they are seriously flawed. He has critiqued these studies as “mining noise,” saying, “We cannot afford to base our understanding of loneliness on the psychological equivalent of wetted fingers in the wind.” 

IJzerman also noted the difficulties of measuring loneliness across various cultures, as some studies have done. “While measuring loneliness across different societies might seem as simple as translating a questionnaire, the reality is far more complex. A Dutch student's understanding of loneliness may differ fundamentally from their British peer's interpretation, shaped by distinct cultural norms and social expectations. Even within the same country, temporal shifts in social attitudes can dramatically affect responses - as stigma around loneliness waxes and wanes, respondents' willingness to acknowledge these feelings may change accordingly.”

While arguing that our difficulty in measuring loneliness should give society pause – especially when it comes to advancing specific policies as a response – he also noted that our current concerns around technology have a long lineage. “Socrates warned that writing would erode memory and authentic dialogue; the printing press faced condemnation for encouraging solitary reading over community gatherings; early telephones were criticized for disrupting social norms; television was blamed for isolating families. Even mundane innovations like heating stoves faced resistance for disrupting traditional communal practices. Time has generally proven these fears exaggerated, suggesting we should approach current concerns about social media with similar careful skepticism.” 

This doesn’t mean we should dismiss all concerns about loneliness.  Whether subjective loneliness has declined or people have simply changed how they interact with others remains something of an open question.  Whatever is occurring, it does not appear that changes in technology are central, so we might look to the breakdowns in institutions, reduced marriages, problems with schools, etc.  

Our difficulty seems to be that our national conversation can occur in only two modes. Either something is a crisis, or it is not worth talking about at all. Perhaps in having a more nuanced understanding of loneliness concerns, we could begin to appreciate that some issues are still worthy of consideration even if they are not a 5-alarm fire.

Christopher J. Ferguson is a professor of psychology at Stetson University in Florida and author of "Catastrophe! The Psychology of Why Good People Make Bad Situations Worse."

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 20:55

North Dakota & Texas Saw The Greatest GDP Growth Of US States Over The Past 35 Years, Louisiana The Least

The 1990s were a different time. Dial-up internet, gas costing a dollar, and many states still leaning on manufacturing.

Even then, new tech clusters and improved drilling methods were starting to reshape the map, setting up today’s energy-rich and tech-focused states for the strongest economies.

The visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Pallavi Rao, ranks all 50 states and the District of Columbia by inflation-adjusted GDP growth between 1998–2024.

Data for real GDP growth by U.S. state is sourced from Bureau of Economic Analysis.

ℹ️ Real GDP growth measured from chained 2017 dollars.

America’s Shale Boom in One Map

North Dakota’s economy more than doubled thanks to the Bakken shale boom, which lifted its real output by 164%—twice the U.S. average.

Texas, already the nation’s largest oil-producing state, followed closely with 141% growth.

Rank State State Code GDP Growth (1998–2024) CAGR 2024 GDP (Billions) 1 North Dakota ND 164% 3.8% $80,058 2 Utah UT 157% 3.7% $299,471 3 Idaho ID 144% 3.5% $129,018 4 Texas TX 141% 3.4% $2,769,766 5 Washington WA 134% 3.3% $856,014 6 Arizona AZ 126% 3.2% $570,089 7 Colorado CO 117% 3.0% $557,633 8 California CA 115% 3.0% $4,048,108 9 Florida FL 113% 3.0% $1,726,710 10 Oregon OR 102% 2.7% $330,250 11 Nevada NV 102% 2.7% $269,011 12 South Dakota SD 101% 2.7% $76,796 13 Nebraska NE 96% 2.6% $189,243 14 Montana MT 93% 2.6% $78,441 15 North Carolina NC 89% 2.5% $844,209 16 Massachusetts MA 87% 2.4% $778,523 17 Georgia GA 85% 2.4% $881,508 18 South Carolina SC 84% 2.4% $357,074 19 Oklahoma OK 83% 2.4% $263,695 20 Tennessee TN 83% 2.3% $561,201 21 Virginia VA 81% 2.3% $761,734 22 New Mexico NM 76% 2.2% $147,085 23 Maryland MD 74% 2.2% $546,028 24 New Hampshire NH 73% 2.1% $119,337 25 Iowa IA 71% 2.1% $265,795 26 Minnesota MN 68% 2.0% $507,688 27 New York NY 65% 2.0% $2,322,139 28 District of Columbia DC 65% 1.9% $184,298 29 Arkansas AR 64% 1.9% $188,340 30 Vermont VT 63% 1.9% $46,276 31 Maine ME 62% 1.9% $99,174 32 Kansas KS 61% 1.9% $230,522 33 Wyoming WY 60% 1.8% $51,498 34 Alabama AL 59% 1.8% $325,345 35 Indiana IN 58% 1.8% $519,517 36 Hawaii HI 56% 1.7% $117,627 37 Wisconsin WI 53% 1.6% $453,299 38 Delaware DE 51% 1.6% $110,972 39 Pennsylvania PA 50% 1.6% $1,007,874 40 New Jersey NJ 47% 1.5% $846,000 41 Kentucky KY 44% 1.4% $295,375 42 Missouri MO 42% 1.4% $448,714 43 Illinois IL 41% 1.3% $1,148,106 44 Rhode Island RI 40% 1.3% $80,381 45 Ohio OH 39% 1.3% $923,141 46 Alaska AK 39% 1.3% $71,567 47 Mississippi MS 36% 1.2% $158,192 48 Connecticut CT 35% 1.2% $356,835 49 West Virginia WV 34% 1.1% $106,475 50 Michigan MI 30% 1.0% $702,467 51 Louisiana LA 23% 0.8% $329,173 N/A U.S. USA 81% 2.3% $29,298,013

New Mexico and Oklahoma also landed in the top 20. Cheap feedstock, rising exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG), and associated midstream build-out helped these states capture much of the value created by soaring U.S. energy production.

ℹ️ Related: New Mexico overtook North Dakota as the second-largest oil producing U.S. state.

Tech & Tourism Hubs Sustain Rapid Expansion

Utah (+157%), Idaho (+144%), and Washington (+134%) show how a diversified tech sector can supercharge state-level GDP.

Microsoft’s cloud push, Idaho’s semiconductor fabs, and Utah’s “Silicon Slopes” collectively fostered high-wage job growth and attracted inbound migration.

Even the giant economies of California (+115%) and Florida (+113%) managed to outpace the national average rate of GDP growth by U.S. states. This shows how tech and professional-services clusters spill over into broader economic activity.

Rust Belt and Coastal Laggards

Manufacturing-heavy states in the Midwest and Appalachia largely underperformed. Michigan (+30%) and West Virginia (+34%) never fully recovered the industrial output lost after the early-2000s recession and the Great Financial Crisis.

Connecticut (+35%) and New Jersey (+47%) illustrate how high costs and slow demographic growth weighed on East Coast economies.

Louisiana, hit by multiple hurricanes and refinery shutdowns, posted the slowest gain at just 23%, one-quarter of the national pace.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The World’s Largest Economies, Including U.S. States on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 20:30

Cheap Power Is The Secret To Winning The Global AI Race

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

• Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang publicly stated that China is positioned to win the global AI race due to its significantly lower energy costs and less stringent regulation compared to the United States and Europe.

• The pursuit of net-zero ambitions has led to high electricity costs in the UK and EU, which directly threatens their plans to become AI superpowers, as AI development is highly dependent on affordable power.

• The surge in demand for electricity from data centers is driving up power prices even in the energy-rich United States, potentially jeopardizing the country's lead in artificial intelligence.

Not long ago, the UK’s Prime Minister declared his government would turn the country into an “AI superpower”. The EU leadership has similar plans for the bloc—while China and the U.S. race ahead without looking back. Neither the UK nor the EU will catch up soon. Their energy is too expensive. Now, Nvidia’s boss is warning that even the United States’ energy costs may be too high to help it win the race.

