GOV/MIL Main "Great Reset" Thread

marsh

On TB every waking moment
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAWSmn5xI4k
9:50 min

No, the U.S. is not going 2 run out of diesel fuel 25 days @The Economic Ninja @Financial Prepper​

FANqLFUBKzYsKrM9J50-K2-PKVjb_FxCkDV-TDLXLzlx3nQPHExbaDBz5wH9xPAyIEDB9BTcSnA=s88-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj

Sage Live Outcast
Nov 3, 2022

No, the U.S. is not going 2 run out of diesel fuel 25 days

1667608407753.png
1667608312998.png
1667608344817.png

1667608477975.png


Logistical issues:
We cannot refine sour oil. We must go to other countries to refine it. EPA pushing our refineries out.

Mississippi River dry up barges can't move fuel. Diesel rationed at terminals because has to be moved by trucks. Most efficient way to move it is by barge or railroad.

We normally have about 30 days of fuel. The 25 days is a float. Now it is about 26 days. It is not a countdown. It is a reserve.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
The Marginalized Majority 6:34 min

The Marginalized Majority​

The New American Published November 4, 2022

Globalist organizations say that censorship, oppression and the abrogation of rights is justified--upon the claim that it advances the plight of "historically marginalized groups". In reality, it's done to set the precedent that the majority must be disempowered, and the society rigged to cater to a minority . . . the only TRUE minority being billionaire-oligarchs. The only true "historically marginalized group" being the working class.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Youth protest global mayors at C40 Summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina 12:24 min

Youth protest global mayors at C40 Summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina​

Rebel News Published November 4, 2022

Rebel News’ Katie Daviscourt reports from Buenos Aires, Argentina, where youth delegates joined a protest against global mayors outside the C40 Summit.

(The big deal at COP 27 will be "financialization" from the northern developed nations to the southern developing nations. That means they want billions of dollars to be paid in reparations for climate change "adaptation." Climate funding for environmental justice.)

^^^

Youth protest global mayors at C40 Summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina​

During the protest, youth delegates told Rebel News that they decided to join the protest because they were told that the summit was going to be centred around the youth, but they were hardly paid attention to.
  • By Katie Daviscourt
  • November 04, 2022
One of the main focal points of this year’s C40 World Mayors Summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina was the creation of the first ever global network of city youth climate councils. However, the C40 Cities’ attempt to target the youth through the “climate crisis” miserably backfired when youth delegates left the summit to protest global mayors in attendance.

The C40 World Mayors Summit flew in 30 international youth leaders and invited 30 youth leaders from Argentina to make the grand announcement alongside the ten C40 mayors that were in attendance from across five continents. Youth delegates spent their time partaking in panel discussions, press conferences, and listening to forums about how cities across the globe can drastically reduce carbon emissions by 2040.

We cannot simply force the next generation to pick up the pieces—young voices must take centre stage in our conversations around the climate crisis.

It was inspiring to spend time with the C40 youth delegation. I fully support their urgent call for green jobs. pic.twitter.com/xiMq6vAx1O
— Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan (@MayorofLondon) October 21, 2022

The goal of the formation of the youth climate councils is to “facilitate the political empowerment and engagement of young climate leaders in local decision-making to transform the world’s cities into green and fair metropolises,” according to Claudia Lopez, Mayor of Bogotá and C40 Vice Chair for Youth Engagement.

However, in a shocking turn of events, a group of youth delegates decided to leave the summit and partake in a protest against the C40 World Mayors Summit and joined a large left-wing group called Movimiento Evita Caba that was protesting outside the convention center in the streets of Buenos Aires on Friday.

During the protest, youth delegates told Rebel News that they decided to join the protest because they were told that the summit was going to be centred around the youth, but they were hardly paid attention to. They slammed international mayors for failing to act on climate change and said their presence at the summit was “all for show.”

“They’re coming here to make a statement that they care about the south governments, the south countries, the global south, but I don’t think that’s happening,” a youth delegate from Argentina told Rebel News.

Their criticism stems from this year’s summit being centered around climate justice in South America, where C40 Chairman and the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan announced that C40 Cities would be investing $1 Billion in South America to help finance climate projects in order to transition to a green economy.

But the youth delegates remain skeptical and believe that they will leave South America behind in the fight for “climate justice.”

For more of our exclusive reporting on the C40 World Mayors Summit, go to C40Summit.com.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Ep. 2917a - Panic Over Hyperinflation Begins, This Could Bring Down The [CB] System 16:41 min (starts at 1:28 min)

Ep. 2917a - Panic Over Hyperinflation Begins, This Could Bring Down The [CB] System​

X22 Report Published November 4, 2022

The people are seeing that there are going to be massive amount of job losses as the [CB][WEF] pushes their green agenda, the people are going to hit the precipice. The financial pundits are warning of hyperinflation, the [CB] is now trapped in their own agenda.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
No ONE should have to say this! It's insane | Redacted with Natali and Clayton Morris 17:37 min

No ONE should have to say this! It's insane | Redacted with Natali and Clayton Morris​

Redacted News Published November 4, 2022

Cambridge University is now offering “free speech training” on its campus to help students understand that free speech is actually fundamental to a free society. The lectures will be offered by philosophy professor Arif Ahmed who came under fire for inviting author Helen Joyce to speak at the campus due to her groundbreaking book “Trans.” Many protested her very presence on the campus and the college master emailed the student body saying that she would boycott the event because she considered Joyce “insulting and hateful.” Thus the need for a renewed lecture on why free speech is essential to freedom. Will it work?

^^^^
They are NOT going to get away with this, we caught them| Redacted with Natali and Clayton Morris 23:28 min

They are NOT going to get away with this, we caught them| Redacted with Natali and Clayton Morris​

Redacted News Published November 4, 2022

"Today we bring you an update on the story about the U.S. government's direct portal to censor Facebook and Twitter. The doctor who exposed this portal through litigation is named Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai. Today he comes to Redacted to tell us what was left out of this story and how he thinks government sources might have published only part of it in order to get ahead of it. This means that the media is helping the government to hide its involvement with social media and this is the proof. Are you surprised?

You can read all of the details involved in Dr. Shiva's lawsuit right here: https://winbackfreedom.com
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Something Has Snapped: Unexplained 2.3 Million Jobs Gap Emerges In Broken Payrolls Report​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 02:44 PM

A simplistic, superficial take of today's jobs report would conclude that the red hot jump in nonfarm payrolls indicates a "strong hiring market" (just ignore the jump in the unemployment rate). Nothing could be further from the truth.

Recall that back in August and September, we showed that a stark divergence had opened between the Household and Establishment surveys that comprise the monthly jobs report, and since March the former has been stagnant while the latter has been rising every single month. In addition to that, full-time jobs were plunging while part-time jobs were soaring.

Fast forward to today when the inconsistencies not only continue to grow, but in some cases have becoming downright grotesque.

Consider the following: the closely followed Establishment survey came in above expectations at 261K, above the 195K expected, and down modestly from last month's upward revised 319K...



... numbers which confirm that at a time when virtually every major tech company is announcing mass layoffs...

Layoffs announced in the last day:

- Lyft 13% of workers
- Opendoor 18%
- Stripe 14%
- Chime 12%
- Twitter 50%
- Morgan Stanley (% unknown)
— Genevieve Roch-Decter, CFA (@GRDecter) November 3, 2022

... the BLS has a single, political agenda - not to spoil the political climate less than a week ahead of the payrolls by painting a "suboptimal" labor market picture.

Alas, there is only so much the Department of Labor can hide under the rug because when looking at the abovementioned gap between the Household and Establishment surveys which we have been pounding the table on since the summer, it just blew out by a whopping 589K, the most since June's 608K, as a result of the 261K increase in the number of nonfarm payrolls (tracked by the Household survey) offset by a perplexing plunge in the number of people actually employed which tumbled by 328K (tracked by Establishment survey).



What is even more perplexing, is that despite the continued rise in nonfarm payrolls, the Household survey continues to telegraph growing weakness, and as of Oct 31, the gap that opened in March has since grown to a whopping 2.3 million "workers" which may or may not exist anywhere besides the spreadsheet model of some BLS political activist!



Showing this another way, there were 158.5 million employed workers in March 2022... and 158.6 million in October 2022 an increase of just 150K, during a period in which the number of payrolls (which as a reminder is the number the market follows) reportedly increased by 2.5 million!



As an aside, it appears this is not the first time the "apolitical" Bureau of Labor Statistics has pulled such a bizarre divergence off: it happened right before Obama's reelection:



And then again: right before Hillary's "100% guaranteed election (because one wouldn't want a soft economy to adversely impact her re-election odds).



It gets better: digging in even deeper into the far more accurate and nuanced Household Survey, we find that the October plunge in Employment was the result of a massive collapse in full-time jobs offset by a modest increase in part-time jobs:



In fact, as shown below, since March, the US has lost 490K full-time employees offset by an almost identical gain of 492K part-time employees, while 126K workers were forced to get more than one job over the same period.



Finally, the cherry on top: the number of Unemployed workers - also tracked by the Household Survey - jumped by 306K, rising to 6.059 million, the highest since February!



So what's going on here? The simple answer: there has been no change in the number of people actually employed, but due to deterioration in the economy, more people are losing their higher-paying, full-time jobs, and switching into much lower- paying, benefits-free part-time jobs, which also forces many to work more than one job, a rotation which picked up in earnest some time in March and which has only been captured by the Household survey. Meanwhile the Establishment survey plows on ahead with its politically-motivated approximations, seasonal adjustments, and other labor market goalseeking meant to make the Biden admin look good at least until after the midterms .

And since the Establishment survey is far slower to pick up on the nuances in employment composition, while the Household Survey has gone nowhere since March, the BLS data engineers have been busy goalseeking the Establishment Survey (with the occasional nudge from the White House especially with midterms looming) to make it appear as if the economy is growing strongly, when in reality all they are doing is applying the same erroneous seasonal adjustment factor that gave such a wrong perspective of the labor market in the aftermath of the covid pandemic (until it was all adjusted away a year ago). In other words, while the labor market is already cracking, it will take the BLS several months of veering away from reality before the government bureaucrats accept and admit what is truly taking place.

As we said back in August, "We expect that "realization" to take place just after the midterms, because the last thing the Biden administration can afford is admit the labor market is crashing in addition to the continued surge in inflation." We still hold on to this prediction: expect big negative payroll prints as soon as December.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

'Revelatory Storm' Will Come, But Not Fully In Time For This Election

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 01:25 PM
“Many believe we are approaching a tipping point, that we are on the verge of a ‘revelatory storm,’ that the truth is finally coming out... What if we never reach it? What if the guilty are never held to account? What if we forget only to transgress again and again?”​
-Julie Ponese, The Epoch Times, October 7, 2022​

Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

Years ago in Texas, I went to a luncheon talk by Pres. Lyndon Johnson’s former press secretary, George Christian. He said he and the rest of Johnson’s staff tried to stick to just three themes in most every message from Johnson: “help the poor, educate the kids and beat up on the communists.”

The themes change but that’s widely accepted wisdom for politicians – maintain the discipline to stick to very few issues that work for you because that’s about all most voters can digest. Most research says the average American spends only about an hour per day following the news.

That’s far too little time for voters to digest the number and gravity of the catastrophes America and Illinois are suffering through, most of which were inflicted by our own government.

The far left now controlling Illinois and the federal government lie and lie and lie again, at a pace too fast for the public to follow.

They’ve flooded the zone, as said in sports. Most voters are simply too busy busting their backs to keep the bills paid, or are too indifferent, to get the entirety of what has become of us into their consciousness.

Most importantly, public understanding has been willfully retarded through censorship by most of the traditional media, big tech platforms and the government itself.

Many of those failures are genuinely existential threats to the nation and Illinois. To wit:

An open southern border and broken immigration system; inflation and a stagnant economy; energy independence thrown away; unaffordable renewable energy goals; censorship by tech platforms, media and the government; incompetent and dishonest healthcare officials as exposed in the Covid pandemic, particularly on school shutdowns; higher education that despises viewpoint diversity; schools teaching hateful racialism; violent crime; criminal prosecutors unwilling to prosecute; plummeting academic and school performance; a dangerously senile president; school officials openly opposing parental control; multiple scandals exposed by the Hunter Biden laptop; a healthcare system that costs far too much; widespread perception of gross wealth and income inequality; breathtaking government incompetence reflected in the Afghanistan withdrawal process; and national debt with an annual interest cost now approaching $1 trillion per year. Particular to Illinois, uncompetitive tax burdens; the highest unemployment rate in the nation; fleeing population and tax base; one-party rule protected by gerrymandered maps; endless public corruption; and an unsustainable pension burden.​

What may prove still more important are things being missed because we are preoccupied with that list. Columnist Michael Barone recently pointed out that, even in ordinary times, pending crises are often overlooked in election debates.

“I don’t remember any candidates talking about Islamic terrorism in the midterm elections of 1998 or about the risk of investing in mortgage-backed securities in 2006,” he wrote.​
“Going back a ways, I can’t recall much discussion about how to win or de-escalate the Vietnam War in 1966 or to cope with rising inflation in 1970.”​

He’s right. Foreign policy matters have gone entirely unmentioned this year. The only exception was a group of progressives who recently questioned our level of commitment to Ukraine, but they were immediately slapped down into silence by their own party.

Or how about a questions on what age is too young for trans-gender surgery and medication? Europe is years ahead of us on that debate (and increasingly banning those treatments below a certain age), yet debate has barely reached our shores.

Ponese, that Epoch Times author quoted above, fears that the truth may never come out thanks to censorship by the establishment and our own blind trust.

“We have relied for too long on institutions to do the remembering for us, to generate moral responsibility on our behalf,” she wrote.​
“In the era of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, personal accountability has been trained out of us. We were taught to believe that institutions would act as our surrogate moral conscience, taking account and making apology for us.”​

That much is true, but things are changing. Alternative voices exposing the truth are being heard, though gradually. Polls show overwhelming, bipartisan distrust of traditional media. Most everybody knows we are being lied to, though it will take time to assimilate just how thoroughly we’ve been lied to.

That full scope of understanding won’t come before this election.

But when it comes, it will indeed be a “revelatory storm” – a grand epiphany causing future generations to ask how ours could have been so thoroughly duped.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

No Amnesty For Lockdowners

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 02:00 PM
Op-ed authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times,

Now that we can talk to our friends and neighbors about it, the reality is sinking in. What our public health experts and politicians did to this country was egregious. Inspired by the totalitarian lockdowns in Wuhan, China, and urged to replicate that policy by the World Health Organization in a report that Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health approved, all constitutional rights were thrown out by the government.

The churches were shut. The schools were closed, in some places for as long as two years, thus sacrificing the education of a whole generation. We faced restrictions on house parties. We couldn’t visit the elderly in homes, not even their sons and daughters who were paying the rent. There were even restrictions on travel between states: Quarantine rules made it impractical.

