Individual Economists

Stormy Daniels Lawyer Says Payment Wasn't 'Hush Money' - Avenatti Calls "A Shakedown"

Zero Hedge -

Stormy Daniels Lawyer Says Payment Wasn't 'Hush Money' - Avenatti Calls "A Shakedown"

A lawyer who was involved in negotiations between former President Donald Trump and two women denied that payments made to them constituted "hush-money," and instead used the word "consideration."

Keith Davidson, who negotiated deals with both Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) and model Karen McDougal, disputed Manhattan prosecutor Joshua Steinglass's language during a May 2 court appearance.

"It wasn’t a ‘payout’ and it wasn’t ‘hush money.’ It was consideration in a civil settlement," said Davidson.

"Would you use the phrase hush money to describe the money that was paid to your client by Donald Trump?" Steinglass shot back.

"I would never use that word," Davidson replied.

When asked what he would call it, he said it was a "Consideration," comparing it to a contract in which one pays to have one's lawn mowed.

Trump attorney Emil Bove pressed Mr. Davidson on his understanding of extortion law, grilling him about previous instances in which he solicited money to suppress embarrassing stories, including one involving wrestler Hulk Hogan.

Mr. Bove suggested to the witness that by the time he negotiated the payments for Ms. McDougal and Ms. Clifford, he would have been “pretty well versed in coming right up to the line without committing extortion.”

I had familiarized myself with the law,” Mr. Davison replied. -Epoch Times

Davidson also told Steinglass that he worked out the "consideration" deal with former Trump attorney Michael Cohen just days before the 2016 election, but that Trump never signed it.

Avenatti pipes up from prison

Trying to reclaim his 15 minutes of fame from prison, former Trump foe and Stormy Daniels' ex-attorney Michael Avenatti posted on X that Davidson is a liar - and had in fact tried to extort Trump.

"Keith Davidson is lying," claimed Avenatti. "After I confronted her w/ her own text msgs, Daniels admitted to me in early 2019 that she & Davidson had extorted Trump in Oct. 2016 – it was a shakedown."

Last month, Trump publicly thanked Avenatti "for revealing the truth about two sleaze bags who have, with their lies and misrepresentations, cost our Country dearly!," referring to the gag orders placed on Trump in his Manhattan trial.
 

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 20:40

Money Is A Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender

Zero Hedge -

Money Is A Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

A major intellectual revelation from my youth came from reading Murray Rothbard’s “What Has Government Done to Our Money?” (1963). He includes a passing opinion that private markets are perfectly capable of producing money with no help from government. Under a sweeping monetary reform, private mints could compete in offering this good with full associated services. There is no need for any government intervention here.

It was the kind of claim that, at some point in one’s life, causes the jaw to hit the floor. Investigating this assertion more, I came to see that there was a large literature on the topic. Historically, money originated in the market economy itself, a naturally evolving institution that met the needs of trade. Whatever good was generally valued by everyone, and was as capable of being divided into consistent units with a stable value, could be deployed as money, with no need for government to do anything but watch.

But of course history has not panned out that way. Every government has a strong incentive to monopolize the good called money because this is how they can tax their citizens, reward the most compliant industries, cultivate close relationships with bankers, and inflate the currency at will through a variety of methods depending on the technology of the time.

We can of course imagine primitive tribes or pre-colonial native populations using rocks and shells, but is there a modern case where private coinage became normalized? In a major but often overlooked work of historical scholarship, economist George Selgin has written the most extensive treatment of the private coinage industry in the UK at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

His book “Good Money” is beautifully produced with color photographs of some of the most alluring coins you will ever see. The historical narrative is endlessly fascinating. At the dawn of the factory system, the Royal Mint didn’t care in the slightest bit about small denomination coins of silver and copper to enable small businessmen to pay their workers. The Royal Mint only produced large denominations in gold for big business doing big trade deals.

Frustrated with the inability to pay workers, the entire period from 1700 through 1813 saw the evolution of a sophisticated industry focused on coinage. Old button factories were converted to producing coins of various weights and sizes based on copper and silver. They were used to pay workers and accepted widely by merchants.

The system worked just fine and it could have continued forever. The new industry alleviated the coin shortage and yielded healthy competition among many producers of new money. It was all made to be inflation resistant and verifiable according to standard weights and measures. This was a full industry of private coinage, in operation in one of the most advanced and industrious societies in the world at the time.

Sadly, the Royal Mint eventually became upset about this. Driven by the eternal need of government to control the money in its realm, Parliament passed a series of acts in 1812–1813 to cartelize the function of the mint and make the Royal Mint the only legal producer. The entire industry was destroyed very quickly. So from this one case, we can see that the monopolization of money is not an outgrowth of market forces but imposed by government. It has always been this way.