“China is going to win the AI race.” Jensen Huang made the blunt statement at the Financial Times’ Future of AI Summit this week, going on to list as reasons for this prediction the fact that China enjoyed lower energy costs and, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, less regulation than the United States. He then proceeded to accuse the collective West of “cynicism” with regard to the AI pursuit, calling for some optimism instead. “Power is free” in China, he said, referring to generous state subsidies for the industry—and likely to the fact that China has a lot of low-cost hydrocarbon power generation, unlike, notably, the UK and the EU.

In fairness, Nvidia’s chief executive has a very good reason to be angry with the U.S. leadership. Beijing this week banned foreign microchips from AI data centers receiving state funding. Per the new regulation, new data centers are to only use Chinese-made chips, Reuters reported, citing unnamed sources. It was unclear from the report whether the regulation had a national or local scope, but in either case, Nvidia chip sales to China would be affected by it.

Personal reasons for disgruntlement aside, Huang’s critique of energy policies and overall regulation are quite on point. The European Union is a perfect case in point: it has for years used regulation as a means of stimulating innovation and competitiveness, only to achieve the complete opposite, drawing strong criticism from industries about it.

The UK, meanwhile, is a perfect case in point on energy costs. The country has some of the highest electricity prices in the world because of the net-zero push by several successive governments. AI development, however, depends on low electricity costs. In other words, the UK’s AI superpower dream will likely remain a dream unless the Starmer cabinet finds a way to bring costs down—even though Nvidia recently announced plans to invest $2 billion in fostering an AI startup culture in the UK.

Yet even in the United States, which is a lot more self-sufficient in affordable energy than either the UK or the EU, the artificial intelligence race is driving electricity prices higher, which may jeopardise the country’s success in that race. Earlier this year, the biggest capacity auction in the country, covering a fifth of Americans, ended with a record-high price of $329.14 per megawatt-day. The number was 22% higher than the final price of last year’s auction and reflected the surge in demand for electricity driven by the data center industry. States with high concentrations of data centers are seeing soaring electricity prices that some households are struggling to pay.

Meanwhile, China is subsidizing its AI industry and building new coal plants to ensure stable, reliable, and affordable electricity even as it remains the largest wind and solar installer in the world. Since 2021, the Chinese state has paid an estimated $100 billion in subsidies to the AI industry, Reuters reported this week, after reviewing government tenders in that sector. Nvidia’s CEO has criticized the Trump administration openly for its export curbs on chips, saying it was smart to keep Chinese AI developers hooked on U.S. chips, which, of course, would also boost Nvidia’s profits, but the Trump administration has refused to listen, focusing on what it sees as a risk of the Chinese government using U.S. chips in military technology.

Corporate interests aside, however, it is true that energy costs will determine the winner of the AI race.

The challenge for the West is to choose between bringing those costs down and suffering defeat in AI as it remains focused on net zero ambitions.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 20:05

Arctic Blast To Plunge U.S. East Temperatures To Nuuk, Greenland Levels

By early next week, much of the eastern United States "will be about as cold as Nuuk, Greenland," warned meteorologist Ben Noll, adding, "It will be warmer in St. John's, Newfoundland, than in parts of northern Florida." 

On Tuesday morning, parts of the Southeast U.S. will be about as cold as Nuuk, Greenland — near the edge of the Arctic Circle.

It will be warmer in St. John's, Newfoundland, than in parts of northern Florida. pic.twitter.com/SU1TNvQAdx

— Ben Noll (@BenNollWeather) November 7, 2025

Temperatures in the Mid-Atlantic region, particularly around Washington, D.C., will begin sliding this weekend and could average in the mid-30s by Tuesday morning.

The Arctic cold blast detailed in a note earlier this week isn't expected to linger long, with temperatures forecast to rebound to seasonal 5,10,30 year seasonal norms between 45°F and 50°F by the end of the week.

"The COLDEST part of the airmass will actually be felt into the south through midweek with some of the highest anomalies from GA into FL especially with morning lows," meteorologist Jim Cantore wrote in a note on X, adding, "Lake effect snow should really set up from Sunday night to Tuesday from west to east and down the spine of Appalachia." 

Separate from the upcoming cold blast, but something we told readers weeks ago, is that globalist Bill Gates' climate-change crisis doom narrative turned out to be utter nonsense; the billionaire himself even admitted as much.

Other folks watching the same soap opera noticed this, too. Climate fueled gaslighting! https://t.co/YbF7jbvsC1

— Ryan Maue (@RyanMaue) November 6, 2025

Remember, the only reason Democrats ramped up their "climate crisis" propaganda against the American taxpayer was to put a heist on the U.S. Treasury and enrich their globalist allies.

Like this guy. 

Now, far-left Al Gore just has to admit that he has been wrong for three decades. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 19:40

The Democrats' Man Problem

Authored by Kurt Schlichter via Townhall,

It’s a challenge when you want to be a major political party and you can’t seem to avoid alienating about 90 percent of 50 percent of the population, but that’s the challenge the Democrats have accepted. People with penises who identify as men, I have some bad news for you. They don’t like you. Not at all. And their solution to this problem – and it’s a serious problem – is to try to convince you, in the least convincing possible way, that they dig you so you’ll shut up and vote as you’re told.

But they do not dig you. Not at all. And they deeply resent that the brutal arithmetic of politics requires that they at least try to appeal to dudes who are not femboys, pinkos, pervs, or eunuchs dominated by their evil faux first wives.

What do they dislike about men and masculinity? Well, the men and masculinity parts. Somebody has to be to blame for the fact that everything they lay their soft, girlish hands on turns to Schiff. Normal men are as good a scapegoat as any; there will never be any introspection about how the common denominator in the disasters that inevitably stem from feminized government (and everything else) is the feminization part. Helen Andrews has called it—check out her viral take on the phenomenon.

Ambition, clear standards, and a willingness to engage in direct conflict rather than passively-aggressively trying to cancel anyone who dares to wrongthink are among the laudable attributes of masculine institutions that have slowly been eroded over the years in favor of the soft, mushy goo of naggy, scoldy failure we have seen in recent decades. Look at the institutions that have embraced their inner girl, which is better at doing the job the institution was meant to do, rather than following the feels of its feminine figureheads. Look at one institution that has unashamedly rejected this pernicious trend and done a 180-degree turnabout. The military, a year ago, was a DEI-addled, barely functional bureaucracy dedicated to imposing civilian society’s social pathologies on what were supposed to be warriors. Diversity is our strength? No, it never was. That’s a soft-headed cliche masquerading as a profound leadership insight. Under Pete Hegseth, the military is once again enforcing standards, on hair, on bellies, on not pretending to be a chick. It’s no longer body-positive, trans-welcoming, and war-losing. Just ask the mullahs, or the Houthis, or the fragments of the drug runners bobbing out there in the ocean about our newly retoxified military’s masculine effectiveness. Name a feminized institution that’s better than the masculine version. Public schools? Hollywood? Academia? Our government, before that big meanie Donald Trump, with his expectations and testosterone, started demanding excellence over demographic box-checking?

The last few elections have demonstrated that normal men want nothing to do with the condescending political nursery school teachers that the Democrats offer. If you’re a man – a real man – the last thing you want to do is spend four years listening to Kamala Harris or one of her analogues hectoring you about how disappointed she is with you about your unwillingness to utterly submit to her domination. If you wield testicles, you can’t vote against the harridans hard enough.

So, what can the Democrats do? Well, they are in quite a pickle, considering how they need to win the votes of men they want to literally disarm and figuratively (at least, sometimes, figuratively) castrate. Will they change their policies to make a nod to men’s concerns and win them back? You know, stop trying to take our guns – you are not a man if you don’t pack heat – or stop shipping our jobs away so we can support ourselves and our families, or end the outright discrimination against straight males in the workplace and academia? That sort of thing.

Of course not. Making men into Ken dolls is an objective, not a side effect. After all, the existence of manbosses is a threat to the rule of girlbosses. And the Democrat women yearn to be girlbosses – the alternative is to be mothers, and that terrifies them. A proper Democrat female slaves for a corporation, non-profit, or the government, and, if she really wants to do the mom thing, waits until she’s down to her last dozen eggs to give motherhood a shot.