Health authorities specifically demanded the need to close all venues where people congregate. Nothing like this had ever happened before. Once people were allowed to crawl out from their domestic holes, they were forced to mask up (even though we had zero evidence that this would achieve anything!) and eventually get vaccine shots that everyone said would end the pandemic but obviously didn’t.

It’s been nearly three years of imposed hell. We now live with the after-effects, including terrible inflation, learning loss, drug addiction, rising crime, cultural nihilism, and wholly justified public fury, which are driving the Democrats to doom on Nov. 8 because it was the Democrats who leaned in and perpetuated all these policies long after they obviously failed.

So sure, people are upset. The right answer would be for our health authorities and politicians to apologize and beg for forgiveness. But nothing like that has happened. They just keep on pretending that all of this was fine. There has been no repeal of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s claimed power to quarantine you next time, and the Biden administration’s own pandemic planning scheme is to prohibit states from opting out the next time around.

So let’s discuss Emily Oster’s piece in The Atlantic in which she claims that everyone needs to immediately comply with some kind of amnesty that she has declared. We’re supposed to forget it all and move on. And why is this? Because, she says, there was so much uncertainty. They just didn’t know about the virus. It was the fog of war, after all, and everyone did their best.

“We didn’t know,” she wrote, and then kept invoking the supposed “uncertainty” of the times, a word she deployed five times. Why, if she (or they) were so uncertain, did they so quickly decide to wreck all liberty in the United States? The so-called precautionary principle would suggest that government should undertake no such policy because of the obvious harms it would impose. They did it anyway.

Here’s the problem. This is complete rot. We knew from February 2020 of the risk stratification of the disease’s serious outcomes. It was in all the papers. We had the data. We knew from the Diamond Princess experience in February 2020 that there were no deaths of those younger than the age of 70 on the ship. That comported with every bit of information we had at the time. Based on what we knew at the time, there was absolutely no case for locking down at all and every reason to not do this.

For that matter, Oster could have merely read the news. MSNBC on Jan. 30, 2020, reported that Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, formerly Barack Obama’s health adviser, said: “Everyone in America should take a very big breath, slow down, and stop panicking and being hysterical. We are having a little too much histrionics on this.”

On March 4, 2020, Slate reported: “There are many compelling reasons to conclude that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is not nearly as deadly as is currently feared. But COVID-19 panic has set in nonetheless. … Allow me to be the bearer of good news. These frightening numbers are unlikely to hold. The true case fatality rate, known as CFR, of this virus is likely to be far lower than current reports suggest.”

On the same day, Psychology Today reported: “Yes, this virus is different and worse than other coronaviruses, but it still looks very familiar. We know more about it than we don’t know. … It’s scary to think that an invisible enemy is out there to make you sick. But your doctor is not panicking, and you don’t need to, either.”

We can even turn to Fauci himself, who wrote as follows on Feb. 28, 2020, in the New England Journal of Medicine: “The overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1 percent) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10 percent and 36 percent, respectively.”

On March 17, 2020, legendary epidemiologist John Ioannidis broke it all down: “The current coronavirus disease, Covid-19, has been called a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco. … One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric. At a minimum, we need unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making.”

Wow, talk about prophetic! All of that happened. He knew this not because he was clairvoyant, but because he has a working brain. You can’t just shut down society without egregious consequences that affect health, economics, social relations, and so much more. In other words, authorities acted with extreme measures that were in no way justified by the data and did so with measures they knew for sure would massively damage the social fabric.

For that matter, we’ve known about the damage of lockdowns since they were first pushed in 2005–06. Famed epidemiologist Donald Henderson warned that such measures would turn a manageable pandemic into a catastrophe!

So here we are, living amid catastrophe. There are no apologies. There’s only coverup. Now, you might ask the following: Why, if the mainstream media from late-January through mid-February 2020 were counseling calm and urging against lockdown frenzy, and even Fauci was saying that we didn’t need a vaccine to get out of this pandemic, was there a sudden shift? What new evidence came in that caused Fauci, along with his minions and inner circle, to surround Trump in early March 2020 and demand that he greenlight the lockdowns?
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Rand Paul Vows To Introduce Bill To Stop Government And Big Tech Colluding To Censor Speech

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 12:39 PM
Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

In the wake of fresh revelations that The Department of Homeland Security has been working relentlessly to shut down speech it deems to be ‘dangerous’ or ‘disinformation,’ Senator Rand Paul has promised to introduce legislation that would make it illegal for government agencies and private big tech to secretly collude on such enterprises.

Appearing on Fox News, Paul said of the Democratic Party, “You know, for all the talk of democracy, it seems to be that they’re undermining the very basic principles of our constitutional republic.”

“Freedom of speech was listed in the first amendment because it was one of the most important rights that our Founders thought should be protected. But having the government collude with Big Tech to censor speech is something that goes against every grain of everything that anyone has ever spoken about as far as freedom of speech,” Paul urged.

The Senator continued, “So when we get back in session, I’m going to introduce legislation that will forbid the government from colluding with private companies to censor speech.”

Video on website 4:08 min

Paul further explained that “this is a tricky situation because many people believe that the First Amendment doesn’t allow us to regulate the speech of private companies. But without question, we can regulate the government, and we can prevent and forbid the government from colluding with private tech on speech.”

“I think we should also preclude them and prohibit them from gathering up our data,” Paul further asserted, adding “we can’t really tell people on the Internet they can’t collect our data, you know, for sales and for marketing. But we can tell the government they can’t collect that data, because I don’t want the government profiling every citizen.”

“That goes against everything that we all believe in as far as the foundation of our constitutional republic,” The Senator proclaimed.

Paul further charged that Democrats “actually want to emulate China,” noting that “They would weld your doors shut if they could.”

“This is the party of authoritarianism. The impulse to authoritarianism came with COVID. But the impulse to gather our information actually probably started with the Patriot act, all the way back to 2001. There was this impulse — we must be safe, we must be protected from terrorists,” Paul explained.

Referring to his father former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, The Senator noted “my dad warned — he warned early on that this kind of going after terrorists would ultimately be used on us.”

“When they finally came and used the Patriot Act on Donald Trump, that was when we knew this wasn’t about terrorism, it was about suppressing dissent from people they disagree with,” Paul stated.

As we highlighted yesterday, ‘fact checking’ isn’t the real principle driving the Biden regime’s drive to censor, as they continue to pump out their own disinformation on social media.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

US Debt-Servicing Costs Skyrocket: $1.4 Trillion In Interest Payments On Deck​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 12:20 PM
By Howard Wang of Convoy Investments

Jerome Powell has been talking tough on inflation and clearly wants to leave a Volcker-like legacy. But the US is far different today than it was in the 80s. The recent Q3 US government borrowing report may throw a wrench in his plans.

US debt servicing costs skyrocketed in Q3 as the rate shock propagated to the $31 trillion worth of federal debt, a number that continues to grow at a $1.5 trillion per year clip. Because of the high debt base, any small changes in average financing rate has a huge impact on ultimate debt costs to the government.

This number will only worsen as we continue to retire cheaper old debt and replace it with costlier new debt.

If the current ~4.5% average yield curve rate propagates to all $31 trillion worth of debt, we are looking at $1.4 trillion per year just in interest payments. This would be 29% of the 2022 FY total Federal tax receipt.



The US government may become the most leveraged and vulnerable player to rate shocks. When you rack up the kinds of debt that our government has, you can lose the luxury of rapidly clamping down on inflation like Volcker did in the 80s. I wouldn’t be surprised if Yellen is, along with the rest of the market, privately begging Powell to slow down.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

"The Fed Is Fuct..." Part 5​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 11:26 AM
Via AdventuresInCapitalism.com,
Read Part 1 here...
Read Part 2 here...
Read Part 3 here...

Read Part 4 here...

I know that I touched upon this in Part 2 of this “Fed is Fuct” series, but I just cannot let go of this topic. It is simply too important of a question—in fact, it seems to be the only question in my mind as we find an event-path for “Project Zimbabwe” to re-accelerate.

Let’s try a thought experiment.
Imagine that OPEC pulled back on their production and sent oil to $300. Given how tight the oil market currently is, it wouldn’t even be that hard for them to achieve this. Given how annoyed they are with Biden and Powell, it’s easy to see how they’d want to do this and prove a point. Meanwhile, the rapid spike in oil prices would dramatically increase OPEC’s revenue, even with fewer barrels sold—making you wonder why they haven’t already done this.

At $300 oil, the US economy would collapse. Sure, inflation prints would go parabolic, but with the rest of the economy in freefall, the Fed would be forced to stop chasing the CPI higher. In fact, I’d wager a healthy sum that in such a scenario, the Fed would dramatically reduce interest rates and flood the market with liquidity. The Fed would effectively ignore their inflation mandate in order to save the global economy from OPEC’s oil price spike—much like when they were fighting germs during March of 2020. In this scenario, the Fed would be responding to an exogenous event that threatened to take down the economy.

Now, what if oil didn’t go to $300 due to OPEC?? What if oil went there because our President has joined an end-of-days economic suicide cult, with a bizarre carbon obsession?? The oil price spike would be the same, yet the cause would be different. In this self-inflicted scenario, would the Fed chase oil higher and continue raising interest rates to fight inflation?? Or would the Fed bail out the economy?? Every investor needs to answer this question and answer it correctly as the range of outcomes is too extreme if you get it wrong. If the causes of the oil spikes are different, will the responses be different??



I think we’re about to play out this experiment in real time over the next few months as the SPR releases end, right as China re-opens. The investment choices in front of you are quite different in terms of how you answer this key question. Sure, you’re going to ride oil into the supernova, but when you switch investment horses, which one do you choose??

What will JPOW do when oil hits $300??

If you aren’t fixating on this conundrum, you’re going to be paralyzed when it happens.



Does he detonate what’s left of the economy by hiking rates?? Or does he stimulate like a lunatic??

One thing is for sure, it won’t be a middle path…

* * *
Disclosure: Funds that I control are long an obscene quantity of energy exposure.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Convoy's Goodale: Smaller Carriers Increasingly Parking Their Trucks​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 10:40 AM
By John Kingston of FreightWaves

Digital brokerage Convoy is seeing a “relatively large number” of smaller carriers putting their trucks on the sidelines for the fourth quarter, according to co-founder Grant Goodale.

Goodale is also Convoy’s carrier experience officer, a position that has him in contact with the smaller and medium-size fleets that are part of Convoy’s network of carriers.

“The spot markets are really tight and almost everybody is taking every bit of work they can,” Goodale said in an interview with FreightWaves at the F3: Future of Freight Festival here. “Despite the fact that consumer spending is at an all-time high, you’re not seeing lots of freight entering the market.”

With conditions getting tougher for independent owner-operators who are having trouble covering their costs, Goodale said that “anecdotally,” he is seeing some owner-operators signing on as employee drivers with larger carriers. But he also said that based on attrition rates through the industry, that move isn’t necessarily long-lasting.

“The data suggests they are absolutely going there but they are not staying,” Goodale said.

There has long been a push-pull relationship between drivers and construction, with workers going from behind the wheel to behind the hammer and back, depending on market conditions. But Goodale said the slowdown in construction is a hindrance to that move now as market conditions deteriorate in trucking. “If there is less construction work, does that mean they are finding other work?” he said of drivers who have recently sidelined their trucks.

Goodale said there was a significant cost squeeze going on for carriers, and it isn’t just from higher diesel prices, which based on the weekly Department of Energy/Energy Information Administration average retail price are up about 50 cents a gallon since the start of October.

nti-vs-diesel-1200x379.jpg
This chart from SONAR represents the retail price of diesel in green, from the DTS.USA data series, and the direction of freight rates from the NTI.USA rate. It shows the divergence in direction.

“We are not seeing rates keep pace with costs and that is definitely squeezing small carriers,” Goodale said. Add in the fact that demand is not spiking along with costs, and it’s a scenario for a tough quarter.”

With a month of the fourth quarter in the books, Goodale said that “none of these things are shaping up to be a particularly good quarter for smaller carriers.”

Another series of earnings calls has come and gone without the larger carriers discussing higher diesel costs as a major headwind. But those companies are armed with extensive fuel surcharge programs. That isn’t the case for everybody, according to Goodale.

“I would say the smaller the carrier, the less likely they are able to consistently cover their diesel costs through fuel surcharges,” he said. And larger carriers are also in a better position to negotiate discounts with major chains or through fuel cards, which Goodale said Convoy hopes to compete with through its own fuel card program.

The soft expected market of 2023 is leading Convoy to “lean into” more contract business in anticipation of a weak year. But every year is different, Goodale said, noting that in the seven years since Convoy was founded, “every year people say this is a real weird year for freight. I don’t know what a normal year looks like.”

otvi-nov-3-1200x427.jpg
The OTVI series in SONAR reflects the recent sharp decline in freight volume.

Goodale reviewed some of the programs Convoy offers carriers in its network, including its own quick pay program. If the payment is for a load booked on the Convoy platform, there is no fee — or “haircut” in finance parlance — if payment is in eight to 48 hours. If a driver wants to get paid in eight hours, it’s a 1.5% fee.

While a 150-basis-point haircut for what could be nothing more than 40 hours of cash availability may seem like a lot — run that out to a year, and see what the interest rate is — Goodale said that Convoy “is finding that if they are really in a bind and need to get cash quickly, it’s worth the 150 bps.”

But he said the primary goal of the program “is to help them have more loaded miles.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Maybe 'Firing People For Being White' Wasn't The Best Strategy?

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 09:40 AM
Twilio shares are down a stunning 36% this morning (its biggest intraday drop ever)...

1667617953689.png

...trading at their lowest level since April 2018, after the infrastructure software company gave a fourth-quarter revenue forecast that came in below estimates...

1667618015655.png

Analysts said they were disappointed by the company’s investor day, which added new concerns, rather than dealing with existing ones.

Most notably, Cowen (which downgraded TWLO to market perform from outperform, cutting its PT to $65 from $100) said Twilio is feeling “acute pressure” from a worsening macro environment, which results in a significant cut to its growth outlook.

There is continued overhang on the stock from combination of “substantial restructuring of its sales force and a lack of any significant change in the medium-term margin structure.”

Jefferies piled on:

"Hard to find any silver linings” as the analyst day raised new concerns instead of extinguishing existing ones..

We wonder, in a totally non-racist way, was CEO Jeff Lawson's decision in mid-September to "ensure our layoffs – while a business necessity today – were carried out through an Anti-Racist/Anti-Oppression lens" a good strategy?

Maybe ignoring the color of people's skin and focusing on their productivity would have been more 'value-add' for stakeholders?
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Stockman: Why The Fed Is Gonna Break Some Serious Financial Furniture​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 08:40 AM

Authored by David Stockman via Contra Corner blog,

The so-called Wall Street economists keep saying that inflation is going to abruptly cool. This prospect is owing to the fact, they claim, that the economy is about to roll-over into recession and especially because shelter costs, which are by far the largest component of the CPI and account for 31% of the weight in the index, are already falling sharply.

We don’t buy either proposition, of course. We think the recession is already here, but the proposition that it will cause an immediate cooling of inflation is just warmed-over Phillips Curve nonsense.