The digital age birthed new attempts to privatize money, stemming from a very real problem of financial verification (revealed in the 2008 financial crisis) and using money without the need for intermediaries. The result was Bitcoin, which was born in January 2010. It grew in sophistication and value over the course of the year. In the following seven years, adoption exploded and incentivized the creation of new private methods of settling transactions and accepting credit cards. It was a solid competitor to nationalized money.

As in 1813, governments did not much like it. The code of Bitcoin itself was deliberately throttled to prevent the new private money from scaling, prompting a fork in the transaction chain and the birth of general chaos in the industry, even as Bitcoin itself kept growing in value. Government responded by taking control of the on-ramps, the off-ramps, all exchanges, and then put heavy taxation and reporting requirements on all dealings. Right now, the crackdown is full-on, with websites and wallets being shut down and top investors investigated and even subject to criminal trials.

As in 19th century Britain, we see here another tragic case of government intervention strangling a wonderful new industry in the interest of maintaining a monopoly on power, the first condition of which is always to control the money of the realm.

I think back to my own shock at the discovery that free enterprise was fully capable of managing money as a good. It had never occurred to me because it had always been otherwise. And yet, if you think about it, there are all sorts of conditions in which market forces invent money as a method of moving beyond primitive barter arrangements.

Every prison has its own form of money. It used to be cigarettes but now is more commonly canned fish or some other valued good. The only reason this is not common in society at large is that governments do not want it this way.

A feature of government management in modern times has been periodic reforms that always end in making the system worse. We had a government-backed gold standard in the late 19th century that was compromised by a fixed price relationship between gold and silver that was unsustainable. Then we got the Federal Reserve in 1913, with the promise that it would control inflation even as it took off soon after the Fed accommodated the need for war funding.

In 1933, we got another reform that devalued the currency from the center, changing the definition of a dollar from 1/20 an ounce of gold to 1/35 an ounce. That massive devaluation was accompanied by a nationwide gold confiscation that included criminal penalties and jail time for noncompliance. At the close of World War II, a new system called Bretton Woods forbid domestic conversion and only allowed gold for international exchange. This was completely unsustainable because every nation has different fiscal and monetary policies so of course the value of money could not be frozen in place. This led to the end of the gold standard completely in 1971–73, resulting in a disastrous inflation bout.

No question that the next great monetary reform will be to globalize a central bank digital currency with track-and-trace capability and the power to turn money on and off on political whim. In order to make this possible, government now needs to eliminate all the competition, just as they did in 1813.

None of this mucking around with the money is in the public interest. It is in the government’s interest and also its industrial partners in banking and finance. A full denationalization of money is the fix for the whole problem but getting there from here will require dislodging the government of its penchant for controlling the economic forces of the whole realm. It’s an age-old problem and perhaps the greatest challenge of all ages.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 20:20

California's Single-Family Zoning Exemplifies The Market-Intervention Problem

Zero Hedge -

California's Single-Family Zoning Exemplifies The Market-Intervention Problem

Via SchiffGold.com,

California’s government bet that they knew better than the free market. And now millions are paying the price...

The story begins in 1919, when the city of Berkley, California instituted legislation setting aside districts that would only allow the construction of single-family housing. The idea spread, and soon much of California’s urban areas had adopted the zoning policy. Today, approximately 40% of the total land in Los Angeles is set aside for single-family homes, while only 11% is reserved for multi-family residences. 

In 2021, a bill was signed which was intended to end single-family zoning in California. But politics is rarely that simple. The decision was met with widespread protests and an LA County Court recently declared the law unconstitutional, preventing its passing in 5 Southern California cities. While many celebrated the ruling, the decision has perpetuated California’s housing crisis.

The logic behind the original legislation was to preserve the “charm” of California’s neighborhoods. In the eyes of policymakers, multi-family residences such as apartment complexes or duplexes would sully the white-picket fence aesthetic which they saw as a staple of Californian life. While this may appear like a harmless notion, this idealism came with devastating consequences.

The problem with this policy is apparent to those with an understanding of supply and demand. By preventing high-capacity residences from being built, the supply of housing has been artificially constrained by the legislation. Even as demand rises for increased housing, companies cannot produce the necessary residences to meet the desire. When demand rises while supply remains fixed, prices will surge. And that’s exactly what happened.

California has the second highest home prices of any state, behind only Hawaii. Housing costs have increased by 10.1% in the past year, while the number of homes sold has decreased by 6.9%. As of March 2024, the average price of a house in LA is a staggering $974,000. In San Francisco, that figure is 1.29 million.

These soaring rates have heavily affected the citizenry. California has the 4th highest homelessness per capita rate among U.S. states. Over 180,000 Californians are homeless, which is almost a third of the nation’s entire homeless population.