So, the plan has to be to trick men into thinking they are a vital component of the Democrat coalition as opposed to an unruly inconvenience that must be tolerated. The Democrats first offered their own version of Real Men, often a vet or some hicklib with a real man’s job, like oysterman, cop, or coach. That’s why Kamala picked Tim Walz – he was a man’s man, if you never hung out with any men. Currently, in Maine, the left is gaga over Graham Platner; they secretly believe his casual racism, psychotic violence fantasies, and Nazi tattoo just make him more authentic.

In another flex, they tried the Harry Sisson model. If there’s anything a real man respects, it’s a hairless boychild who looks like he can barely do a push-up. Of course, Harry disqualified himself in the eyes of the Democrats, not because of his laughable unsuitability for the mission but because he was trying to pick up chicks online. Typical Democrats, hating the player and not the game. 

They have also explored offering the James Spader archetype from every ’80s movie; Gavin Newsom is a spoiled, degenerate rich kid, but with astonishing hair. His oily charm and habit of banging his way through his friends’ wives is exactly what Democrats expect from men, even though it’s alien to most of us. They fear him, yet they are drawn to him; it’s akin to how good-looking convicts on death row get tons of marriage proposals. As usual, we are all living in these people’s personal psychodramas.

Then there are the women who they use to try to leverage men to do their will at the ballot box, and sometimes said leveraging is physically necessary. You might think that if one really wanted to appeal to men, one might go with a slinky ingenue à la Sydney Sweeney. But when that starlet rolled around on screen to sell jeans, the Democrat types called her a “Nazi.” Take that, heterosexuality on the part of men and women! Yeah, if there’s anything men hate, it’s pretty girls.

Instead, the Democrats decided that what men wanted was Olivia Julianna and sent her out to arouse the troops. That initiative quickly fizzled; she looks like she’s got a contract out on Han Solo, who would definitely fire first if she cornered him.

And then there are the new Joe Rogans, lefty online influencers who the left hopes will perform the male-speaking function Joe Rogan performed before the left decided to cancel Joe Rogan. One candidate is Hasan Piker, a tiresome commie who plays footsie with threats of violence and tortures his dog. Men just love people who hurt dogs, according to people who never sat in an audience that was cheering on John Wick.

Piker’s at least in shape and not a bloated slob. Filling in the bloated slob slot is Stavros Halkias, an enormous, sweaty comic with political takes of the Mamdani-stan variety, best known for his role as a scabrous degenerate in the very funny show “Tires.” He’s amusing on TV, but he’s not exactly a guy men long to emulate. He looks like he should be telling you, “No Coke, Pepsi,” and awkwardly propositioning your girlfriend. Do not Google the name of his former podcast.

And then there’s the Great White Wine Woman Hope, someone called Jennifer Welch. This bizarre mutant has been getting a lot of play lately, an indicator of Dem desperation. Billed as a “red state mom,” she talks like a Santa Monica Chardonnay swiller and looks like a plastic surgery cautionary example. I don’t know if it’s a Botox OD or a facelift too far, but her mug looks like a snare drum, and she appears so alien you expect her to demand you take her to your leader, which, to her consternation, is Donald Trump. She comes off like every woman you’ve ever seen berating a manager over some petty gripe. So angry, so bitter – if she’s not gobbling handfuls of SSRIs, maybe she ought to be.

An interior designer and former Bravo star on some show you haven’t seen, Welch is from Oklahoma, which is supposed to be a selling point, but hey, so is Jimmy Lankford – there’s always a blue streak in the deep red, and vice versa. Her thing is big talk to rile up the weirdos, losers, and mutations; she’s very mad at, for example, Riley Gaines for being normal and attractive. Welch is the kind of person who shouts “No Kings!” unironically; a man’s response to her is “no thanks.” But, more sinisterly, she recently told the Dems they need to get even more psychotic: “You can either jump on board with this s---, or we’re coming after you in the same way that we come after MAGA. Period.” The “s---” she was referencing was the base’s open delight over the murder of Charlie Kirk. Charming. Nothing appeals to men like a literal gargoyle badgering them with up-talky monologues that blend absolute ignorance about politics with sociopathology.

The main challenge for the Democrats is that they hate the people they want to appeal to. They don’t want to win men over, much less compromise with them. They want to shut them up and teach them to comply. Some males will, but no men will.

Follow Kurt on Twitter @KurtSchlichter and order Kurt Schlichter’s action-packed new novel, American Apocalypse: The Second Civil War out now! Get Kurt Schlichter and Irina Moises’s noir fantasy novel, Lost Angeles: Silver Bullets On The Sunset Strip! Also, check out Kurt’s Kelly Turnbull People’s Republic series of conservative action novels.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 19:15

UN Bends The Knee, Revokes Sanctions On Syrian Leaders Ahead Of Trump Meeting

The U.N. Security Council voted Thursday to end terrorism-related sanctions on Syria’s interim president and interior minister, acknowledging the country’s change after Bashar al-Assad was deposed in early December 2024.

The resolution, sponsored by the United States, was adopted via 14 votes in favor and an abstention by China.

It removes Ahmed al-Sharaa—previously known as Mohammed al-Jolani—leader of political and military group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Interior Minister Anas Khattab from sanctions aimed at ISIS and al-Qaida associates.

The move comes ahead of a reported meeting between al-Sharaa and President Donald Trump in Washington next week.

As Kimberley Hayek details below for The Epoch Times, Thursday’s decision means al-Sharaa and Khattab will no longer be subject to asset freezes and travel bans, which were imposed in 2014 when HTS was designated a terrorist organization by the United Nations.

In May, the United States, the UK, and the EU lifted measures targeting Syria worth about $15 billion that restricted asset transfers and trade. The United States then removed HTS’s designation as a foreign terrorist organization in July. The UK did the same in October.

The U.N. resolution recognizes the interim Syrian government’s pledges for unencumbered humanitarian access, fighting terrorism, including against ISIS and al-Qaida, and preserving human rights.

U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz viewed it as a “strong political signal” recognizing Syria’s new era.

The Syrian government, said Waltz, “is working hard to fulfill its commitments on countering terrorism and narcotics, on eliminating any remnants of chemical weapons, and promoting regional security and stability as well as an inclusive, Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political process.”

Syria’s delegate, Ambassador Ibrahim Abdulmalik Olabi, celebrated the decision.

“We consider [this resolution] a sign of a growing confidence in the new Syria, its people and its leadership,” he said, calling it a “badge of honour.”

The Security Council has regularly approved travel exemptions for al-Sharaa this year, meaning the upcoming White House meeting between Trump and al-Sharaa did not hinge on the U.N. vote.

Al-Sharaa, in 2005, joined the organization that would become Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), according to a congressional report published in September. Al-Sharaa, according to a former U.S. intelligence official, led an AQI cell.

Al-Sharaa was arrested by U.S. forces in Iraq in about 2005 and held in Camp Bucca until his release in either 2010 or 2011. After returning to Syria, he helped found the al-Nusra Front (al-Qaida’s Syrian affiliate) in early 2012. He later severed his group’s formal relationship with al-Qaida in 2016 and oversaw its rebranding into HTS in 2017.

In February, a European Parliament report outlined the reasons behind action being taken by multiple countries to delist the Syrian government from sanctions.

“Internally, the HTS leadership has taken several measures to ensure continuity of governance and prevent anarchy in Syria, for instance, by working with former regime officials to preserve state institutions and making efforts to disarm and integrate the various armed groups into the security forces,” reads the report.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 18:50

America’s Future: Food Stamp Riots And Communism?

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

There’s a lot of black-pilling Republicans out there this week after a handful of elections in the northeastern US led to “sweeping” Democrat victories in New York, New Jersey and Virginia. As is always the case whenever Republicans lose any race no matter how insignificant to the bigger picture, suddenly the sky is falling and doom is about to come crashing down on America for all eternity. The panic has become quite tiresome.

Keep in mind, the gloom is limited mostly to social media and is exacerbated by a few hundred conservative influencers. As usual, these people still don’t realize that the social media world is not the real world.