Likewise, the second point essentially amounts to wishful thinking. To wit, it’s based on “asking rents” for newly leased units, which have cooled in the typical fall seasonal pattern at a slightly faster pace than normal. In turn, this is alleged to mean that the great rental inflation boom is already fading into the rear-view mirror.

Well, here’s the chart from the latest Apartment List national rent report. In both pre-Covid years of 2018 and 2019, month-over-month rents fell seasonally in the fall (blue bars) just like they are now. That puts the 0.7% decline reported for October 2022 versus prior month in appropriate context.

In a word, it’s not much to write home about, given that October rents in 2019 fell by almost as much at 0.5% on a M/M basis.

Moreover, when we are dealing with a not seasonally adjusted month-over-month data set, the hugely aberrant increases of 2021 must be taken into consideration. For instance, the peak monthly gain in July 2021 amounted to 30% at an annualized rate.

Accordingly, on a two-year stacked basis, the October 2022 asking rent increase is still positive, a clear deviation from the implicit two-year stacked declines during the pre-Covid period.



More importantly, “asking rents” have a very limited meaning. They reflect conditions on the market for new leases as embodied in the soaring rent indices published by private real estate companies like the Apartment List. By definition, however, these new lease rates have yet to roll through the total stock of US residential housing—and we are talking about all 128 million units!

That is to say, there are about 44 million rental units and 84 million homeowner occupied units in the US. In its wisdom the BLS treats this as a giant stock of rental housing via the OER (owners equivalent rent) for the latter and the “rent of primary residence” for the former.

Consequently, in both the real world, as well as the BLS scheme of things, it would take an extended period of time for rent rates on new leases to roll through the entire housing stock. Yet the CPI is designed to represent rent prices paid by all renters during the month (and homeowners who are treated as imputed “renters” in the CPI), not just new renters.

For this reason, the CPI rental indices lag behind private market asking rents by a year or more because it takes at least that long for the rent rolls to turn-over. Not surprisingly, therefore, the annualized rate of CPI rent increases in recent months has accelerated sharply (purple line) as rising asking rents have rolled into the rent rolls.

Thus, during September, the annualized rate of CPI shelter increase was 8.9% versus prior month—a figure well above the Y/Y (black line) gain of 6.6%.

Needless to say, even if the purple line now starts cooling consistent with the alleged weakening trend in asking rents, the Y/Y increase for shelter will continue to rise well into 2023.

What happens after that is not at all clear, but one thing is obvious from the Apartment List chart above. To wit, the only “cooling” that has occurred so far is a slightly elevated seasonal decline, which will likely be reversed to seasonal increases early next year if prior history is any guide.

CPI Shelter Index: Y/Y Change (black line) Versus M/M Annualized Increase (purple line),2012-2022



One hint about the future direction of the seasonally adjusted CPI shelter index, however, lies in the tight-as-a-drum rental unit vacancy rate. As of the latest data, (Q2 2022), the 5.6% vacancy rate was a modern low and compared to pre-Covid levels of 6.8% in Q2 2019 and 8.6% in Q2 2018.

In fact, the Q2 apartment vacancy rate was the lowest in 38 years, and since 1956 was matched or exceeded only during the 1970s. And those were not exactly disinflationary years for housing and rental prices.

Rental Housing Vacancy Rate, 1984-2022



Likewise, there is no evidence that a flood of new rental unit supply is about to come crashing into the market. The 376,000 units (annualized rate) delivered in Q2 2022 were only slightly above recent levels; and they were also well below peak deliveries in the 1970s and 1980s.

In sum, the rental housing market is extremely tight and is likely to remain so for an extended period into the future. Accordingly, the here-comes-deflation crowd is actually making a mountain out of a mole-hill, claiming that an ordinary seasonal decline in asking rents heralds a sharp deceleration of the shelter index.

It doesn’t.

New Apartment Units Completed, 1973-2022



Nor is there any reason to believe that a surfeit of owner-occupied units will flood into the rental market, causing rates to swoon. In fact, the vacancy rate among the 84,840,000 owner-occupied units in the US was just 0.7% in Q2 2022—the tightest vacancy rate for that series since it incepted in 1956!

Stated differently, there are currently only 625,000 vacant owner units in the entire US. That figure compares to a vacancy rate of 1.7% and 1.3 million vacant owner units in Q2 2016, a period when shelter cost rises were already rising at a 3.4% Y/Y rate.

So with a dramatically tighter supply/demand condition today, why in the world would rental rates weaken, let alone plunge toward the flat-line, in the periods just ahead? The excess supply that would be required to sharply cool the home rental markets just isn’t there in either segment of the 131 million unit (counting vacancies) US housing stock.

Homeowner Vacancy Rate, 1956-2022



If shelter is not going to rescue a rising CPI, we doubt whether other services costs will, either. That’s because labor costs are still rising strongly and will pass through into service sector prices in the periods ahead.

Thus, as reported last Friday total compensation costs during Q3 2022 (including fringes and benefits) rose by 5.1% versus prior year, the highest gain since the series’ inception in 2002. It was also nearly double the 2.3% annualized increase between 2012 and 2019.

So, yes. labor costs have accelerated dramatically since the spring of 2020, and are now working their way into the prices charged by domestic vendors.

Accordingly, Wall Street models showing CPI inflation plunging in the periods ahead (2023-2024) are just another case of stock peddlers moonlighting as “economists”.

Y/Y Change In The Employment Cost Index, 2002-2022



For want of doubt, consider the path of the CPI for services index, which makes up about 60% of the weight in the overall CPI basket. Between 2012 and 2019, it rose by an average of 2.59% per annum, which rate of gain has soared to a record 7.4% in Q3 2022.

That is to say, services inflation has nearly tripled from its pre-Covid steady state owing to the fact that domestic compensation costs have been rising rapidly, as well. Accordingly, it will take a far higher interest rate than the terminal rate of 5.0% which the market has currently priced-in, to bring wage costs and therefore service sector prices back to the Fed’s 2.00% target.

Y/Y Change in CPI For Services, 2012-2022



None of this, however, has stopped the Fed’s favorite whisperer, Nick Timiraos of the Wall Street Journal, from spreading false hope that the Fed’s anti-inflation campaign is nearing its end-stages. In particular, the current “pivot” meme consists of the notion that after the turn of the year the Fed will engage in a prolonged “pause” in its rate increasing campaign.

Supposedly, that’s to permit the monetary policy lag to work its magic, and also because Wall Street can’t stand the heat, whining that the increases have already been too large and prolonged:

Those officials and several private-sector economists have warned of growing risks that the Fed will raise rates too much and cause an unnecessarily sharp slowdown. Until June, the Fed hadn’t raised interest rates by 0.75 point, or 75 basis points, since 1994.

Well, no. The actual fact is that the Fed has not been confronted with soaring, increasingly embedded inflation since the early 1980s and it has never before started a rate increasing campaign from the zero bound.

What the latter means, of course, is that several 75 basis point increases were needed just to rescue Fed policy from its foolhardy embrace of zero interest rates. In turn, this means that its so-called “braking” action has barely begun to bite.

For instance, during the most recently reported week (October 19), the Y/Y increase in outstanding credit card debt hit 18.4%, a level that is self-evidently stoking consumer demand, not curtailing it. Accordingly, the Fed has a lot more interest rate wood to chop before it succeeds in slowing household spending and the resulting inflationary pressures.

Y/Y Change In Credit Card And Other Revolving Consumer Debt, 2012-2022



For want of doubt, here is the trend of interest rates on credit card debt. The slight elevation during the past few months barely gets rates back to the level of the 1990s, a period when the CPI was rising at just 2-3% per annum.

In a word, 5% on the Fed funds rate doesn’t cut the anti-inflationary mustard in the current environment. It will take a “rate shock” far higher than currently expected by the Wall Street permabulls and perennial whiners to curtail the inflationary tides that are now assaulting the US economy.

So as one typical Wall Street economist inadvertently averred this AM while pleading for mercy from the Fed at tomorrow’s meeting.

They have to think about calibration at this meeting. You’re trying to cool down an economy, not throw it into a deep freeze,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG.

Well, whether they intend it or not, the “deep freeze” is necessarily exactly where the Fed is taking the inflation-bloated US economy.

Interest Rates On Credit Card Debt, 1994-2022



Another factor which is compounding the Fed’s anti-inflation challenge is the artificial build-up of “savings” during the Covid Lockdowns and resulting stimmy bacchanalia. By estimates of Fed staff, that build-up peaked at about $2.25 trillion during Q3 2021, but has since then been only moderately reduced to about $1.70 trillion. This means that there is still considerable spending power in reserve that has never before been present during a tightening cycle.

Moreover, upwards of half of that excess is held by the top quartile of households (green part of the bars), which households are likely to be the last segment to be impacted by the Fed’s interest raising campaign.

To be sure, the estimated build-up shown below should never have happened in the first place. As we now know, there was never any justification for the Lockdowns, which resulted in sharply reduced spending for services, or the subsequent massive stimmies, which in part ended up in household bank accounts.

But those Washington-fostered distortions did happen, and have made the Fed’s inflation-fighting job all the more difficult.



In any event, when inflation gets embedded in expectations history shows that it stubbornly persists. As shown in the chart below, even after Paul Volcker brought the hammer down on the inflationary tides of that era, and brought inflation readings back to 2.0% (black line) by 1986, medium term consumer inflation expectations (red bars) remained far above actual levels for many years.

At the end of the day, we think excess credit build-up and depreciation of the money stock is what causes inflation on a worldwide basis, not “expectations” as revealed in highly flawed surveys. But the fact is, the Fed heads are hard core believers in expectations models, and will therefore not easily give-up the fight.

Stated differently, there is a lot of history that the Keynesian money-printers who occupy the Eccles Building blithely ignore. But, crucially, for purposes of divining where this ship of fools is headed next, the chart below is one bit of history that can’t be ignored,



So the question recurs as to whether Fed policy will lead to serious broken financial furniture in the months and quarters ahead.

Based on the chart below, we’d say it already has...

 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Judge Rejects Biden Administration’s Attempt to Block Depositions in Big Tech-Government Censorship Case

By Zachary Stieber November 2, 2022 Updated: November 3, 2022

The Biden administration’s attempt to block depositions of several key officials was turned down Nov. 2 by a U.S. judge.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, a Trump appointee, rejected a request for a partial stay of his Oct. 21 order authorizing the depositions of eight officials, including President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Government lawyers asked the judge to impose the partial stay as an appeals court weighs a request to vacate the part of his order that enables the depositions of Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, a Biden appointee; Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly, a Biden appointee; and Rob Flaherty, a deputy assistant to the president.

Absent a stay, “high-ranking governmental officials would be diverted from their significant duties and burdened in both preparing and sitting for a deposition, all of which may ultimately prove to be unnecessary if the Court of Appeals grants” their request, the government said.

Doughty ruled that the government failed to show how the officials would be irreparably harmed apart from referencing a diversion from “significant duties.” That didn’t meet the standard for showing irreparable harm, he said.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs, including the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, would be irreparably harmed by a partial stay because they’ve alleged a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment and ‘The loss of First Amendment freedoms, even for minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury,'” Doughty said, quoting from a ruling in a separate case.

“The Court finds that both the public interest and the interest of the other parties in preserving free speech significantly outweighs the inconvenience the three deponents will have in preparing for and giving their depositions,” he added.

The depositions are scheduled to take place in early December. Fauci’s is slated for November, according to a notice made public by The Gateway Pundit, one of the plaintiffs.

The ruling means the three contested depositions will happen unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit approves the writ of mandamus that the administration recently filed.

The writ asks the appeals court to vacate Doughty’s deposition order with regards to Murthy, Easterly, and Flaherty.

“Although mandamus relief is ‘drastic and extraordinary,’ it is warranted where, as here, there is ‘no other adequate means to attain’ the necessary relief; ‘the writ is appropriate under the circumstances,’ including because the issues implicated have ‘importance beyond the immediate case,’ and the district court ‘clearly and indisputably erred,'” government lawyers said in the writ, quoting from a ruling in a separate case.

A response to the filing is due on Nov. 7.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Scholz's China-Appeasing Visit With Xi Triggers Backlash In Europe

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 05:40 PM

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz met with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday in Beijing, where the German leader was on the ground for just 11 hours, and he focused his talking points on the war in Ukraine and containing Russian aggression. But looming large was the symbolism and controversial messaging back home of such a high-level visit, Scholz's first as German chancellor. After all, he arrived with a team of top CEOs by his side. As CNN put it, the message is clear: "business with the world’s second-largest economy must continue"...

Accompanying Scholz on the whirlwind visit was a "delegation of 12 German industry titans, including the CEOs of Volkswagen (VLKAF), Deutsche Bank (DB), Siemens (SIEGY) and chemicals giant BASF (BASFY), according to a person familiar with the matter. They were expected to meet with Chinese companies behind closed doors," CNN continued in describing the optics. They also were given a rare exemption to China's typically strict quarantine and Covid measures for anyone entering the country.

Scholz's trip, despite being only a day-long, marked the first time a European head of state has visited China since Russia launched its invasion. It was further Scholz's first major foreign trip as Germany's chancellor, and comes just after Xi secured a third term as Communist party secretary and president of China.

"We are seeing discussions in China tending more towards autonomy and less economic ties. And these views are ones that need discussing," Scholz told a press briefing in Beijing. The trip was seen as an attempt to maintain cozy relations with China after key pillars of a successful German economic machine evaporated this year - namely cheap energy from Russia and a prior relaxed approach to security spending.

But as Politico points out, "To his critics, he's making exactly the same mistakes of overreliance on China as Berlin previously made with Russia."

Foremost among them is German Foreign Minister and Greens party member Annalena Baerbock, who didn't hide her disapproval and discomfort with Scholz's meeting in stating just ahead of the trip, "The federal chancellor has decided the time of his trip. Now it is crucial to make clear in China the messages that we laid down together in the coalition agreement," as cited in Der Spiegel newspaper. She and others are piling on pressure for a new, more assertive stance toward China.

"As is well known, we clearly stated in the coalition agreement that China is our partner on global issues, that we cannot decouple in a globalized world, but that China is also a competitor and increasingly a systemic rival,” said Baerbock. She added: "And that we will base our China policy on this strategic understanding and also align our cooperation with other regions in the world."

Seeking to defend himself against such growing criticisms, also as the EU is seeking to put pressure on Beijing to turn more definitively against Russia's war aims in Ukraine, Scholz wrote in an op-ed this week, "When I travel to Beijing as German chancellor, then I do so also as a European" - suggesting the trip in no way compromised the EU's united front.

However, he acknowledged, "It is here that new centers of power are emerging in a multipolar world, and we aim to establish and expand partnerships with all of them." And he noted, "Thus, in recent months, we have carried out in-depth coordination at the international level — with close partners such as Japan and Korea, India and Indonesia, and countries in Africa and Latin America too. At the end of next week, I will travel to Southeast Asia and the G20 summit, and while I’m visiting China, Germany’s federal president will be in Japan and Korea."