If you were shocked by someone like Zohran Mamdani winning the mayor’s race in New York for example, then you have not been paying any attention to what’s been happening in blue cities lately. I predicted that liberals would turn out in droves to vote for the guy back in July. In my article “Batman vs The Joker: Democrats Will Double Down On Chaos To Save Their Party”, I noted:

“Leftists in the US will rally around uncompromising socialists like Mamdani because they’re tired of pretending that they care about “democracy”, free markets, property rights, moral codes or freedom in general. They need an all encompassing vision, even if it’s a monstrous and dystopian one. And, they want leadership that is transparent and unapologetic in its psychopathic intent. They don’t want to play the role of humanitarians anymore – They want to take the mask off and taste the flavors of blood and power…”

It’s New York, folks. It’s one of the largest hives of far-left scum and villainy in the world and conservatives only make up 26% of the city’s population.  OF COURSE Mamdani won. He represents everything the political left wants; a radical repudiation of western culture and free markets. Let’s not forget, these are the same people who celebrated the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

The same goes for New Jersey. In Virginia, the GOP decided to run a woman (Winsome Earle-Sears) who positioned herself as a “Never-Trumper” in 2022. She claimed that Trump was a liability for the Republican Party and that he should step aside. She then suddenly flipped in 2024 after Trump won again. OF COURSE she lost the race in Virginia. Conservatives have scruples about their candidates. They aren’t going to show up at the ballot box for someone who trashes their party leader and then jumps on the bandwagon at the last minute.

My point is, the hysteria going around social media over these “losses” is limited to a tiny bubble of people bouncing their ideas around in perpetuity. These few elections are in no way an indicator of America shifting far-left. They are, however, a reminder that our country is thoroughly divided on almost every issue and policy. Conservatives and progressives could not be more opposed in every way.

And, as I keep saying but I’m not sure if conservatives are hearing, it’s a reminder that leftists and Democrats are fighting A WAR while conservatives continue to play politics.  The leftists are consolidating around communist figures and ideas of radical insurgency.   Meanwhile GOP members and influencers are freaking out about “how to get more college-age white women in NYC” to vote for them.  It’s pure stupidity.

I would like to use the EBT/SNAP debate as a model for this divide because I think it’s revealing. Food subsidies are the epitome of socialism and the growing dependency on government that they create cannot be denied. Over 42 million Americans are now collecting SNAP; that’s 12.5% of the population. When the program first started in the late 1960s (on a national level), only 1.4% of the population qualified.

When SNAP was created it was promoted as a stop gap, a temporary safety net for people out of work and looking for employment. The primary focus of welfare benefits was supposed to be the disabled and the elderly, not able bodied working-age people (who now make up 80% of SNAP recipients). The program was a helping hand and then it became a crutch or a trap.

Right now the government shutdown is up in the air and emergency funds will do little to keep food subsidies running. The crux of the shutdown is the debate over healthcare benefits (more socialism) going to illegal immigrants (at least 1.8 million illegal migrants collected ACA in 2024). Only 5 Senate Democrats are need to vote for a clean funding bill, but they have refused 14 times.

As I have been warning for the past couple months, the Democrats are hoping for food riots that can be blamed on Trump and conservatives. Another few weeks and yes, this could happen in some major cities where Democrats refuse to enforce property theft laws.  The Democrat message is this:  “We will use mob violence and chaos to FORCE you to give us what we want.  Even if you win elections, we are in control…”

It’s political extortion.  Give them what they want and they will only continue to mobilize angry mobs over and over again to exert leverage over government decisions.

But what will the result be? Corporate chains and grocers will inevitably close up shop and those cities will become permanent food deserts. Leftists can’t force retailers to stay open, stock shelves and put employees at risk. Food riots will not have the effect that Democrats are hoping for.  Businesses will leave these cities. Smart people will leave these cities.  And the Democrat politicians still running the cities will be targeted by the same criminal mobs they have allied with.

There are certainly a number of people out there that are in actual need. I would never hold it against someone if they turned to a government program for support when life goes wrong. If they’re trying to rebuild and get a job and they need a short term boost, that’s okay. I prefer charity be private and personal rather than government enforced, but I grew up dirt poor; I know people will take whatever help they can get and usually they don’t care if it comes from the government.

The problem arises when welfare becomes a social mainstay, or an expectation. The level of entitlement surrounding SNAP is truly incredible. The number of people taking to the internet to call for blood because “Trump is stealing their SNAP” is disturbing. It’s the same thing that always happens with socialist projects – They draw support because they start small and innocuous. Then, they turn into an expensive society draining monstrosity that the populace is addicted to.

A number of commentators have been ringing warning bells about potential food riots, but I would like to point out some positives if cuts to SNAP continue.

First, the program was never supposed to become as large and costly as it is today. Reducing it to people who are truly in need (disabled, elderly and short term jobless) would help to reduce government spending which helps to reduce national debt and inflation.

Second, with 42 million people on food subsidies, grocery retailers are collecting billions in taxpayer dollars through artificially created demand. This demand eats up supply and, in turn, helps to drive up food prices. Cutting down SNAP would lead to a reduction in grocery traffic and deflation in prices for everyone.

Third, if labor shortages are persisting as the BLS claims, then able bodied people living on SNAP for years will now be forced to go back to work, filling the labor pool and solving the shortage problem. All the talk of migrant deportations leaving industries without workers? That goes away.

Free stuff is not free stuff. There is always a terrible price to be paid for government subsidized living. There are only two kinds of people that support long term welfare for the able bodied – Entitled people who are lazy and don’t want to work for what they have, and the politicians that want those people to vote for them.

Zohran Mamdani won in New York in part because of his many promises of socialist handouts, from government run grocery stores with cheap food to a rent freeze to free public transportation and subsidies for minorities and low income residents.  Mamdani is growing a “free stuff army” and the only way he can fund these programs is through overt taxation; he has admitted this.

He claims rich individuals and corporations will pay the heft of the bill, but we’ve seen similar attempts in cities like Seattle and San Francisco. They all end the same way – With wealthy residents leaving the city by the thousands and taking their businesses with them. The socialist politicians are then left with only middle-class taxpayers who then bear the pain of funding those programs.

The goal of the far-left is to make everyone equal: Everyone becomes equally poor. Meanwhile the wealthy have the ability to simply leave and go to economies where they are more appreciated. Socialism and communism lead to a larger wealth gap, not a smaller wealth gap.

Mamdani will likely attempt a capital flight tax, which will not work. Businesses and money will rush out of New York like blood from an arterial wound. The rent freeze will push many property owners to stop leasing or sell, which will result in a shrinking rental market for the poor and middle class. Within 2-3 years the metropolis will be an economic wasteland.

Socialism only works when you can force everyone to participate in the scam, and even then it still ends with a far lower standard of living for most people. The only places where this doesn’t happen are highly homogeneous countries with small populations and vast natural resources.  In every other case, progressive economic policies encourage dependency and then trigger disaster.

Is America facing food riots if the shutdown continues? Probably. In limited pockets of the country certainly, but mostly in places where Democrats are already running the economy into the ground. In other words, people who vote far left will suffer the most.  The riots will take place in their backyards.

Is the increasing radicalism of the left a sign that the US will descend into full bore communism? Is Mamdani just the beginning?

No, that’s not going to happen. Even if GOP fears over the mid-terms turn out to be accurate, elections are not the only determinant of the direction of a nation. Millions of conservatives and patriots are not going to allow widespread communism/globalism to take hold. We’ve already got a taste of that under the Biden Administration. We’ve also seen many progressives brag about how they plan to take revenge on us (for winning in 2024) once they get back into power.

Conservatives need to STOP constantly worrying about the next election and start considering what needs to be done now.  They need to stop playing politics and start defending themselves against the insurgency that is targeting them. Many of us are prepared to fight an internal war before we become a punching bag for the political left (there will never be another covid shutdown, for example).  And if a war happens, the left will lose.

Let’s hope violence isn’t necessary.  Let’s hope that a political solution is possible, but let’s prepare accordingly anyway.  The only way war can be avoided is if the political left changes their ways and stops poking the bear.  Who actually thinks they will change?