1667619384094.png

The op-ed just written by Olaf Scholz is worth a read.

Biggest bombshell: "New centers of power are emerging in a multipolar world, and we aim to establish and expand partnerships with all of them"

New - multipolar - world order is now reality.https://t.co/jSqpagD6MC

— Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) November 4, 2022
Following the Friday meeting with President Xi, Scholz said he urged the Chinese side to remove barriers for closer economic ties:

Scholz said he had told Xi that China was becoming "more difficult" for German companies, in terms of market access, the protection of intellectual property and the "interruption of economic relationships" as the country moved towards "autarky". He said he had told his hosts "how important it is in our view to rectify these imbalances".

Scholz later told reporters that he and Xi had discussed what could be done to ensure a "level playing field" for German investors in China. In his press statement, premier Li Keqiang acknowledged Germany and China had "differences" and said these had been discussed. "But we still respect each other," he said.

And on the foreign policy front, Scholz urged President Xi Jinping the Beijing must use its "influence" on Moscow to halt the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. "I told President (Xi) that it is important for China to use its influence on Russia," Scholz said in a statement after the meeting. "Russia must immediately stop the attacks under which the civilian population is suffering daily and withdraw from Ukraine."

Scholz reminded the Chinese leader that all major global powers, including the West, had vowed to respect the UN charter and "principles such as sovereignty and territorial integrity," which is being violated by Russia in Ukraine, according to the statement.

The two leaders also talked about the deeply alarming possibility of nuclear escalation, as well as the newly restored but tenuous Ukraine grain export deal. Sholz at a news conference lashed out at the Kremlin, saying "Hunger must not be used as a weapon."

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1588511523638763521
1:23 min

Chinese state media affirmed that Xi Jinping called on all world powers to "reject the threat of nuclear weapons and advocate against a nuclear war to prevent a crisis on the Eurasian continent" - while leaving his words somewhat vague regarding Russia or Putin and the West's accusations of nuclear saber-rattling. Both agreed that nuclear threats and potential use related to the Ukraine crisis must be out of the question:

...Scholz told reporters he was “glad” that he and Xi had "reached an understanding . . . that there can be no escalation through the use of tactical nuclear weapons".

"Everyone here in China knows that an escalation of the war would have consequences for us all," he added. In an earlier statement to the press after the talks, Scholz said he and Xi agreed that "nuclear-threatening gestures are irresponsible and extremely dangerous".

Just days prior to Russia's late February invasion of Ukraine, Beijing and Moscow signed a "no-limits partnership" intended to deep political and economic ties.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1588605333140037633
.06 min

Interestingly, even as Scholz told Xi that Germany supports 'one China' rule, he took the opportunity to issue warnings "I have ... made it clear that any change in Taiwan's status quo must be peaceful or by mutual agreement," Scholz said alongside China's outgoing premier Li Keqiang at a press event.

But then, "Scholz warned China against military intervention in Taiwan and called for the protection of human rights in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, stressing that all United Nations members have agreed to protect the rights of ethnic minorities and so calling for those protections now is not an interference in China's internal affairs," according to a US media report on the visit.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Beijing Urges Countries Around South China Sea To 'Jointly Resist' The US​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 04:40 PM
Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has called on other claimants to the South China Sea to “jointly resist” US pressure in the region, The South China Morning Post reported on Thursday.

China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia all have overlapping claims to the South China Sea. The US has inserted itself into the maritime dispute and formally rejected most of Beijing’s claims in 2020, which has been reaffirmed by the Biden administration.



The US rejected China’s claims under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), an international treaty that defines the rights of nations to territorial waters. While using UNCLOS to reject Beijing’s claims, the US is not a party to the treaty as it has never been ratified by the Senate.

"Some countries not only refuse to accede to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea but also concoct the Indo-Pacific strategy to compile exclusive small circles, engage in close provocations at sea, show off forces, endanger the peace and tranquility of the sea. This should be jointly resisted," Wang said, referring to the US.

The Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific Strategy was released earlier this year, and the document calls for a greater US presence in the region to counter China with a focus on building alliances and boosting partnerships. Wang has previously said that such an effort could lead to a Ukraine-style "tragedy."

Another aspect of the US involvement in the South China Sea dispute is US naval operations in the disputed waters. Since the Obama administration, the US has sailed warships close to Chinese-controlled islands in the waters, raising tensions with Beijing.

The US has also cited a 2016 international tribunal ruling made under UNCLOS that sided with the Philippines in its maritime dispute with China over claims in the South China Sea. Wang hit out at the ruling on Thursday, calling it "the abuse of arbitration."

China has been consistent in issuing 'resist US hegemony' messaging over the past number of months:

1667619766712.png

The US and the Philippines recently held war games where around 3,500 troops stormed a beach in the South China Sea near a disputed reef. Manila and Washington are treaty allies, and the US has warned China repeatedly that their mutual defense treaty applies to attacks on Philippine vessels in the South China Sea.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Macleod: The Great Global Unwind Begins, Part 2​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 07:20 PM
Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

With price inflation rising out of control and interest rates rising strongly, the trading environment for commercial banks has fundamentally changed.

With bad debts looming and bond prices in entrenched downtrends, procrastination is now the enemy of bankers.

We are at the beginning of The Great Unwind, and this article elaborates on my first article for Goldmoney on the subject
published here.

The imperative for bankers to respond to these conditions overrides all other matters if their businesses are to survive these changed conditions. We are entering a cyclical downdraft of the bank credit cycle which promises to be cataclysmic. And the monetary policy planners at the central banks can do nothing to stop it.

After outlining the scale of the problems faced by each global systemically important bank, this article looks at the future for the $600 trillion derivatives mountain.

It was born out of the long-term decline in interest rates from the mid-eighties, which ended last year. It is almost entirely distributed through banks and shadow banks.

The question to address is, what is the future for the derivative mountain, now that the long-term trend for falling interest rates is over? And what are the economic consequences?



If it’s you in the hot seat…​

Imagine, for a moment, that you are the CEO of a commercial bank involved in lending to businesses and with profit centres acting in a range of financial activities. As CEO, you are answerable to the board of directors for the bank’s performance, and ultimately the bank’s shareholders for maintaining and advancing the value of their shares.

Furthermore, let us set this imaginary exercise in the present. These are the issues that should keep you awake at night:
  • In common with your competitors, the ratio of your balance sheet assets to total equity is almost the highest in the history of the bank, in many cases for other banks over twenty times leaveraged.
  • Official inflation, measured by the CPI is about ten per cent, and producer prices are rising somewhat faster. Your central bank expects a return to the 2% target in two- or three-years’ time. But your contacts at the central bank have privately admitted to you that they cannot imagine the circumstances where this would be true without a deep recession.
  • Bond yields are rising, and losses are beginning to impact on the bank’s investments. The bank has relatively little direct exposure to corporate bonds and equities, but they are commonly held as collateral against customer loans.
  • How are higher interest rates impacting the quality of the bank’s loan book? The bank supported its business customers through the covid pandemic, which increased the indebtedness of them all. This exposes the bank to excessive default risk if rates rise further.
  • The mortgage loan book has been a profitable business for decades. But the bank is beginning to see a material rise in delinquencies. If loan guarantees are not forthcoming from government agencies, the bank may have to shut this activity down.
  • What impact will higher interest rates have on the bank’s derivative exposure? What are the counterparty risks in derivative chains? Derivatives that involve inadequately capitalised counterparties should perhaps be sold on, or where the bank has the option to do so, closed down.
The underlying problem is that the conditions that led to the bank becoming increasingly involved in diversified activities, such as investment banking, trading, and investment management have now changed. Since financial deregulation in the 1980s, the bank has expanded into these profitable areas.

The whole industry moved from dealing in credit into generating fee income.

The growth in fee income can be directly related to the long-term trend of falling interest rates, which apart from interruptions such as the dot-com excesses and the Lehman crisis, stimulated growth in corporate finance, underwriting, investment management, and trading in financial securities. The expansion of these activities in turn led to a massive expansion of derivative markets, with new instruments being devised, such as credit default and interest rate swaps.

If, and this is really what should worry you, the long-term trend of falling global interest rates has ended and is now set to be reversed, not just temporarily but for the rest of the decade and perhaps beyond, then the reasons justifying the bank’s expansion away from its core lending business have come to an end. As CEO, how do you unwind the deep-rooted departmental interests, and keep the shareholders onside?

It is time for the whole executive to be urgently involved in a wide-ranging debate about how serious these threats might be and where you should take actions to protect the bank’s shareholders’ interests. Given the high level of balance sheet leverage, the bank’s survival is at stake if you act indecisively or too slowly. You are facing head-on the unpleasant prospect of The Great Unwind.

Balance sheet ratios​

There are two ratios that concern bankers. The first is the relationship between liquid and illiquid assets with respect to sources of balance sheet funding.

These are set by regulators through Basel regulations, now in their third iteration. Banks are required to submit details of their balance sheets periodically to bank regulators in accordance with the net stable funding requirement formula as set out in Basel III.

The second ratio is of less importance to regulators, which is the relationship between Tier 1 capital and the total balance sheet, which Basel regulations simply states that the maximum leverage ratio is for Tier 1 capital to not be less than 3% of the bank’s balance sheet assets. Put another way, subject to certain conditions, a bank can theoretically leverage its assets to equity as much as thirty-three times. But it should be noted that within that leverage ratio, a bank is permitted to net off certain classifications of credit, reducing its apparent balance sheet size. The following are examples of hidden forms of balance sheet assets and liabilities:
  • Security financing transactions, which include repos and other derivatives, can be netted off where they are between the same counterparty and maturity. For a true accounting picture, a bank balance sheet should reflect credit and debt obligations on both sides of its balance sheet until they are extinguished.
  • Long and short credit derivatives can be netted so long as there is no maturity mismatch. Again, the full obligations should be reflected on both sides of the balance sheet. And valuation methods give banks enormous wriggle room, an issue which regulators are unable to properly address.
  • Off-balance sheet items are only partially recognised through standardised credit conversion factors. Where a bank has off-balance sheet activities, they should be properly reflected in its accounts.
Therefore, true bank balance sheet leverage can be considerably greater than a bank complying with Basel regulations will declare in its audited accounts.

But while conforming with Basel regulations, the board of a bank has a primary duty, often forgotten even by some directors, to their shareholders.

It is changes in the ratio between a bank’s assets and its shareholders’ equity which drive the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction, which in turn drives the business cycle.

While they have a specific expertise in assessing lending risk, bankers are human. When they perceive lending risk to decline, they increase the quantity of credit offered, recorded as assets on their bank balance sheets, without increasing shareholders’ equity. Their confidence is synchronised through individual banks’ market intelligence and commonly available information concerning lending conditions. What few bankers realise is that it is expansion of their cohort lending which creates the very confidence in the lending conditions being observed.

The benefit to the bank is enhanced by expanding the ratio of total balance sheet assets to shareholders’ equity. A gross lending margin of two per cent becomes 20% for the shareholders on a balance sheet ten-times leveraged.

However, this depends on margins being maintained, which, when banks compete with each other for lending business, is unlikely. Furthermore, the trend for declining rates over the decades due to the policies of the monetary authorities has led to a general increase in shareholder leverage as banking cohorts try to maintain profitability on slimming margins.

We all know that this recently reached an extreme position, with unnaturally negative interest rates imposed by central banks principally in Japan, the Eurozone, and Switzerland. In response to heavily compressed rate margins, the large commercial banks in the Eurozone were leveraging up through repos to gear up the slimmest of lending margins. The European repo market has been rolling over in excess of €9 trillion in all currencies with euros the largest component by far.

For these reasons, the most highly leveraged G-SIBs (global systemically important banks) are in the Eurozone and Japan. Table 1 below shows their balance sheet leverage from highest to lowest (the third column), and the price to book rating upon which the market values this leverage risk. Share prices were as of last weekend.



With the Eurozone’s and Japan’s G-SIBs heading the list of most highly leveraged banks, the question before us is now that interest rates are rising, how will these banks adjust their balance sheet ratios to more normal levels, which are probably in the region of eight to ten times or even less? True balance sheet gearing in all cases is likely to be far, far higher principally because of the accounting treatment of derivative obligations. These are the banks leading involvement in repos, have significant derivative positions, have netted out foreign exchange, commodity, and credit derivatives, and have only partially reflected off-balance sheet obligations through standardised credit conversion factors.

In general terms, in the new interest rate environment banks are almost certain to restrict counterparty risk by reducing their exposure to other banks for two reasons. Firstly, contracting balance sheets throughout the banking industry enhance systemic risk significantly, and a significant number of the banks in Table 1 are highly likely to fail. And secondly, as a cohort bankers are motivated to act the same way for the same reasons at the same time, even for banks without derivative exposure. The contraction and consequences of interbank obligations should not be ignored.

The problems of rising inflation, interest rates, and bond yields​

After decades of minimal price inflation, central banks were caught unawares when consumer prices started to rise and continued to do so. Initially, they said it was transient. When they were laughed at, they then merely pushed back their forecasts of consumer price inflation returning to the 2% target back a year. The chart below, of the current UK’s Office for Budget Responsibility forecast is typical. It is due to be updated on 17 November, but it is a racing certainty that the OBS will still expect it to return to 2%, a little further delayed. To admit otherwise is to acknowledge a complete failure of monetary policy.



The US Congressional Budget Office is similarly unrealistically optimistic about the outlook for consumer price inflation. The illustration below is lifted from the CBO’s website.



But with consumer prices already rising in the US, UK, and Europe at a 10% clip and likely to go higher in the coming months, the interest rate disconnection is substantial and can only be bridged with interest rates doubling or even tripling from current levels. Even if they only double, business plans for all manufacturers and service providers will go out of the window. And with that catastrophe, bad debts for the banks will simply soar.

The effect on financial securities will be no less devastating. While banks generally limit their bond exposure to shorter maturities — typically bills and bonds maturing in less than a year — it is likely that banks in the Eurozone and Japan will have some exposure to longer maturities. They might have some exposure to corporate bonds and collateralised debt obligations as well, which will be at risk from rising interest rates. This is not to be ignored, and the evidence of a downturn in credit availability for corporates is already evident in loan officer surveys. Our next chart, of US banking sentiment towards corporate borrowers confirms that credit contraction for non-financial borrowers is already underway.



Clearly, bank credit is set to contract mightily, and together with higher interest rates it is likely to lead to escalating non-performing loans, insolvencies, and rising unemployment. These conditions are likely to develop before interest rates can properly reflect the debasement of the major currencies, reflected in the rise in consumer prices.

Economists commonly assume that the developing recession will restrict consumer demand, leading to an amelioration of the consumer price inflation problem. Furthermore, some supply chains are beginning to flow again, particularly with respect to computer chips. But before we can consider how a fall in demand affects prices, we should remember that the initial market effect of contracting bank credit is always to drive interest rates higher, due to accelerating credit demand arising from lost sales and accumulating inventories while banks are trying to reduce their credit obligations.