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 18:25

Maduro Open To 'Managed Exit' If Trump Provides Amnesty; Putin On Standby With Military Aid

Last week, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro reached out to Russia, China and Iran for possible military aid, after US President Donald Trump mulled a military attack amid a massive buildup of American forces in the region.

"The requests to Moscow were made in the form of a letter meant for Russian President Vladimir Putin and was intended to be delivered during a visit to the Russian capital by a senior aide this month," the Washington Post (CIA) reported, adding that Maduro also sent a letter to Chinese President Xi Jinping seeking "expanded military cooperation" between the two countries in order to counter "the escalation between the U.S. and Venezuela."

Now, The Atlantic (also CIA) writes that Maduro is open to a managed exit / exile, as long as Trump promises amnesty. 

Maduro would be open to a managed exit if the United States provides amnesty for him and his top lieutenants, lifts its bounties, and facilitates a comfortable exile, people who have dealings with the Caracas regime say. “If there is enough pressure, and if there is enough candy in the dish,” the person who speaks to officials in both countries said, “everything is on the table with Maduro.”

Of course, one needs to view the 'managed exit' thing with a grain of salt given the source and timing of what's going on. 

Of note, Trump's Venezuela envoy Richard Grenell was originally tasked with negotiating a deal with Maduro that would allow: 

• U.S. access to Venezuela’s oil and minerals
• Crackdowns on gangs/drug transit
• Release of detained Americans
• Resumption of deportation flights to Venezuela

While Grenell secured early concessions, including the release of six American hostages, Trump abruptly ended Grenell's negotiations after Secretary of State Marco Rubio pushed for a more aggressive strategy. 

Grenell, however, had made headway in negotiating a "managed exit" for Maduro. 

Talks of a managed exit come amid US strikes on allegedly cartel-linked boats near Venezuela and in the Pacific, killing at least 65 people across 16 attacks, which was followed by the Pentagon launching the largest Caribbean buildup since 1962 - which include: 

• the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier
• 8+ warships
• ~10,000 troops
• nuclear submarine
• drones and fighter jets

In short - way more than what might be needed to take on cartels - implying imminent regime change (which The Atlantic is surely happy about). Trump has also authorized the CIA to conduct potentially lethal activities in Venezuela (as if they needed permission). 

Russia Ready to Rock Soldiers, formation, deployment, missiles on vehicles, weapons systems. Military parade of the Russian Army on Red Square in Moscow on May 9. | The Kremlin

With tensions escalating, Russia has responded to Maduro's pleas for aid - with Moscow now publicly saying it's prepared to provide support, including:

• Repairing Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets
• Upgrading radar and engines
• Delivering ~14 missile units
• Possible supply of new Oreshnik missile systems

Moscow is considering this to be legitimate bilateral military-technical cooperation, not covert aid - which would of course raise the cost and the risk of a US strike or invasion, and risks a direct proxy confrontation, Newsweek reports, noting that foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova confirmed Caracas's request. 

Moscow’s response could reshape great power dynamics in Latin America and alter the regional security balance. Maduro’s request underscores Venezuela’s heightened sense of vulnerability and its turn to Moscow for critical military backing.

Zakharova said that Moscow stood ready to “respond appropriately to the requests” from Venezuela while requesting that all parties refrain from escalatory actions. Earlier statements from her have emphasized that Moscow acts within bilateral military‑technical cooperation agreements and laws, and that the maintained presence of Russian military advisers in Venezuela is consistent with those deals.

Russia's involvement would rugpull Marco Rubio's dreams of "quick regime change" - after framing Venezuela as a narco-terrorist state and a destabilizing force that serves as a proxy to US adversaries. It also means Grenell's push for a negotiated exit may be off the table, as Maduro may feel he now has leverage to wait out Trump, and/or demand larger incentives. 

And so, it appears the entire regime change endeavor just became much riskier for team Trump.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 18:00

Supreme Court Issues Major Opinion On Transgender Identity & The Trump Passport Policy

Authored by Jonathan Turley,.

In a significant win for the Trump Administration, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion on Thursday afternoon on the Trump Administration’s requirement that passport holders use their sex assigned at birth and that such requirements do not violate equal protection guarantees. While a brief, unsigned opinion issued on the interim docket, it represents a major ruling on the constitutional protections afforded to transgender individuals.

The case began with a challenge to an executive order issued on January 20, 2025, declaring that the federal government would only “recognize two sexes, male and female.” The order instructed the State Department to “require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards, accurately reflect the holder’s sex.”

The litigants alleged that the order and underlying policy were a denial of equal protection.

I previously discussed the Supreme Court’s upholding a Tennessee ban on transgender medical treatments for adolescents. One of the most notable aspects of this decision was the concurrence of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, rejecting the claim that transgender status qualifies as a group entitled to heightened scrutiny under the Constitution.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements.” However, the Court stressed that “This Court has not previously held that transgender individuals are a suspect or quasisuspect class. And this case, in any event, does not raise that question because SB1 does not classify on the basis of transgender status.”

In her concurrence, Justice Amy Coney Barrett directly rejected the claim:

The Sixth Circuit held that transgender individuals do not constitute a suspect class, and it was right to do so.3 To begin, transgender status is not marked by the same sort of “‘obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics’” as race or sex.

…Nor is the transgender population a “discrete group,” as our cases require.

…The boundaries of the group, in other words, are not defined by an easily ascertainable characteristic that is fixed and consistent across the group. Finally, holding that transgender people constitute a suspect class would require courts to oversee all manner of policy choices normally committed to legislative discretion.

…The conclusion that transgender individuals do not share the “obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics” of “a discrete group” is enough to demonstrate that transgender status does not define a suspect class.

…The Equal Protection Clause does not demand heightened judicial scrutiny of laws that classify based on transgender status. Rational-basis review applies, which means that courts must give legislatures flexibility to make policy in this area.

While that was a concurrence with only Justice Thomas, I wrote at the time that the concurrence “likely speaks to the view of a three or four other members on the Court.”

It now appears that it clearly did represent the majority’s view.

In this opinion, the Court rejects the rulings of U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick, a Biden appointee in Massachusetts, and the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on the injunction of the policy. Both courts would have forced the Trump Administration to issue passports to transgender and nonbinary Americans that reflect the sex designation of their choosing.

However, the Court ruled that “Displaying passport holders’ sex at birth no more offends equal protection principles than displaying their country of birth—in both cases, the Government is merely attesting to a historical fact without subjecting anyone to differential treatment.”

In rejecting the equal protection claim, the Court added that there is no evidence that a policy requiring a passport to display the holder’s biological sex can only be the result of “a bare  . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group.” It further found that the challengers are unlikely to prevail under the Administrative Procedure Act as “arbitrary and capricious.”

The Trump administration is thus “likely to succeed on the merits” of its defense against the challengers’ claims, the court wrote. And because Kobick’s order “enjoins enforcement of an Executive Branch policy with foreign affairs implications concerning a Government document,” the court said, the government “will ‘suffer[] a form of irreparable injury’” if the order is not paused.

That produced another fiery dissent from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her dissent, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.

Jackson slammed her colleagues:

“The Court … fails to spill any ink considering the plaintiffs, opting instead to intervene in the Government’s favor without equitable justification, and in a manner that permits harm to be inflicted on the most vulnerable party.”

Jackson dismissed the opinion as a type of “back-of-the-napkin assessment” in a cursory opinion. She objected that, not only had the Administration not shown any irreparable harm absent emergency relief, but the challengers “have shown they will suffer concrete injuries if the Government’s Passport Policy is immediately enforced.” She concluded by claiming that “the Court’s failure to acknowledge the basic norms of equity jurisdiction is more than merely regrettable. It is an abdication of the Court’s duty to ensure that equitable standards apply equally to all litigants—to transgender people and the Government alike.”

The opinion substantially reinforced Barrett’s earlier position. While the government had the advantage of a case in an area where considerable deference is given to executive decision-making, the underlying equal protection holding is a major setback for advocates seeking to establish transgender status as protected in the same way as race or religion.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 17:40

Obama-Appointed Judge Restricts Trump's Use Of Tear Gas, Other Anti-Riot Measures In Chicago

A federal judge has restricted the federal government’s use of tear gas and other types of anti-riot measures in Chicago.