Part 1 of 3
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 3

Since almost all recorded transactions that make up GDP are settled with bank credit, its contraction will reduce GDP as well. The extent to which this is the case cannot be mechanically predicted. However, since bank balance sheets are very highly leveraged and rising interest rates will force a severe credit contraction, the effect will not be trivial. If a banker is to retain control over non-performing write-offs, he must not delay in reducing his exposure.

It is for this reason that the cycle of bank credit is like a saw-tooth series of gradual increases followed by sharp declines. And the more exaggerated the increase, the more catastrophic the decline.

Mortgage loan books​

It turns out that the sub-prime mortgage crisis of 2007-2009 was little more than a blip in the growth of bank lending for residential property ownership.
But America with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac is different from other jurisdictions, where banks have become highly active originators in the mortgage business.

With old memories of ruinous interest rates, borrowers have consistently gone for fixed rate mortgages in preference to floating rates. Some 80% of residential mortgages in the UK are fixed rate for between two and five years before they are reset. Until recently, to opt for fixed rates was the wrong decision. Banks have profited mightily, not by simply lending long and borrowing short, but by covering fixed rate offers with interest rate swaps allowing a healthy turn for the bank, with early termination expenses covered by penalties for the borrower.

For a bank, the beauty of this business lies in the transaction size and minimal administration. And with house prices continually rising, the collateral has been secure. But this has now changed dramatically, with mortgage rates soaring and house prices turning lower. The previous lucky minority who opted for floating rates find they face an enhanced risk of repossession of their homes. And interest rates have probably only started to increase.

From a banker’s point of view, this is turning into a very bad business.

Payment defaults are certain to increase rapidly; not just for those on floating rates, but with the majority of borrowers on two- and three- fixed rate deals which are maturing at a rapid rate. A two-year fixed rate of less than two per cent faces renewal at over three times that. And no banker wants the bad publicity of foreclosing on homeowners and their families in droves, “who through no fault of their own” face eviction.

In any event, when homeowners in large numbers face eviction, the lenders have the problem more than the homeowners. It is both politically and practicably impossible for lenders to evict families in large numbers and put their homes up for sale. Apart from anything else, residential property values would collapse under the combined weight of higher borrowing costs (if mortgages are still available) and an increasing supply of liquidated housing stocks. Look no further than what happened to property prices in cities like Atlanta in 2007-2010, as the liar-loans were unwound. All that happens from the bank’s point of view is that even solvent borrowers would be pushed deeply into negative equity.

The difficulties in managing these politically toxic issues will not be the only problem facing bankers. Existing fixed-rate mortgages have been covered through credit default swaps, which are only as good as a bank’s counterparties. If, say, a British bank has a highly leveraged Eurozone bank as its counterparty, it will soon be thinking about counterparty risk in a more focused way. Where it can, it should seek to novate these obligations with more secure counterparties. But that comes with costs.

In a rising interest rate environment, this easy-come business will not be easy-go.

Wider derivative considerations​

According to the Bank for International Settlements, OTC derivative market interests in the global banking system amounted to $600 trillion equivalent of notional amounts outstanding last December.

https://www.goldmoney.com/research/the-great-unwind-1#_edn1 Being based on only seventy dealers in twelve countries reporting to their respective central banks, the statistics are not the whole picture, capturing an estimated 94% on average of their wider triannual survey covering an additional thirty nations.

To this can be added a further $40 trillion in regulated futures and options markets, in which banks play a major counterparty role. To give an idea of the sheer scale of these activities, global GDP is estimated at roughly $100 trillion.

The credit nature of OTC derivatives is poorly understood, and therefore widely ignored by commentators. Nevertheless, these are credit obligations which are only extinguished after the terms of the individual derivative contracts have been satisfied. But being purely financial, they differ from a contract which has on one side the delivery of goods or a service, and on the other a settlement invariably in bank credit. A financial transaction, be it a forward settlement, a swap, or an option exercise, involves both debt and credit obligations. And since debt is synonymous with credit because one always balances the other in both parties’ books, until a financial obligation is settled there is twice the notional credit involved.

The simplest example to take is deferred settlements, such as foreign exchange forwards. In these cases, there are two parts to the contract: there is the initial agreement, under whose terms there may or may not be a partial margin payment due immediately, and the second part is satisfaction of the entire contract by its completion.

At a notional $104 trillion — the BIS’s figure for mid-2021— foreign exchange contracts are the second largest segment of the $600 trillion OTC total. Ten per cent of that $104 trillion are options. According to the BIS’s triannual survey, only 84% of foreign exchange contracts are captured in the semi-annual statistics, so a truer figure is $124 trillion.

By maturity, they split 80% up to a year, 15% one to five years, and the rest over five years. Therefore, these are not a simple case of next day settlement, but credit obligations of material duration.

The status of options is different from forward settlements, being initial settlements for a transaction that might not eventually take place. The buyer of the option has no further credit obligation other than the initial payment of a premium to the seller of the option. But the latter party does have a continuing credit obligation which is not in his power to extinguish before it finally matures.

Because all foreign exchange contracts on the BIS’s statistics represent only one side of foreign exchange contracts, the whole amount of $124 trillion are definitely credit, the majority of which, only excluding options, is duplicated by matching credit obligations for the other counterparties.

Therefore, total foreign exchange derivative credit in trillions is double notional amounts outstanding less one side of notional options. This amounts to $236 trillion.

According to the BIS, the gross market value of this credit is $2.548 trillion. The BIS defines gross market value as “the sum of the absolute values of all outstanding derivatives contracts with either positive or negative replacement values evaluated at market prices prevailing on the settlement date”. In other words, to the extent to which the banking system is counterparty to these OTC derivatives, in total their balance sheets will reflect this figure, and not actual credit obligations, which are almost a hundred times greater.

It is in this context that counterparty risk must be considered. Counterparty risk is a wager that delivery of a credit obligation might not occur, and the relevant figure with respect to foreign exchange commitments alone for assessing it is $236 trillion. As an indication of the scale of these credit obligations, the BIS reports that the total of global bank credit to the non-financial sector amounted to $226.3 trillion at the date of its latest derivative statistics, similar to the scale of foreign exchange derivative credit on its own.[ii]

In round figure terms, all other OTC derivatives in the BIS statistics total about five times the recorded foreign exchange total. They include in the BIS’s notional amounts:

    • Interest rate contracts — $475.2 trillion
    • Equity-linked contracts —$7.28 trillion
    • Commodity contract — $2.22 trillion
    • Credit derivatives — $9.06 trillion
    • Credit default swaps — $8.80 trillion
    • Not otherwise classified — $337 billion.

Interest rate derivatives in rising rates

Interest rate derivatives make up the vast bulk of all OTC derivatives, with the notional contract amount of interest rate swaps totalling $397.11 trillion, and forward rate agreements adding a further $39.44 trillion. A swap is a financial derivative in which two parties agree to exchange payment streams based on a specified notional amount for a specified period. And a forward rate agreement is a contract in which the rate to be paid or received on a specific obligation is for a set period of time, beginning at some time in the future.

What concerns us here are the consequences of a rising trend of interest rates for the values of these contracts. FRAs might continue thrive if interest rate relationships along yield curves permit. But an environment of rising counterparty risk might be a hurdle too high for participating banks to overcome. A far more important consideration is the future for interest rate swaps.

Unlike the foreign exchange contracts described above, interest rate swap notional amounts are not bank credit obligations. The credit commitments of both parties are only for the income streams on a notional amount. An originator, usually a bank, funds a fixed interest stream from a floating rate, rather than the other way round.

A clue to the relationship between the gross market value of these contracts and interest rates is illustrated below, which is of interest rate swaps only originated in US dollars.



The chart confirms what we would expect: that major falls in the Fed funds rate stimulate the gross market value of interest rate swaps; and increases in the funds rate correspondingly leads to falls in their gross value. From this, we confirm that declining interest rates lead to profits for banks taking floating rates and offering fixed rates. This is the protection that customers from the gamut of pension funds to homeowners seek from higher rates. While over the long-term interest rates were declining, interest rate swaps were a profitable form of insurance product for the banks to offer. And we can now see that with sharply rising interest rates, not only will these profits vanish, but the banks are bound to exit this market entirely.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Part 3 of 3

This is the heart of The Great Unwind. It will be a surprise to observers to see the BIS’s OTC derivative statistics collapse as interest rates rise further. Existing contracts with time to run can be closed down by buying out counterparties, entering offsetting swaps, selling the swap to another party, or entering an option on offsetting swaps. But these solutions to a bank withdrawing from interest rate swap obligations will be very costly, if available at all, as the entire banking cohort attempts to depart from this market.

Undoubtedly, large losses will result, threatening the entire global banking network through enhanced systemic risk.

Derivatives and the Bretton Woods III meme​

That we are entering an entirely new banking and financial environment was originally put forward by a Credit Suisse analyst, Zoltan Pozsar, earlier this year. Pozsar argued that since the ending of Bretton Woods, a new financial era had dominated financial markets, which he described as Bretton Woods II.

He contended that the trend for lower interest rates has now ended, that global supply chains will be repatriated, and that the era of the petrodollar is over. Instead, Bretton Woods III will be the era of commodity-based currencies.

Driving his argument was the imposition of currency sanctions against Russia. In his 3 March article, he posed the question: is the OTC commodity derivatives market the gorilla in the room?

[iii] His concern was over margin calls faced by producers and others in the physical commodity business hedging physical product by carrying short positions in the futures markets. As if on cue, Trafigura, the big commodities trader, had to be refinanced within weeks of Pozsar’s note having received massive margin calls on its OTC positions.

[iv] Since Pozsar’s note, Saudi Arabia has signalled the death of the petrodollar by aligning itself with the Russia-China axis, and is scheduled to join the BRICS organisation next year. Members of the Eurasian Economic Union are planning a new trade settlement currency, said to be linked at least partly to commodities. And Moscow is setting up a new gold exchange to handle Russian and other nations’ refined gold, which will almost certainly adopt China’s 99.99% gold kilo standard.

Undoubtedly, the movement towards commodity-linked currencies, the decline of the dollar’s hegemony, and of western financial markets will have a major impact on commercial banking. One wonders how many of the banks weaned on financial activities can make the transition back to traditional lending. And if global supply chains are a thing of the past, will they be prepared to provide the credit for investment in replacement component production in the advanced economies?

As a subset of commodity derivatives, the London Bullion Markets’ forward contracts were estimated to be $781bn on 31 December 2021, of which gold forwards and swaps represented $528bn. At that date, this was the equivalent of 8,975 tonnes compared with 1,595 tonnes in the main gold contract on Comex — a ratio of 5.6 to one



The other side of the LBMA banks’ derivative positions is unallocated customer accounts, originally devised and expanded as a means of diverting demand for gold that would have otherwise driven up the price of bullion. The trend towards increasing quantities of paper bullion relative to the physical is likely to be reversed, because suppression of the gold price is now leading to accelerating demand for physical bullion.

While Keynesian hedge fund managers claim that higher interest rates are bad for the gold price, rising interest rates are bound to render derivative trading unprofitable for banks which find themselves both short of derivatives, and technically short to their unallocated bullion account holders. As quickly as the London bullion market developed in the 1980s, it is likely to diminish as interest rates increase.

Economic consequences of contracting bank credit​

Today, the priority for commercial banks is to reduce their balance sheets to more normal conservative levels in their shareholders’ interests. Without considering secondary factors, the likely consequences of a severe credit contraction for the nominal GDP statistic could be to reduce it by a third or more in major jurisdictions. Realistically, central banks will have no option but to finance the losses of tax revenue and the increased welfare burdens falling on their government’s shoulders. The expansion of central bank currency and credit will replace the contraction of commercial bank credit.

Empirical evidence suggests that a population is more alert to the inflationary implications of central bank credit expanding than that of commercial bank credit. Essentially, if the public deems the currency to be stable, it will respond to higher prices when it is the result of bank credit expansion by moderating their spending. But if the public sees the currency as being unstable, they will vary their spending, and therefore their liquidity reserves accordingly.

Clearly, the political imperative will be to replace lost commercial bank credit with central bank credit. Nor can we rule out “helicopter drops” in an attempt to stimulate recovery. But having tried these measures during the covid pandemic, the public reaction to central bank debasement in a deep recession is almost certain to be less tolerant.

Central banks, which are already ceding control of interest rates to market forces will find they continue to rise as currencies’ purchasing powers continue to quicken their collapse.

Conclusion​



As dealers in credit, banks face the most difficult times in living memory.
Austrian economists have long understood that the business cycle is driven by a cycle of bank credit. The root of the credit cycle has been ignored by statist economists and policymakers who respond by suppressing the evidence. This has been going on with increasing intensity since the 1980s, when the Fed under Paul Volcker broke with interest rate suppression to slay the 1970s inflation dragon.

Since then, the era of pre-Bretton Woods price stability has been replaced by the fiat dollar as the reserve currency, with demand for it engineered by Triffin’s dilemma: balancing the export of dollars through budget and trade deficits with global demand for it. The expansion of derivative markets served to conceal the inflationary effects by shifting the supply of dollar credit into financial markets, away from non-financial activities. This lessened the consequences of currency expansion on the prices of goods and services, allowing the monetary authorities to suppress interest rates without apparent ill effects.

That period has now ended, and The Great Unwind of all the distortions accumulated over the last four decades has begun. No one in government and central banking circles saw it coming, and they are still in denial.

Commercial bankers are becoming acutely aware of the dangers to their business models. At the moment, they have only a growing fear of the consequences of interest rates seemingly out of control. Having been protected from free markets by central banks and their regulators, this loss of statist control is immensely worrying for them.

It is now dawning on commercial bankers that they have been left high and dry, with over-leveraged balance sheets, loan business rapidly souring, loan collateral falling in value, and a derivative merry-go-round about to implode. They must stop pandering to regulators and public opinion, and now protect their shareholders from The Great Unwind by dumping credit obligations as rapidly as possible ahead of the wider banking crowd.

From banking deregulation in the mid-eighties, it took nearly four decades to get to this point. The Great Unwind might take only as many months.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Brazil's Civil and Military Federal Police Invade the National Congress to Protest Fraud 2:19 min

BRAZIL'S CIVIL AND MILITARY FEDERAL POLICE INVADE THE NATIONAL CONGRESS TO PROTEST FRAUD​

Brazil's Civil and Military Federal Police Invade the National Congress to Protest Fraud. Insurrection! Tarnishing the sacred halls. Isn’t it lovely!
It's their duty to protect their country and themselves! Those are their halls not the governments...the government is the one tarnishing the halls with their evil corrupt schemes.

^^^^^
Nationwide lockdown in Brazil on Monday! It’s happening! .30 min

NATIONWIDE LOCKDOWN IN BRAZIL ON MONDAY! IT’S HAPPENING!​

I m estimating Bolsinaro got at least 60-70% of the vote.
Last election results were
In 2018 Bolsonaro won 57 million votes to 44 million.
In 2022 Bolsonaro gets even more votes, 58 million, but somehow his opponent gets 60 million, just enough to pip him.
16 million more votes, all for Lulu. And we're supposed to believe this? I'm guessing Bolsinaro got 65% of the vote, everyone knows Lula is a WEF globalist.
Bolsinaro got lets estimate 65 million, Lula 40 million 65/105 = 62 %
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
BREAKING: Biden just in California and announced he will shut down coal plants all across America!!! .17 min

BREAKING: BIDEN JUST IN CALIFORNIA AND ANNOUNCED HE WILL SHUT DOWN COAL PLANTS ALL ACROSS AMERICA!!!​

Everyone should be stocking up on food, weapons, and ammo. Because when the system crashes be sure, it won’t be the politicians suffering. The Democrats plan under complete control by the WEF, is too crash everything as part of population reduction and create a one party system.

^^^^

Four Days Before Election Day, Biden Claims He Is Closing Coal Mines. Are You Listening Pennsylvania?​

BY KEVIN DOWNEY JR. 7:53 PM ON NOVEMBER 04, 2022

As if John Fetterman’s debate with Dr. Oz wasn’t enough of a campaign killer, Joe Biden announced today that he will be closing coal plants in favor of wind and solar power.

Let’s see how that goes over with Pennsylvania voters, especially considering that Fetterman claimed a while back he is against fracking, although he flip-flopped when asked about this in the debate.

What happens if Pennsylvania loses coal and fracking? The state will be financially gutted. More importantly for now, how will Pennsylvania voters respond to Gropey Joe’s threats to close coal plants?

Pennsylvania is the second-largest producer of gas and the third-largest producer of coal in the nation. There are roughly 18,000 people employed directly or indirectly in the coal business, people who may not want to be unemployed because of the Democrats’ war on coal, gas, and fossil fuels in general.

FACT-O-RAMA! Joe Biden killed the Keystone XL pipeline, costing thousands of jobs and 800,000 barrels of oil a day. Remember that on Election Day.

Some polls have Oz up just a little bit on Fetterman, who shot himself in the foot during the debate when he struggled to put two sentences together.

Ohio has a bevy of coal mines, too, most of which are located near the border Ohio shares with West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Like Pennsylvania, Ohio has a grueling Senate race going as well, in which GOP candidate JD Vance is slugging it out with the Democrats’ Tim Ryan. Polls show Vance with a tiny edge but well within the margin of error.

RUMOR-O-RAMA! Obama once supposedly said, “Never underestimate Joe’s ability to f*** things up.” Obama, for once, was right.

Will coal employees help the GOP in this election? More entertainingly, will Biden’s handlers be able to shut him up for the next four days so that he can’t torpedo his own party?
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Michael Yon @MichaelYon
Nov 5, 2022 at 12:25am
OGUS/Globalists and The Ukraine Trap
05 November 2022

Massive error to send US troops into Ukraine. I suspect OGUS/Globalists are trying to create a mass-casualty event with US troops to provoke anger, and to sideline those who do not wave Ukrainian flags. This was the strategy to provoke Mexican-American war, and to provoke Pearl Harbor attack. Japanese were desperate to negotiate and meet our demands yet Democrats wanted war with Japan.

Japan was running out of oil and other vitals and finally as last ditch effort decided to fight. Fast forward: We nuked Japan. Not once. Twice.

And if anyone thinks the world did not notice…Russia noticed and has deliverable hydrogen bombs.

It worked those times against Mexico and against Japan. Getting Americans riled up after US casualties. I doubt it will work again even if an entire American Army Division is lost. Probably opposite. Turn against the Woke Generals and the wandering Biden and his drug-addict son and their Ukraine corruption. Will you support a war in which openly racist Generals and civilian ‘leaders’ pick who gets killed?

We have no borders. Elections stolen. Economy collapsing. Blue cities are filled with staggering zombies — waves of Hunter Bidens — sleeping and shitting on streets.

And OGUS runs off to war that is destroying Europe. This is insane.

Nord Stream was an act of war against NATO. Who blew up those pipes?

1667623816702.jpeg
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Democrats' school porn agenda threatened by enraged Muslim parents​

Hundreds blast party over offensive books in class

By Bob Unruh
Published November 4, 2022 at 5:41pm

In recent years, Muslim immigrants to America have gathered in various communities where they are comfortable with their friends and family and businesses.

It's not unusual for minority groups to remain connected.

One of those areas is Detroit, where Dearborn, Hamtramck and Detroit's Warrendale neighborhood now have many – even a majority – of Muslim residents.

That region also has been a "fortress" for Democrats, and Muslims largely have voted as a bloc for that party.

But all of a sudden, those votes are at risk, and it's because of the leftists' porn agenda for public schools.

In a column at PJMedia, Kevin Downey Jr. explains the surprise comes "less than a week before the midterms, and the Democrats are in panic mode."

He wrote, "They didn’t learn from Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s victory last November — don’t mess with people’s kids — and they didn’t see themselves possibly losing Michigan."

The members of the Muslim community, it seems, "don’t want their kids exposed to gay porn in their schools. They don’t believe in a 14-year-old’s 'right' to have his penis lopped off behind his parents’ backs. They are not down with aborting a child at all, much less a week before it’s born."

"Hilariously, these are three of the Democrats’ election battle flags in 2022. What could go wrong?"

The problem he pointed out is that the Democrats "may have just 'woke" their way out of power in Michigan. If the Republicans can take Wayne County, they will take the state. Muslims make up roughly 3% of Michigan’s population, where Trump beat Hillary by .23%."

The reports about unrest on the volatile issues have been arriving from many points.

"Michigan’s GOP gubernatorial candidate, Tudor Dixon, recently mentioned a Muslim father who approached her and said he was voting Republican for the first time in his life," the report said.

"It’s all due to the sexually explicit books and content in our schools," Khalil Othman told the Detroit Free Press. "The whole Democratic establishment and leadership stayed silent and quiet and left the parents alone, fighting the issue. That was a red line for me."

WND recently carried the report when Todd Starnes documented how Dearborn schools shut down a board meeting because hundreds of "mostly Muslim parents erupted in chants of 'Vote them out.'"

The trigger was the school's "sexually explicit LGBT books made available to students."

The PJMedia report said because of that dispute, "Muslim leaders in Michigan are calling for their community to vote against liberal Democrats, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib. This comes as notorious Democrat jackpuddings Ilhan Omar and AOC have been heckled by their own people over the wildly expensive war in Ukraine. Is this the end of 'the Squad'?"
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
(Note: Rucker is a Christian. This episode includes some reference to religion)

How to Fight Back Against the Globalist Elite Cabal’s Depopulation and Control Agenda​

It can seem hopeless, especially to those of us who are paying close enough attention. But there are actions we can take to keep fighting the good fight. One of the most pressing is coming Tuesday.

BY JD RUCKER
November 4, 2022

There was a time not too long ago when I thought the “depopulation agenda” promoted by many “conspiracy theorists” was just unnecessary fearmongering for the sake of fame and fortune. It’s not that I didn’t believe in the presence of a globalist elite cabal; even before I was a “conspiracy theorist” I realized there were people conspiring to kill many if not most of us and to control the rest. But I wasn’t ready to accept that the cabal had gained enough strength to enact their plans. That was something for the end times, I thought, and how could we be in the end times when President Trump and America were soaring?

That was before the Plandemic. Today and for the last couple of years, I’ve acknowledged the reality that this globalist elite cabal really does want most humans gone and complete control over the remnant. We’re seeing it manifest right in front of our eyes with challenge after challenge after challenge being deployed across the globe.

On today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, I analyzed a couple of the conspiracies that are engaged against us today. Then, I talked about a few of the things we can and should do to slow the rise of their depopulation and control agenda.

Let’s start there. It’s always good to get solutions before we read about the problems. There are the standard solutions that I’ve proposed in the past, including the most important one: PRAYER. Read the Book of Daniel for multiple examples of the importance of prayer in overcoming the challenges of this world. I also noted the efficacy in both the long- and short-term of spreading the word for the sake of waking people up and making allies in the coming battle with the globalist elite cabal. They want us dead or controlled.

Unfortunately, most Americans and citizens of the world will allow themselves to be controlled before even risking losing their lives. We need to wake people up NOW so they’re not astonished when the powers-that-be make their big moves for The Great Reset.

Take your kids out of public schools. Stop supporting woke corporations by giving them your business. Protect your finances with sound money. Help get the economy jumpstarted, especially your local economy. These are all things that can be done and I’ll go into more details about each of these in future shows.

But today, the best thing we can do is help bring forth the so-called “red tsunami” on Tuesday. I know what a lot of people think when I mention that because I feel the same way. The feckless GOP led by Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy won’t fix anything. In reality, we don’t need them to fix it. We just need them to slow the bleeding. If Democrats retain control, they will initiate policies that will bring about the national and global demise much faster. This is why we need to vote, to get others to vote, and to participate in voter-fraud-busting activities like poll watching.

It really comes down to stalling. The GOP will not be able to fix it, but they may be able to slow the bleeding enough for us to fix it. At the very least we’ll have more time to prepare for what’s to come. It’s not an ideal solution, but at this point we need to fight this battle on every front we can.

Here’s the show and a couple of the stories I covered:

How to Fight Back Against the Globalist Elite Cabal's Depopulation and Control Agenda 1:21:06 min

How to Fight Back Against the Globalist Elite Cabal's Depopulation and Control Agenda​

The JD Rucker Show Published November 4, 2022

Another leaked video has emerged to show that the World Economic Forum (WEF), led by the infamous globalist kingpin Klaus Schwab, is planning to unleash mass genocide as the catalyst for its promised “Great Reset.”

Yuval Noah Harari, who is described as Schwab’s “right-hand man,” is on a promotional tour right now shilling a new book he allegedly wrote. That manuscript asks questions like: What do we need so many humans for?

Now that the globalists have attained near-total control over pretty much everything, they appear ready to cull the herd of human slaves. It began in this latest installment with the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) plandemic, followed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

There is also skyrocketing inflation, supply chain failures, food shortages, crop destruction and other economic instability – all things that are swirling into a perfect storm of global shock and awe.

Referring to non-globalists as “common people” who are fully disposable, Harari’s latest leaked statements reveal a profound attitude of self-perceived superiority and globalist supremacy.

Harari says the common folk below him are right to be fearful about the future because their lives could end at any moment. And it would not be any great loss, he says, because non-globalists are “redundant.”

“We just don’t need the vast majority of you,” says Israeli globalist​

In a future run by “smart people,” Harari went on to state, common people will naturally face increased feelings of anxiety and fear about being left behind.

And he is technically right: those who refuse to board the ark of Christ will, in fact, be left behind in Harari’s globalist dystopia.

“We just don’t need the vast majority of you,” Harari stated out loud without shame, believing himself to be invincible.

As we previously reported, Harari, an Israeli historian and professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, openly admitted that he and the rest of his globalist cabal are unleashing transhumanism as their own personal “technological Noah’s Ark” – meaning they believe the lie that tampering with their DNA and genetic blueprints will somehow grant them eternal life while the rest of us are either eliminated or turned into their permanent slaves.

Talking about this kind of thing used to be scoffed at and labeled conspiracy theorism, but now we have the plan coming straight from the mouths of the globalist cabal itself – right out in the open with no shame.

Rockefeller Foundation official Alan Gregg is another outspoken globalist who recently declared that the world has cancer and that cancer is mankind – excluding himself, of course.

Prince Phillip, the late Queen Elizabeth’s husband, likewise believed that humanity is a cancer that he wished he could eradicate by dying and coming back to life as a killer virus.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
(Brazil)

Lula's Win in Brazil Is a Victory for the Great Reset & CCP: Jack Posobiec and Libby Emmons Explain​

  • by: Olivia Rondeau
  • 11/04/2022

On Thursday's episode of Human Events Daily, host Jack Posobiec and The Post Millennial Editor-in-Chief Libby Emmons spoke about the win of "full-on 'Great Reset,'" Brazilian president-elect Luiz Inácio "Lula" da Silva over President Jair Bolsonaro.

While mainstream media and Big Tech seem to have largely shied away from acknowledging Lula's criminal past, Posobiec dove straight in.

Jack Posobiec and TPM's Libby Emmons talk about the protests in Brazil after WEF convict gets elected as the president 7:13 min
video previously posted

"We're told by the media that Lula has won. This guy is full-on 'Great Reset,' full-on World Economic Forum, totally embedded with the Chinese Communist Party. He's been in office before," he said.

"His previous time in office was exemplified with high corruption – which he went to jail for, as a matter of fact – high crime, a terrible economy," the host added.

Audio of full 25:57 min show on website

Lula, who served as president from 2003 to 2011 and served time in prison for corruption before his sentence was annulled, received 50.83 percent of the vote to Bolsonaro's 49.17.

According to Posobiec, the leader of the National Workers Party "certainly flirt with full-on communism, if not embracing it completely."

Twitter has been flagging posts that claim that the election was stolen from Bolsonaro with tags saying they are "misleading." Video showing police joining in on truck driver blockade protests now have a label that read, "learn why election experts say civic processes in Brazil are safe and secure."

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1587255260715835392
2:03 min

According to Fox News, while Bolsonaro has yet to formally concede defeat, he told Supreme Court Justice Luiz Edson Fachin on Tuesday that his battle with Lula "is over," emphasizing that he has "always played within the four lines of the constitution."

Nonetheless, his supporters have continued to voice their frustration while Twitter attempts to silence them.

"So Libby, why are we not allowed to talk about the results in Brazil? Are we not allowed to question this whatsoever? Because, Twitter won't allow it… not only did Twitter say we're not allowed to mention this, but Biden, about a year ago, sent the head of the CIA down to the capital of Brazil to tell Bolsonaro to his face, that he wasn't allowed to question the results," said Posobiec to Emmons.

"Yeah, it's really interesting that they felt the need to send the head of the CIA down to tell Bolsonaro that so far in advance of the election. I guess there was a lot of reason to believe that an election so far in the future was already going to be contested before it had even been held," Emmons replied, noting that the timing of the situation was "stunning."

"And yeah, we saw Twitter put warning notices up saying that the Brazilian election was perfectly fair and aboveboard… People were looking at it, there were protests. There were things like that going on. And then suddenly, you hear so much protest from the standing regimes… like, left-leaning regimes – that this election was perfectly fair and just," she continued.

"And that certainly causes concern, I think among anyone who's forming their own opinions is looking around wondering why there's so much protest about that," Emmons added.

Socialist American congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez congratulated da Silva with a single-worded tweet: "LULA"

1667625484753.png

The left-wing Brazilian also received cheers from Minnesota Democratic Representative and fellow "Squad" member Ilhan Omar.

1667625521236.png

"AOC put out just a one-word tweet that says 'Lula,' because she is on a first name basis with this gentleman who was accused of corruption and went to prison for it. This is who's on her team, I guess," Emmons remarked.
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

House Republicans release 1,000-page report alleging politicization in the FBI, DOJ​

Whistleblowers say FBI is 'rotted at its core' in Republican report on alleged misconduct

By Chris Pandolfo | Fox News

Jim Jordan, Republicans release FBI, DOJ report alleging politicization​

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on the GOP plan to probe FBI and DOJ and his confidence in Republicans running in swing states.