On Thursday, Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis said during a hearing that government witnesses’ claims of violence at protests in Chicago were not credible, citing several occasions where she said video recordings contradicted immigration officials’ accounts about what happened.

“The government would have people believe instead that the Chicagoland area is in a visehold of violence, ransacked by rioters, and attacked by agitators,” she said.

“That simply is untrue.”

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a statement from a spokesperson on the ruling described protesters in the city as “rioters, gangbangers and terrorists” who pose a threat to federal agents.

“Despite these real dangers, our law enforcement shows incredible restraint in exhausting all options before force is escalated,” the DHS spokesperson said, noting that the government would appeal the decision.

The spokesperson described the injunction as “an extreme act by an activist judge that risks the lives and livelihoods of law enforcement officers.”

As Joseph Lord reports for The Epoch Times, Ellis has seen at least one of her earlier rulings related to immigration enforcement in the city overruled, and this latest ruling could face similar challenges if the judge is found to have overstepped her authority by an appellate court. If it isn’t overturned in a higher court, Ellis’s ruling will stay in effect as proceedings related to this issue move forward.

The court hearing comes amid escalating showdowns between protestors opposed to the administration’s immigration enforcement operations and federal agents in America’s third-largest city.

For weeks, protestors and civil liberties groups have alleged that tactics used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have become increasingly aggressive in the city.

Ellis agreed with these allegations in her ruling, finding that the government’s use of force in several cases wasn’t merited by the circumstances on the ground.

Court Order

Ellis ordered the federal government to restrict the use of anti-riot measures against peaceful protestors and members of the press.

The preliminary injunction granted by Ellis restricts agents from using items such as tear gas and pepper balls, “unless such force is objectively necessary” to prevent “an immediate threat.”

It also bars agents from using physical force, including shoving, against protestors and journalists, and requires agents to give two verbal warnings before using riot control weapons.

The order comes after days of testimony about Chicagoans’ encounters with federal agents.

During hours of proceedings on Wednesday, Ellis heard testimony from multiple protestors, journalists, and members of the clergy who said they had been subjected to tear gassing and pepper balls from federal agents during protests in the city.

Witnesses gave testimony about alleged violent encounters with federal agents outside an immigrant detention center in Broadview, Illinois, and on Chicago’s residential streets.

Several people testified that they had had guns pointed at their heads while filming agents, while one pastor testified that he had been struck in the face by a pepper ball while praying.

Ellis granted the preliminary injunction in response to a request brought by some of those affected to restrict the use of federal force against them.

First Amendment

The plaintiffs argued that using excessive force at protests could make individuals less inclined to exercise their rights out of fear of consequences or reprisal.

In her decision, Ellis ruled that there was merit to the plaintiffs’ claims that the government’s conduct could have a chilling effect on First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, assembly, and religion, saying that her order would prevent this.

Federal agents’ use of force, including anti-riot measures, has historically been guided by broad standard requiring the force to be “objectively reasonable,” a standard laid out in the 1989 Supreme Court case Graham v. Connor.

This entails a general requirement to use as little force as possible and respect constitutional rights, while responding proportionately to legitimate threats.

U.S. Justice Department attorney Sarmad Khojasteh argued during the hearing that in every instance, federal agents were justified in their use of force, and told the court that protestors’ actions did not constitute protected First Amendment activity.

Ellis said that in several cases, federal agents had misrepresented events, presenting a different story than events captured on video, in order to justify an escalation of force.

Ellis said during the hearing that Gregory Bovino—the Border Patrol commander-at-large spearheading the administration’s immigration enforcement effort in the city—claimed that he had been hit with a rock prior to throwing tear gas, but that “Video evidence ultimately disproved this.”

According to the judge, Bovino admitted during a deposition that he was struck after tear gas had been dispersed.

Attorneys for the government responded that Bovino has started wearing a body camera since this incident took place, but was not equipped with one at the time. As part of her order, Ellis directed immigration agents to wear body cameras and clearly present their badges or identification.

A similar order was issued by Ellis last month in a temporary restraining order, which expired on Nov. 6.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 17:20

What Might Happen If The Shutdown Never Ends...

Authored by Chuck Devore via DailyCaller.com,

Shutdown, Day 100

I’m walking through the haze of what still lays claim to be the capital city of the United States of America. The monuments still stand, though graffiti covers a few now. Weeds are starting to poke up in lawns that were once well-tended. Trees and bushes look a bit rangy.

Leviathan bureaucracy has simply… stopped. Or has it? No more IRS audits? No EPA enforcers? Really? Certainly, the endless streams of grants propping up about a third of state spending (along with 1,000 strings—those are gone) but the programs remain, at least in name.

Shutdown, Day 200

Anarcho-capitalists speak of a coming paradise, but in the flickering neon of my neural implant—courtesy of a black-market hack—I saw the edges blurring.

Was this freedom? Or was the simulation unraveling?

The military, those stoic guardians of the Republic, unpaid for months, started to splinter. Enterprising commands offered themselves as mercenaries for hire. In Virginia, a battalion rented themselves to a tech mogul, guarding server farms against looters who mistook data farms for food depots. “Protection services,” they called it, bartering ammo for crypto.

The Lone Star State, seeing opportunity, decreed that active-duty troops on Texan soil would draw from state coffers—filled by oil revenues swelling without federal siphons.

Churches in red states swelled with tithes, now untaxed fortunes, funneled into soup kitchens and orphanages. In Alabama, Pastor Clarke preached, “The Lord provides where Caesar fails,” as congregations pooled resources, feeding the poor with communal farms that bloomed in the absence of regulations. 

But in New York, the dream swiftly soured. Comrade-Governor Mamdani, the firebrand socialist, swept into statewide power months earlier on waves of elite discontent, promising a workers’ paradise. “Seize the means!” his rallies thundered, as crowds stormed Wall Street’s empty towers. Yet the production had fled—factories shuttered, supply chains evaporated without federal bailouts. Bread lines snaked through Manhattan, citizens trading heirlooms for scraps. Mamdani’s decrees echoed hollowly: universal income from thin air, but the air made a thin gruel.

Shutdown, Day 500

Out West, Reason Foundation libertarians made their move. Selecting the best beachfront, they declared the Santa Monica pier their sovereign zone. “Voluntary exchange,” they proclaimed, as free market chemists in lab coats brewed designer highs, partnering with shadowy Chinese syndicates via encrypted drones. Profits soared, with drugs flooding the coast—euphorics that made the shutdown feel like bliss. Their privateer fleet, retrofitted yachts with missile launchers, patrolled the Pacific, “neutralizing competition” from Mexican cartels. On the sidewalks, illuminated by a gaudy cacophony of LED light, legions of voluntary sex slaves, many missing a kidney, called out their price and specialty. Was this to be capitalism’s final form? Its highest triumph?

The dream had morphed into a nightmare loop, reality folding like a Dickian origami. My implant glitched nightly, replaying shutdown announcements in a loop.

Federal buildings were squats now, haunted by gaunt bureaucrats peddling secrets for sustenance.

States clawed back independence; locals thrived or withered on their own merits. No transfer payments meant blue cities begged for alms, while red heartlands prospered, untaxed incomes fueling private charities. Churches became mini-welfare states, bishops as CEOs, harvesting souls and auditing spreadsheets. “Faith-based efficiency,” it was called, outpacing any government program.

The military’s atomization accelerated. Unpaid sailors auctioned submarines on dark web markets; pilots flew freelance for agribusiness, dusting crops with precision strikes. The exception was in Texas where, flush with petrodollars, the rebirthed Republic of Texas nationalized its garrisons, renaming the force the “Lone Star Legion.” The world’s third most-powerful military was on Austin’s payroll with inevitable whispers of border ambitions and score-settling against the increasingly restive criminal cartels to the south.

New York’s paradise imploded. Mamdani’s regime mandated collectives, but the “means” were ghosts—corporations relocated to tax havens, leaving rusting husks. Starvation riots gripped the boroughs, with workers seizing empty warehouses only to find dust—even the rats decamped to New Jersey.