House Republicans released a new report on Friday detailing whistleblower allegations of FBI misconduct and politicization at the highest levels of the Department of Justice.

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation, under the stewardship of Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland, is broken," the GOP report states. "The problem lies not with the majority of front-line agents who serve our country, but with the FBI's politicized bureaucracy."

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee say this report is "the first comprehensive accounting of the FBI's problems to date, which undermine the FBI's fundamental law-enforcement mission."

The report features testimony from whistleblowers who describe FBI leadership in Washington, D.C., as "rotted at its core." They allege a "systemic culture of unaccountability" and say the bureau is beset by "rampant corruption, manipulation, and abuse."

The FBI responded to the report in a statement Friday night.

"The FBI has testified to Congress and responded to letters from legislators on numerous occasions to provide an accurate accounting of how we do our work. The men and women of the FBI devote themselves to protecting the American people from terrorism, violent crime, cyber threats and other dangers. Put quite simply: we follow the facts without regard for politics. While outside opinions and criticism often come with the job, we will continue to follow the facts wherever they lead, do things by the book, and speak through our work," the statement read.

Read the Republican report:​

House Republicans Release F... by Paul Conner

Broadly, the report alleges systemic political bias against conservatives.
Some allegations were previously disclosed, such as accusations that the FBI is artificially inflating statistics about domestic violent extremism to fit the White House narrative on supposed dangers to democracy, or that counterterrorism authorities were instructed to investigate parents who spoke out at school board meetings.

Other allegations suggest that the FBI is actively seeking to "purge" employees with conservative views and those who dissent from "woke" diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

Additionally, whistleblowers say "political meddling" by the FBI "is dragging the criminal side [of the Bureau] down" as resources are "pulled away" from investigating crimes. One whistleblower alleged he was "told that child sexual abuse material investigations were no longer an FBI priority and should be referred to local law enforcement agencies."

House Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has spoken about several of these allegations for months. He and Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, have sent letters to the Justice Department and FBI leadership demanding answers on the whistleblower allegations they have received, and those letters are contained within the report.

"Americans deserve to have confidence that the enormous power and reach of federal law enforcement will be used fairly and free of any indication of politicization.The FBI has the power, quite literally, to ruin a person’s life — to invade their residence, to take their property, and even to deprive them of their liberty," the report says.

"The potential abuse of this power, or even the appearance of abuse, erodes the fundamental principle of equality under the law and confidence in the rule of law. The FBI’s tremendous power is precisely why the people’s elected representatives in Congress must conduct vigorous oversight, particularly in light of allegations of abuse and misconduct made to date."
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Afghanistan IG: We Can’t Fully Account for $1.1 Billion Spent Since Kabul Fell; Feds Won’t Cooperate​

PATRICK GOODENOUGH| NOVEMBER 4, 2022 | 4:31AM EDT

(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction has informed lawmakers that, “for the first time in its [14-year] history,” it is unable to provide Congress and taxpayers with “a full accounting” of government spending in the country – more than $1.1 billion since the Taliban takeover – because federal agencies won’t cooperate.

In its most recent quarterly report to Congress, the 57th since its establishment, the watchdog said both USAID and the Treasury Department “refused to cooperate with SIGAR in any capacity, while the State Department was selective in the information it provided.”

As Republicans on the House Oversight and Reform Committee push for answers, the State Department says that SIGAR has been pressing for information on spending that falls outside its mandate.

“Our position is that, except for certain specific funds, SIGAR’s statutory mandate is limited to funds available for, quote, ‘the reconstruction of Afghanistan,’” State Department spokesman Ned Price said on Wednesday.

“Since the Taliban takeover in August of last year, we have stopped providing assistance for the purpose of reconstruction and we now focus on alleviating the immediate humanitarian situation in the country.”

House Oversight ranking member Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) and colleague Rep. Glen Grothman (R-Wisc.) dispute that argument, however. In a recent letter to SIGAR head John Sopko, they called the administration’s “obstruction” of his office’s work “unprecedented.”

Comer and Grothman noted, for example, that USAID had not provided SIGAR with information on Economic Support Fund (ESF) funds for Afghanistan.

The legislation that created SIGAR, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008, clearly lists ESF funds among those to be examined and reported on in the quarterly reports.

The legislation also gives SIGAR “jurisdiction to audit, investigate, and report on projects and programs” whose purposes include:

(A) To build or rebuild physical infrastructure of Afghanistan
(B) To establish or reestablish a political or societal institution of Afghanistan
(C) To provide products or services to the people of Afghanistan

SIGAR said in its report that the State Department and USAID were “claiming without basis that U.S. programming in Afghanistan is unrelated to reconstruction activities, and is instead ‘humanitarian and development assistance.’”

“SIGAR rejects this claim, noting that there is little to no substantive difference between assistance referred to as ‘reconstruction’ and assistance referred to as ‘development’ or ‘humanitarian.’”

Moreover, it said that every one of its quarterly reports up until now “discuss humanitarian and development assistance within the broader context of Afghanistan reconstruction.”

“No federal agency has challenged SIGAR’s authority to conduct oversight of such programs until now.”

‘Most transparent administration in history’
In their letter to Sopko, Comer and Grothman said that the State Department and USAID had historically honored SIGAR’s mission.

“But since the Biden administration’s botched Afghanistan withdrawal – which is in desperate need of oversight – State and USAID have denied travel, delayed, obstructed, and even questioned SIGAR’s jurisdictional authority.”

They wrote that it was SIGAR’s responsibility to examine whether there has been any “waste, fraud, and abuse” in the more than $1.1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people since the withdrawal, “and to what extent the Taliban may have access to those funds.”

“The lack of cooperation from the Biden administration raises serious questions. What do they have to hide? Are funds being given to the Taliban?

What is being done to assist women and girls? How is the U.S. engaging with the U.N. and other multilateral organizations on these matters?”

Comer and Grothman asked Sopko to provide a staff-level briefing on the matter.

“So much for being the most transparent administration in history,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) commented on Thursday.

He recalled Biden having written soon after taking office that “[t]he revitalization of our national security and foreign policy workforce requires a recommitment to the highest standards of transparency.”

“He was right. He should listen to himself,” Burchett said.

“It’s beyond unacceptable for our federal government to dodge accountability like this. It’s cowardly, and it’s far less than the American people deserve from our leaders. We won’t tolerate this kind of behavior next year, that’s for sure.”

At a daily briefing on Wednesday, Price said that “within the scope” of SIGAR’s mandate that is limited to overseeing reconstruction funds, the agencies have cooperated with the watchdog.

He said the State Department and USAID “have provided SIGAR written responses to dozens of questions, as well as thousands of pages of responsive documents, analyses, and spreadsheets describing dozens of programs that were part of the U.S. government’s reconstruction effort in Afghanistan.”

SIGAR was created by the FY2008 NDAA to audit U.S.-funded reconstruction programs and operations and investigate allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse relating to those programs. Currently comprising 139 staffers, the team has been led by Sopko since 2012.

^^^^
1667626903727.jpeg

(Comment: USAID is a known money pot for George Soros and colour revolutions in S. America and Africa.)
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Whitney: The One Chart That Explains Everything

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 08:00 PM
Authored by Mike Whitney,

Look at the chart below. The chart explains everything.

1667627752472.png

It explains why Washington is so worried about China’s explosive growth. It explains why the US continues to hector China on the issues of Taiwan and the South China Sea. It explains why Washington sends congressional delegations to Taiwan in defiance of Beijing’s explicit requests. It explains why the Pentagon continues to send US warships through the Taiwan Strait and ship massive amounts of lethal weaponry to Taipei. It explains why Washington is creating anti-China coalitions in Asia that are aimed at encircling and provoking Beijing. It explains why the Biden administration is stepping up its trade war on China, imposing onerous economic sanctions on its businesses, and banning critical high-tech semi-conductors that are “are essential not just… for virtually every aspect of modern society, from electronic products and transport to the design and production of all manner of goods.” It explains why China has been singled-out in the US National Security Strategy (NSS) as “the only competitor with both the intent and, increasingly, the capability to reshape the international order.” It explains why Washington now regards China as its biggest and most formidable strategic adversary that must be isolated, demonized and defeated.

The chart above explains everything, not just the hostile diplomatic jabs that are designed to discredit and humiliate China, but also the openly belligerent policies that are aimed at Russia as well. People need to understand this. They need to see what is really going on so they can put events in their proper geopolitical context.

And what “context” is that?

The context of a Third World War; a war that was thoroughly-planned, instigated and (now) prosecuted by Washington and Washington’s proxies. That’s what’s really going on. The increasingly violent conflagrations we see cropping-up in Ukraine and Asia are not the result of “Russian aggression” or “evil Putin”. No. They are the actualization of a sinister geopolitical strategy to quash China’s meteoric rise and preserve America’s dominant role in the world order. Can there be any doubt about that?

No. None.

This is why we are experiencing the redivision of the world into warring blocs. This is why we are seeing the roll back of 30 years of Globalization and massive suppyline disruption. And this is why Europe has been thrust headlong into frigid darkness and forced deindustrialisation. All of these suicidal policies were concocted for one purpose and one purpose alone, to maintain America’s exalted spot in the global system. That is why all of humanity is presently embroiled in a Third World War; a war that is designed to prevent China from becoming the world’s biggest economy; a war that is designed to preserve US global primacy. Check out this excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

An October 19 Financial Times article by Edward Luce, entitled “Containing China is Biden’s explicit goal,” sounded the following alarm: “Imagine that a superpower declared war on a great power and nobody noticed. Joe Biden this month launched a full-blown economic war on China—all but committing the US to stopping its rise—and for the most part, Americans did not react.​
“To be sure, there is Russia’s war on Ukraine and inflation at home to preoccupy attention. But history is likely to record Biden’s move as the moment when US-China rivalry came out of the closet.”​
Moreover, last week, a top Biden administration official indicated that the US was preparing new bans on China in key hi-tech areas. Speaking at the Center for a New American Security, Alan Estevez, the under-secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, was asked if the US would ban China from accessing quantum information science, biotechnology, artificial intelligence software or advanced algorithms. Estevez admitted that this was already being actively discussed. “Will we end up doing something in those areas? If I was a betting person, I would put down money on that,” he said….​
Luce concluded his Financial Times article cited above by declaring: “Will Biden’s gamble work? I’m not relishing the prospect of finding out. For better or worse, the world has just changed with a whimper not a bang. Let us hope it stays that way.”…(“Biden’s technology war against China”, World Socialist Web Site)​

Once again, look at the chart. What does it tell you?

The first thing it tells you is that the hostilities we see in Ukraine (and eventually Taiwan), can be traced back to a fundamental shift in the global economy. China is growing stronger. It’s on a path to overtake the United States economy within the decade. And with growth, come certain benefits. As the world’s biggest economy, China will naturally become Asia’s regional hegemon. And, as Asia’s regional hegemon it will be able “to settle regional disputes in its own favor and to de-legitimize U.S. regional and global leadership.”

Can you see the problem here?

For nearly two decades, the US has oriented its foreign policy around a “rebalancing of forces” strategy called the “pivot to Asia”. In short, the US intends to be the dominant player in the world’s most populous and prosperous region, Asia. Can you see how China’s rise derails Washington’s plan for the future?

The United States is not going to let this happen without a fight. Washington is not going to let China muscle-it-out of the markets that it plans to dominate. That’s not going to happen. And if you think that’s going to happen, you’d better think again. The United States will go to war to avoid a scenario in which the US plays “second fiddle” to China. In fact, the foreign policy establishment has already decided that the US will engage China militarily for that very objective.

So, our thesis is simple; we think WW3 has already begun. That’s all we’re saying. The ructions we see in Ukraine are merely the first salvo in a Third World War that has already triggered an unprecedented energy crisis, massive worldwide food insecurity, a catastrophic break-down in global supply lines, widespread and out-of-control inflation, the steady reemergence of extreme nationalism, and the redivision of the world into warring blocs. What more proof do you need?

And it’s all economic. The origins of this conflict can all be traced back to the seismic changes in the global economy, the rise of China and the unavoidable decline of the United States. It is a case of one empire replacing the other. Naturally, a transition of this magnitude is going to generate tectonic changes in global distribution of power. And along with those changes will come more flashpoints, more devastation, and the looming prospect of nuclear war. And this is precisely how things are playing out.

So, how does the chart explain what is happening in Ukraine?

Washington’s proxy war in Ukraine is actually aimed at China not Russia. Russia is not a peer competitor and Russia does not have the economic wherewithal to displace the United States in the global order. NordStream, however, did pose a significant risk to the US by greatly strengthening Moscow’s economic relations with the EU and particularly with Europe’s industrial powerhouse, Germany. The Moscow-Berlin alliance—which was mutually beneficial and key to German prosperity—had to be sabotaged to prevent further economic integration that would have drawn the continents closer together into the world’s biggest free trade zone. Washington had to stop that in order to preserve its economic stranglehold on Europe and defend the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Even so, no one expected the US to blow up the pipeline itself in—what appears to be—the greatest act of industrial terrorism in history. That was truly shocking.

In essence, Washington sees Russia as an obstacle to its “pivot” plan to encircle, isolate and weaken China. But Russia is not the greatest threat to US global primacy; not even close. That designation belongs to China.

The Third World War is being waged to contain China not Russia. What the war in Ukraine suggests is that—among foreign policy elites—there is general agreement that, The road to Beijing goes through Moscow. That appears to be the consensus view. In other words, US powerbrokers want to weaken Russia in order to spread US military bases across Asia. Ultimately, the military will be called upon to enforce Washington’s economic rule over its new Asian subjects. If that day ever comes.

We think it is extremely unlikely that Washington’s ambitious plan will succeed, but we have no doubt that it will be implemented all the same. Tens of millions of people are likely to die in a desperate attempt to turn-back the clock to the fleeting ‘unipolar moment’ and the equally short-lived American Century. It is a tragedy beyond comprehension.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

School Choice Is About To Revolutionize K-12 Education​

FRIDAY, NOV 04, 2022 - 06:40 PM
Authored by Brian McGlinchey via starkrealities.substack.com

Since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, America’s parents have shifted nearly 2 million students from public schools to alternatives that include private schools and home schooling. For public schools, that represents a loss of about 4% of their enrollment.

Expect the exodus to grow larger, as the United States is undergoing a major change in philosophy regarding publicly-funded K-12 education, away from funding government-run school systems and toward funding individual students—with parents getting to choose where their children learn.

In June, Arizona put itself at the leading edge of that shift: Every Arizona family can now direct about $7,000 a year per student toward the education solution of their choice. Funds can be used for private schools, home schooling, tutoring and online learning.

Arizona also provides free choice among public schools — rather than being forced into a particular school by neighborhood, parents who prefer public schools can pick whichever one they want, first-come first-served.

Defenders of the status quo typically characterize school-choice laws as “taking money away” from public schools, recoiling at the very idea that government money would be spent anywhere other than a government institution.

However, that’s already how the great majority of publicly-funded education and other entitlements work, without uproar.