The Santa Monica cartel, allied with Beijing’s ghost ships, dominated the West Coast dope trade. Euphorics, laced with neural enhancers, turned users into loyal consumers—love was mandatory, the shutdown as engineered bliss. Their privateers raided cartel convoys, sinking rivals in international waters. “Market correction,” the Reason scholars penned in manifestos, profits funding seasteads off Malibu.

But in my dreams, I could see ragged outlines of code: anarchy or programming? I no longer cared.

Shutdown Day 1,000

My implant shorted out 24 days ago, leaving me in a searing funhouse reality—or was it?

Federal remnants passed into myth, D.C. a feral zone where survivalists bartered artifacts.

The best of states were fiefdoms: locals patched roads, red America nurtured the needy through a multitude of churches providing poorhouses, farms, and shelter. Untaxed wealth birthed benevolence: poverty waned in Bible Belt bastions, and volunteers outnumbered the destitute.

The military devolved into a patchwork of warlords. Many rented to corporations, securing trade routes. Texas, however, had ascended. Its Legion, battle-hardened and state-funded, crossed the Rio Grande at dawn on Day 1,000, tanks rolling into cartel strongholds, drones whirring overhead. Old revanchist dreams revived—annexing borderlands, eradicating narco empires. Mexico City protested, but without U.S. aid, its forces crumbled. Texan privateers, now allied with Santa Monica’s fleet in a marriage of convenience, bombarded cartel coastal hideouts, “liberating” resources in the name of free enterprise and Texas.

Mamdani’s paradise was a shell, a starving farce. Seizures yielded nothing; producers had vanished to freer climes. Famine struck the vanguard last, with the masses fleeing to red sanctuaries where churches offered bread and salvation.

Santa Monica gleamed a libertarían Valhalla. Its cartel, in cahoots with China, monopolized highs from British Columbia to Baja. Profits sustained armadas—their privateer navy obliterating Mexican remnants. They toasted to an “Ancap ascendancy.”

Was the shutdown a dream, or had we all awakened in someone else’s simulation?

*  *  *

Chuck DeVore is Chief National Initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. He served in the California State Assembly and is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve. He’s the author of “Crisis of the House Never United.”

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 17:00

Inside Meta's $16 Billion Scam Ad Economy

Internal Meta documents reveal that the company expected to make about 10% of its 2024 revenue—roughly $16 billion—from ads promoting scams and banned goods, according to a new expose from Reuters. 

The files show that Meta knew for years Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp were flooded with fraudulent ads for investment schemes, fake e-commerce, illegal gambling, and prohibited medical products, but repeatedly failed to stop them.

A December 2024 document estimated that users were shown 15 billion “higher-risk” scam ads every day, generating about $7 billion in annual revenue. Rather than banning questionable advertisers outright, Meta only blocks them if it’s “95% certain” they’re committing fraud. When suspicion is lower, the company instead charges them higher ad rates—a “penalty bid” system that lets Meta profit while claiming deterrence. Its ad algorithms also tend to show more scam ads to users who click on them, amplifying exposure.

The documents describe Meta’s internal balancing act: cutting down on fraudulent ads without hurting its profits. In 2024, executives proposed reducing revenue from scams and illegal goods from 10.1% to 7.3% in 2025, then to 5.8% by 2027. However, managers were instructed not to take enforcement actions that would cost more than 0.15% of total revenue—about $135 million that half-year. “Let’s be cautious,” one manager wrote, warning staff to stay within “specific revenue guardrails.”

Reuters writes that an April 2025 internal review concluded it was “easier to advertise scams on Meta platforms than Google.” Despite this, Meta leadership opted for what it called a “moderate approach,” focusing enforcement only in countries facing imminent regulatory scrutiny. The company also accepted that fines—expected to reach up to $1 billion—were likely inevitable but far smaller than the profits from scam-related ads.

Regulators have taken notice. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Meta for hosting financial scam ads, while a British regulator found its platforms were linked to 54% of all payments-related scam losses in 2023—more than twice the total of all other social media combined.

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone dismissed the leaked materials as “a selective view that distorts Meta’s approach to fraud and scams.” He said the 10% estimate was “rough and overly-inclusive,” and emphasized that “we aggressively fight fraud and scams because people on our platforms don’t want this content, legitimate advertisers don’t want it and we don’t want it either.” Stone also noted that Meta had reduced scam-ad reports by 58% and removed more than 134 million pieces of fraudulent ad content in 2025.

Still, internal safety staff estimated Meta’s platforms are tied to one-third of all successful scams in the U.S. Former Meta investigator Sandeep Abraham summarized the situation bluntly: “If regulators wouldn’t tolerate banks profiting from fraud, they shouldn’t tolerate it in tech.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 16:40

Good Luck To The Big Apple's Moiling Masses Of Latté-Clutchers

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Side of Jihad With That Pastrami on Rye?

"Socialism is a wonderful idea. It's only as a reality that it has been disastrous."

- Thomas Sowell

Does Zohran’s radiant smile put you in mind of a labradoodle puppy? The guy was just that soft and fluffy during the mayoral election campaign, beaming remorselessly for the cameras, summoning a cushy nirvana of give-aways that would deliver an “affordable” life to the moiling masses of under-employed latte-clutchers doomed by their unpayable college loans and the gender-study diplomas they innocently bought with all that money. Under Zohran, New York City will soon be one colossal student lounge, and even the baristas serving the lattes will get nice one-bedroom river-view apartments, ride to work on free buses, and buy their take-out chili-crisp fried tofu for cheap at the city-run food store.

Brothers in Arms: Alex Soros (L), Zohran (R)

Look (above): there is Zohran with his billionaire friend and patron Alex Soros. Alex does not seem to realize that Zohran wants to eat him for lunch. Fluffy as they might be, labradoodles are actually carnivores. And Zohran has declared that billionaires should not exist. He says the billionaires of New York are going to pay for those lattes, free buses, river-view apartments, and all the rest of the package. Is he planning to hold them hostage? Staple their John Lobb bespoke alligator leather loafers to the parqueted floor of the penthouse at 15 Central Park West while he loots their accounts?

No! They are going to make like Snake Pliskin and escape from New York with all their assets and chattels. Florida, Nashville, Boise! It’s a big country and, let’s face it, your laptop is your office. Then what? Maybe it will be like the old glory days of Soviet Russia in New York. The people will pretend to work and Zohran will pretend to pay them and everybody will be all happy and equal. That city-run food store will become the city-run free food store, just like the hippies dreamed about in 1967, the summer of love! Jews and Jihadis will march together, arm-in-arm, into a gleaming future. . . !

Then there was the victory speech. Not so labradoodle smiley. More like Fidel Castro (if anyone remembers that guy) in harangue mode. But know this: Zohran is a talented demagogue. He got game! He can bring it! He exudes charm like the Knicks’ Jalen Brunsen sweats at the three-point line! He can put it over, whip up a crowd, paint dazzling word-panoramas of a democratic-socialist promised land in the offing. He will have a glorious Christmas season awaiting the swearing-in at one minute past midnight, New Years Day.

Waitaminnit! Zohran probably doesn’t do Christmas, and certainly not Hanukkah. But it’s conceivable that he will huddle at Zabar’s with his constituents, the altekakers of the Upper West Side who (perhaps foolishly) voted for him, and together figure out how to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu the next time he comes to the UN — a campaign promise! And he can prepare to ride out of the gate on Jan 1 at warp speed to freeze a million rents, change-out social workers for cops, set up the free child-care, and perform all the other miracles promised.

I hate to break the spell, but here’s what you are really going to get in New York City with Mayor Zohran Mamdani: far and away the most corrupt administration ever in the history of the place, making the Boss Tweed era look like a model of efficiency and rectitude. I will tell you why: Zohran has zero managerial experience. In the decade, roughly, since he graduated from Bowdoin College up in faraway piney Maine, Zohran has worked as a campaign volunteer, a rapper (“Kanda Chap Chap” under the name Young Cardamom), a voter field-operator, a music supervisor for his Mom’s documentary film, and, since 2021, a New York State Assemblyman for District 36 in the Borough of Queens who rarely shows up in the chamber to vote for anything.

The New York City government comprises over a hundred agencies with a budget of $112.4-billion. The opportunities for grift are fantastic beyond comprehension. Now, appoint and hire thousands of Gen Z DEI types to run all those services, young folk who worked for Zohran’s campaign and were promised jobs in the new admin. What will you get? Cosmic level incompetence at best, and more likely wholesale looting of the public till. Now layer-on the omnipresent mob action in the New York City unions and the mafia-associated contractors who do business with the city. Doesn’t look great. And how much will be creamed off for the Zakaat, the obligatory Islamic tithe turned over to the poor, the needy, the homeless, the debtors and the practice of jihad?

So, good luck Big Apple as you await the luscious caramel coating of Woke-socialism to be laid on you.

Zohran’s elevation capped an election week of Democratic Party triumph that left the faithful too hungover to even perform the much ballyhooed “Trump Must Go Now” exorcism promised for the day after the vote. Alex Soros & Friends bought plane tickets for a few “furry” Transtifas to fly in from Portland, OR, their training ground, but the event was a bust. Mr. Trump was not squeezed out of the known universe like a watermelon seed, as hoped.

The Golden Golem of Greatness lurches on, coping with the Democrat’s never-ending seditious jihad against our country, featuring such new stars as New Jersey’s Mikie Sherrill and Virginia’s next governor, Abigail Spanberger, shown below wearing the winsome regalia of Covid-19 she modeled on the floor of the US House of representatives back in pandemic-time.

How does that thing work. . . ?

You go, girl!

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 16:20

Consumer Credit Jumps More Than Expected To New Record High Driven By Surge In Student Loans

The consumer credit rollercoaster continues.

One month after total consumer credit grew far less than expected, barely printing in the green, moments ago the Fed reported that in September consumer credit jumped once again, rising by $13.093 billion to a new record high of $5.077 trillion. 

The increase was driven by a modest rebound by revolving credit, which rose by $1.65 billion in September after contracting in August by the 2nd biggest amount since Covid, shrinking by $6.1 billion (only last November's $11.2 billion was larger).

The modest increase in revolving credit was more than offset by another solid bounce in non-revolving credit which increased by $9.2 billion, the second biggest increase of 2025.

Broken down by components, student loans - now that the repayment moratorium is over - surged by $27.4 billion in Q3 to a record $1.841 trillion. As discussed previously, student loans have a magical capability of being abused for everything but college, which is why enterprising "students" binge on them any time they can to fund all their other purchases. Meanwhile, car loans rose by a far more modest $6.2 billion to $1.567 trillion.

Finally, and this will come as a surprise to nobody, despite 1.50% in rate cuts by the Fed since last September, we can now confirm that rates on credit cards have gone... nowhere at all, as banks continue to bleed US consumers dry.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 15:52

Appeals Court Lets Texas Enforce Law Limiting Drag Shows

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal appeals court on Nov. 6 allowed Texas to enforce a state ban on drag shows performed in the presence of minors.

Conservative Texans showed up to protest a drag-queen event held at a Katy, Texas, church Sept. 24, 2022. Darlene McCormick Sanchez/The Epoch Times

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit voted 2–1 to vacate a 2023 injunction blocking the law that was issued by a federal district court.

The appeals court directed the district court to throw out pending claims against all of the defendants except Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the case known as The Woodlands Pride Inc. v. Paxton for lack of standing. The lead plaintiff, a nonprofit known as The Woodlands Pride Inc., which was found to lack standing, sponsors an annual pride festival in Montgomery County, Texas.

Standing refers to the right of someone to sue in court. The parties must show a strong enough connection to the claim to justify their participation in a lawsuit.

The law known as Texas Senate Bill 12 regulates “sexually oriented performances” that take place on public property and in the presence of minors, U.S. Circuit Judge Kurt Engelhardt wrote in the majority opinion.

A “sexually oriented performance” is defined as “a visual performance” that features a performer who “is nude” or “engages in sexual conduct,” and “appeals to the prurient interest in sex.”

The law has never been enforced because the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas blocked it before it could take effect. Claiming the law violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, challengers sued to block it under Section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code, a federal law that allows individuals to sue the government for civil rights violations, Engelhardt said.

The appeals court found that The Woodlands Pride Inc. does not have standing to pursue an injunction against any of the appellants because its activities are not affected by the state law.

The activities the nonprofit acknowledged doing, such as distributing condoms and lubricant, and testing for sexually transmitted diseases, are not prohibited by the state law, Engelhard said.

“None of the trial evidence indicates that the performances are ‘in some sense erotic.’ Because Woodlands Pride does not intend to engage in conduct that is arguably proscribed by S.B.12, it does not have standing to seek an injunction against any of the appellants,” he said.

However, the co-plaintiff production company, 360 Queen Entertainment, may continue its lawsuit challenging the state law. Its performances may be affected by the law because they contain nudity and have been attended by children, the appeals court ruled.

Engelhardt said that the district court’s ruling came out before the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Moody v. NetChoice, which laid out criteria for determining whether the rights of performers or businesses were being violated.

The appeals court found that the district court did not carry out a proper analysis of whether the state law violates the First Amendment rights of performers and businesses.

“Consequently, we are unequipped to undertake this task in the first instance, and remand for the district court to do so,” the appeals court said, sending the case back to the district court.

U.S. Circuit Judge James Dennis dissented in part.

Dennis agreed with the majority that the case should be remanded to the district court, but disagreed with denying standing to The Woodlands Pride Inc. and another co-plaintiff.

The plaintiffs and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which was part of the legal team challenging Senate Bill 12, expressed disappointment at the new ruling.

“Today’s decision is heartbreaking for drag performers, small businesses, and every Texan who believes in free expression,” they said in a statement.

The Epoch Times reached out for comment to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. No reply was received by publication time.

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 15:25

Un-Sustainables: ESG Outflow Bloodbath Hits Ninth Consecutive Month

The downward spiral of sustainable equity stocks built on the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) globalist movement has deepened under the Trump era, as investor focus and capital flows have pivoted sharply toward the booming artificial intelligence trade.

A Goldman Sachs team led by analyst Varsha Venugopal offered clients a fresh snapshot of the darkening ESG space, cautioning that:

Sustainable equity outflows continued in September (-$8.4 bn) for the ninth consecutive month. Outflows were driven by W. European active funds (-$8.3 bn), while active funds in N. America (-$2.5 bn) and RoW (-$0.4 bn) saw more modest outflows. Passive strategies saw inflows (+$2.8 bn) across all regions in the latest month. Integration strategies saw outflows (-$8.3 bn), as did thematic strategies (-$0.8 bn), though only marginally. Global Sustainable fixed income flows turned modestly negative in September (-$1.8 bn).

The broader picture for sustainable equity fund flows reveals a continued wave of outflows, driven mainly by heavy redemptions across Europe and the U.S. during the summer months.

Sustainable equity funds saw outflows in 3Q25 (-$70.1 bn), largely driven by redemptions from select funds in July (Exhibit 6).

W. Europe drove outflows in September (-$6.2 bn), while N. America (-$2.1 bn) and RoW (-$0.01 bn) saw marginal to negligible outflows.

Europe

North America 

All sustainable thematic categories, climate, human development, etc., have recorded nonstop outflows for nine consecutive quarters.

"Sustainable fund equity AUM penetration" refers to the percentage of total equity assets under management (AUM) invested in ESG-labeled funds. The data below shows that this phenomenon has largely lost momentum after globalist Wall Street bankers drove the ESG bubble into hyperdrive during the Biden–Harris regime era.

For the last few years, we've pointed out that the ESG and climate-driven investment bubble was destined to burst. This latest report confirms that equity outflows are continuing and that the ESG obsession, which forced the premature retirement of reliable fossil-fuel power generation in favor of unreliable solar and wind, has proven a disaster for grid stability in the age of energy-hungry AI data centers.

ZeroHedge Pro Subs can read the full report in the usual place. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 11/07/2025 - 15:05