“We have Pell Grants for low-income students for higher eduction, we have the Head Start program for pre-K where you can pick public, private, religious or non-religious,” said Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, on Michael Malice’s “Your Welcome” podcast.

We have food stamps where the money goes to the person and you can pick Walmart or Trader Joe’s…it doesn’t go to a residentially-assigned, government-run grocery store. That would be absolutely ridiculous.”

Meanwhile, those who say school choice programs will drain public schools of huge sums of money are implicitly asserting that, were it not for a system that protects public schools from competition — by granting them a monopoly on the use of public K-12 funds — a great many more parents would send their children elsewhere.

For decades, public school monopolies have been protected by a particular, self-reinforcing power dynamic:
  • Powerful teacher unions overwhelmingly favor Democratic politicians. Exhibit A: Democrats have received 99.94% of congressional contributions from the American Federation of Teachers in 2022.
  • Democratic politicians protect public school monopolies by opposing voucher and other school choice programs, while relentlessly pushing for increased public school funding
  • Increased funding enables the hiring of more public school staff
  • Larger staffs mean more union dues, enriching teacher unions and increasing their political power…and the cycle repeats
Today, however, there are large cracks in the foundation of this monopoly-protecting fortress, and the government response to the Covid-19 pandemic has been a big factor.

With public schools closed to in-person instruction, parents were suddenly much more engaged in their children’s education, and many didn’t like what they were seeing as they observed remote teaching.

As the pandemic ground on, relentless union opposition to school re-openings, and the insistence on masking children despite the many collateral harms of doing so, made it all too clear to enlightened parents that public teacher unions — and public school boards — can’t be trusted to always put children’s interests first.

Though the government’s destructive responses to the pandemic are now largely behind us, the impact on parent attitudes about public schools is still growing, as a steady stream of reports illuminates the massive learning setbacks experienced by K-12 victims of school shutdowns.

At the same time, new data shows that students in private schools — which were much more eager to provide in-person instruction — fared significantly better.

The ongoing culture wars are another reason more people are embracing the idea of funding students rather than systems.

Parents understandably have strongly differing ideas about what’s appropriate for the classroom. Rather than forcing opposing parents into the same school and having them fight at board meetings about which curriculum will be forced onto everyone, each family should be free to seek out a school arrangement that best matches their own philosophy — and use public money to do so.

Many politicians who oppose school choice are themselves private school products or send their own children to private schools. One of the most notorious such hypocrites is Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Pandering to teacher unions as a presidential candidate, Warren said she not only wanted to stop school choice programs, but also end federal funding for charter schools and make it harder to open new ones.

Yet Warren sent her son to private schools — including one on Philadelphia’s wealthy Main Line where total fees today are $42,600. Worse, she actually denied it when confronted about her hypocrisy by a group of black Atlanta activists, who know the worst-performing public schools tend to be in poor, minority communities — and that wealthier people like Warren have the disposable income to afford private schools without using government money.

Nebraska state senator Justin Wayne, a black Democrat who supports school choice, knows all that too. Wayne told his colleagues he’d vote against school choice if they moved their children to a school in his neighborhood “so we can go through the transformation — that you keep telling my community to wait for — together.”

Arizona’s 2022 expansion is distinguished from other school-choice experiments by its universality — all children are eligible to use a stipulated amount of state school dollars for education at a public school, private school or home school, regardless of where they live or the incomes of their parents.

Having witnessed what Arizona has done, activist parents in other states are now pressuring their own legislatures. As they do, they’re backed by polls showing 72% of Americans now support school choice programs, including 82% of Republicans and 68% of Democrats.

Look for the school choice movement to take a major step forward in 2023
— most impactfully in Texas. The Lone Star State’s public school population is a close second in size to California’s, and nearly double the third largest, which is Florida’s.

In the wake of Arizona’s school choice expansion, Governor Greg Abbott said he too wants to let parents “send their children to any public school, charter school or private school with state funding following the student,” and the next biennial legislature section starts on Jan. 10.

While private school enrollments will surge, the rise of school choice will also stimulate a novel education approach that existed before the pandemic but was greatly popularized by it — learning pods.

When parents were let down by public school closures — with working parents suddenly scrambling to manage day-long supervision of their children — many of them formed collaborative learning pods, where small groups of children would gather at a single home to do schoolwork together and have social interaction.

Before the pandemic, other parents had already used a pod approach to home-schooling. As school choice programs allow the use of state money to cover the cost of home schooling, look for pods to proliferate.

Those pods won’t all be led by parents. The concept could turn into an ideal career alternative for public school teachers yearning to break free from public school system bureaucracy.

Consider the math in Arizona for a former public school teacher who sets out on her own and assembles a pod of 15 children to teach. With parents able to tap up to about $7,000 per student per year for education, that teacher could charge $105,000 for her services with no out-of-pocket expense for the parents. In 2021, public school teacher salaries in Arizona ranged between $40,554 and $68,910.

Particularly for middle and high schools, where deeper subject-matter knowledge is required, groups of specialist teachers could collaborate to form their own “micro-schools.”

Of course, when comparing income, teachers will have to factor in expenses and the loss of public school system employee benefits — as well as intangible changes in quality-of-life they realize by leaving a public school system behind.

Parents will have their own pros and cons to consider, which is one reason why school choice shouldn’t be equated with the wholesale destruction of public schools. Indeed, it’s likely to bring about long-needed improvements — especially when programs like Arizona’s let parents who stay in the public system choose which public school their child attends.

“Twenty-five of 27 studies suggest that…school-choice competition leads to better outcomes in the public schools,” said DeAngelis. “Why? Because school choice is a rising tide that lifts all boats. Competition works.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
(Haiti)

BREAKING! US armored vehicles attack Haiti fuel terminal blockade, Russian tankers arrive | Redacted 9:19 min

BREAKING! US armored vehicles attack Haiti fuel terminal blockade, Russian tankers arrive | Redacted​

Redacted News Published November 4, 2022

Tense stand-offs across Port-au-Prince, Haiti today as Haiti's government forces face off against opposition forces. Meanwhile Russian tankers arrived this afternoon to bring fuel to the Haitian people. U.S. Air Force aircraft arrive to bring "humanitarian aid."
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Massachusetts’ 1,200 MW Offshore Wind Project ‘no longer viable’ (rough waters ahead?)

By Robert Bradley Jr. — November 2, 2022

“… global commodity price increases … sharp and sudden increases in interest rates, prolonged supply chain constraints, and persistent inflation have significantly increased the expected cost of constructing the project.”​

Electricity rates are going up because of wind, solar, and batteries being forced upon, and duplicating, the grid. Reliability is going down because of wind and solar intermittency. And higher interest rates are (further) ruining the economics of the infrastructure-heavy, up-front capital necessary to turn “free” wind and solar into electricity.

It’s a perfect storm that might just overcome the taxpayer largesse of the federal subsidies (DOE and IRS) and rate averaging for captive ratepayers. With offshore wind experimental and extra-uneconomic, the worst can be assumed.

An October 30, 2020, article by Colin Young, “Major Massachusetts offshore wind project no longer viable,” explains the fluid situation.

A major offshore wind project in the Massachusetts pipeline “is no longer viable and would not be able to move forward” under the terms of contracts filed in May. Both developers behind the state’s next two offshore wind projects are asking state regulators to pause review of the contracts for one month amid price increases, supply shortages and interest rate hikes….

A one-month freeze, the developer said, “would give the parties an opportunity to evaluate the current situation facing the project and potentially agree upon changes to the PPAs, along with other measures, that could allow the project to return to viability.”

“As has been publicly reported in recent weeks, global commodity price increases, in part due to ongoing war in Ukraine, sharp and sudden increases in interest rates, prolonged supply chain constraints, and persistent inflation have significantly increased the expected cost of constructing the project. As a result, the project is no longer viable and would not be able to move forward absent amendments to the PPAs,” attorneys for Commonwealth Wind wrote in their motion.

The developer’s brief highlights “cost saving measures, tax incentives under the newly enacted Inflation Reduction Act, an increase in the PPA prices, and improvements to Project efficiencies” as the possible approaches to restoring their project to viability. The developer also said that it “remains fully committed to the project and to delivering cost-effective renewable energy from the project to the residents and businesses of Massachusetts in a manner that advances the purposes of [the state’s clean energy law] and the Commonwealth’s energy and climate policies.”

The Boston Globe reported last month that a top Avangrid executive told investors that the company expected Commonwealth Wind and Park City Wind (a project intended to provide power to Connecticut) to each be delayed by a year as they sought contract revisions. CEO Pedro Azagra said Commonwealth Wind is now expected to go live in 2028, the Globe reported….

Commonwealth Wind said that “the IRA benefits to the project are not fully known at this time and not anticipated to make the project economic absent other changes to the PPAs,” but told DPU that it “believes there may be potential opportunities to share benefits associated with the IRA with ratepayers and would be willing to explore those opportunities with stakeholders.”

It is unclear when a DPU decision will come, but the agency had previously set a Tuesday deadline for briefs related to the latest offshore wind contract….

Final Comment

The above article comes from the New Bedford Light, not the New York Times. But if the impasse continues without additional subsidies from Massachusetts authorities or captive ratepayers, it will deserve national attention.

One can only hope that local ratepayers reject associated rate hikes and preserve their shorelines at the same time. And may Commonwealth Wind’s problems serve as a warning that not only nuclear (Plant Vogtle) but also offshore wind is subject to significant risk to its developers.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Joe Biden Tells Reporters Americans “Want More” of His Inflation Policies Before Shuffling Away (VIDEO)​

By Cristina Laila
Published November 4, 2022 at 8:40pm

Joe Biden Friday afternoon told reporters that what gives him the most confidence going into the midterm elections is that Americans want more of his policies.

Biden stopped and spoke to reporters as he prepared to depart San Diego en route to Chicago, Illinois where he will participate in a political reception.

“The thing that gives me the most confidence is the fact that the policies we’ve initiated people care about, they want more!” Biden said to reporters on the tarmac.

The arrogance of this guy!


VIDEO:
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1588649835431079936
.09 min

Another reporter tried to get Biden’s attention before he shuffled over to Air Force One.

“Mr. President, could I just ask you one quick question?” the reporter queried.

“No,” Biden said.

You said that you were going to meet with the oil companies…” the reporter said.

Biden mumbled something and shuffled away.

WATCH:
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1588668220084752385
.11 min

Joe Biden spent Thursday and Friday campaigning for Democrats in New Mexico and Southern California.

Biden was a mumbling disaster Thursday evening and Friday.

IMG_9533.jpg


One of Joe Biden’s last minute pitches to voters in SoCal: Vote Democrat because the Republicans are going to impeach me if they take back the House.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

An Ex-Leftist Reacts to Biden’s Speech About 'Democracy'

BY LINCOLN BROWN 9:22 PM ON NOVEMBER 02, 2022

Earlier in the day, I warned readers that Biden was set to make Wednesday night about democracy. Well, I watched Custard’s Last Stand. On the upside, I need to lose a little weight and now I have no appetite. I thought I would address my reaction to the ersatz commander-in-chief:

Dear Mr. President,

First of all, the United States of America is not a democracy. Dear God, that is Civics 101. America is a republic. It was designed as a republic because the framers knew that democracies could easily descend into mob rule. That includes mobs you like. More on that later.

Secondly, the man who attacked Paul Pelosi is a mentally ill drug addict whose interests and intentions were all over the map. I don’t see you shedding any tears for the people who face these lunatics every single day on city streets. But your people found enough to get back on the MAGA horse.

Speaking of that, and mobs…

Third, no one is buying ”MAGA Republicans” anymore. You’ve ridden said horse into the ground. It’s dead. Leave it be. It was not the vast majority of Republicans who stormed the Capitol on January 6. It wasn’t even the majority of people at the rally. But you just can’t leave it alone. Americans, sir, have been struggling with increasing crime under the watch of you and your counterparts, and they have very few tears left to shed for the protected class who, for a few hours out of one day, felt threatened. And frankly, sir, you and your party have trotted out the routine so many times that any dramatic value it may have had is lost on everyone but yourselves and your pet media. Nary a word from you about the sieges in cities by anarchists or the threats against a Supreme Court justice. You cry crocodile tears over J6 and talk about unifying a nation while finding any reason to raid the homes of abortion opponents and ignore the destruction of pregnancy centers.

Democracy versus autocracy, you say? Who but an autocrat would weaponize the Department of Justice to terrorize his political opponents, cast concerned parents as domestic terrorists, and even try to find ways to criminalize election rhetoric he doesn’t like? Who but an autocrat would freeze energy production in his own country, raid the reserves, and flirt with nationalizing the oil industry?

We won’t know the results until a few days after the election? I’ve been voting since 1985. Going back as far as I can remember (Al Gore aside), most elections have been finished on Election Day. It is patently obvious to anyone with half a brain at their disposal that your handlers, speech writers, and members of the Democratic upper echelon are setting the scene to buy time. After all, Big Tech needs to sow the seeds of doubt, and hell, you might just skeeve your way out of this one, if the vote is close enough.

Related: Biden Goes Full Steve Martin, Has His ‘I Was Born a Poor Black Child’ Moment

You want your fellow Americans to help you meet this day? Maybe your fellow Americans are worried about putting gas in the tank, heating their homes, or making their rent or mortgage. Maybe they are reeling from the fact that you and your media lied to them about a drug that did nothing to prevent the spread of a disease, and watched their businesses and livelihoods evaporate. And you and the people who profited from it could not have cared less. Maybe the voters are hearing about the supply chain being interrupted by a lack of diesel fuel or an impending railroad strike, which, despite your crowing about fixing it, may occur after the election after all. Maybe they are worried about getting attacked on the street or having their stores or boutiques cleaned out. They know how your allies are trying to divide and judge their children on the color of their skin, and mutilate their growing bodies. Some don’t feel safe outside their homes and barely feel safe inside them. Some still remember the Afghanistan debacle. Some of them are even worried about nuclear war. I wasn’t even alive the last time that concern was on the table.

Maybe they understand that you want them to help you meet this day so that you and your people can stay in office. These people don’t even know what the next day will bring for them, and they do not have the financial cushion of you and your party leaders and mouthpieces.

Back during the earliest stages of the 2008 election, I believed in you. I backed you and hell, I even liked you. And yes, I probably owe every reader at PJ Media an apology for that. Of course, Obama came along and all of us donkeys got the vapors for him, but that just goes to show you how easily Democrats can be emotionally manipulated. Had I only known then what I know now. Not that it would have mattered, but at least I wouldn’t have to admit to having supported you.

But people aren’t being manipulated now. And that has nothing to do with “election deniers.” It has nothing to do with MAGA Republicans. They can see what you and your party have done to them. The kitty or perhaps the donkey is out of the proverbial burlap. You and your party failed us, just like you failed me twelve years ago. But instead of apologizing and maybe listening, you doubled down, you dug in. And the rest of us paid for it.

People have figured out something about you and the rest of your ruling class, sir. You are everything you accuse conservatives of being. And you were able to hide that. Until now.
 
Top