While the cause of some homelessness is self-inflicted, studies have found a direct correlation between the cost of housing and rates of homelessness. With the second-highest housing costs of any state, it’s safe to say daunting housing prices are at least partially to blame for a vast number of California’s displaced citizens.

Another consequence of the legislation is an increase in class inequality. California has the fourth-most unequal income distribution of any state. The zoning law contributes to this problem by acting as a gatekeeper that excludes low-income families from better neighborhoods, sacrificing equality for community “quality.” Accompanied by the state’s stringent school choice laws, many citizens are left attending lower-caliber schools in worse neighborhoods. This harms future career opportunities and feeds the vicious generational cycle of poverty.

These issues are all either caused or exacerbated by the single-family zoning legislation which has constrained the state’s housing market for decades. The directive prevents the construction of apartment complexes, or other housing structures which would cater to a larger constituency, keeping prices too high for many to afford. From 1919 to the present, politicians have continued to turn a blind eye to single-family zoning’s detrimental effects in the pursuit of the perceived good of protecting neighborhoods.

The Fundamental Problem with Government Intervention

Government intervention always leads to unintended consequences. It’s a tale as old as government. But why does it so often result in disaster?

There’s a fatal flaw at the root of all bureaucratic intervention: a lack of information. In any centralized decision, there is an incalculable amount of pertinent decentralized information that is not available to governmental bodies.

In the absence of intervention, this information is communicated through prices. Even though all of the information will never be understood by the same person at once, we’re still able to coordinate our plans to reach a productive end. That’s the beauty of the price system. You may have no idea that a cocoa farm in Ghana had a poor yield, but you will buy less cocoa when it costs more than usual. A series of complex events can all be boiled down to a simple price hike.

Government intervention is the wrench in the works. No centralized body can know all of the variables in a given situation. While protecting Californian neighborhoods sounds good, it is a gross simplification of the actual issues at play. Restricting the supply of housing leads to a bevy of consequences, including skyrocketing prices, rampant homelessness, and pervasive inequality. The pursuit of a solution in the absence of information usually ends up hurting more people than it helps.

Economics is often regarded as a dismal science reserved for bookworms and professors. But for the homeless who are struggling to survive because of market-hampering governmental policies, economics is about life and death. When the government intervenes in the market system because it “knows best,” it far too often doesn’t, and innocent people pay the price. It’s up to us to hold our leaders accountable for the consequences of their actions and to help those harmed by their political arrogance.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 20:00

Major Australian Pension Fund To Restrict Coal Investments

Zero Hedge -

Major Australian Pension Fund To Restrict Coal Investments

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Australian Retirement Trust, which manages $183 billion (AUS$280 billion) of retirement savings, is placing thermal coal on its exclusion list as of July 1, as it looks to have a net-zero emissions portfolio by 2050.

Thermal coal includes the mining of lignite, bituminous, anthracite, and steam coal and its sale to external parties, the second-largest Australian pension fund said in updates to its product offering.

The fund will be screening its investments and exclude direct investments in coal companies that have 10% of revenue from coal (estimated or reported) in the most recent year of financial reporting.

“As a global investor, Australian Retirement Trust is committed to achieving a net zero greenhouse gas emissions investment portfolio by 2050,” the fund said in a statement carried by Reuters.

However, it applies exclusions in limited circumstances “in accordance with members’ best financial interest.”

For coal investments, exclusions will apply for pooled derivative products, which may have indirect exposure to companies involved in the mining of thermal coal. Exclusions will also be made for companies deriving revenue from metallurgical coal used in the production of steel, coal mined for internal power generation, intra-company sales of mined thermal coal, revenue from coal trading, and royalty income for companies not involved in thermal coal extraction operations.

Climate change is the single largest motivation of investment institutions to decide to exclude companies from their portfolios, a so-called ‘exclusion tracker’ showed last year.

Investors have become increasingly wary of investing in ‘sin industries’, which for many now include fossil fuel companies alongside the weapons and tobacco sectors.

Pension funds and other institutional investors in Europe have already excluded some major oil and gas companies from their portfolios, while some European banks have scaled back financing for fossil fuel projects.

Not all investors are dumping fossil fuels—some believe that owning stocks could help them influence decisions at oil and gas firms regarding emissions reductions.   

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 19:40

Biden Admin Covertly Pursued Gender Affirming Care For Kids In States Where The Practice Is Banned

Zero Hedge -

Biden Admin Covertly Pursued Gender Affirming Care For Kids In States Where The Practice Is Banned

America First Legal revealed documents on Thursday from its lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), showcasing emails from Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine and indicating that the Biden Administration has engaged privately with "gender affirming care providers" from states that have outlawed these practices, pledging federal support to counteract such state laws.

In particular, Levine expressed significant concern for the LGBTI+ community in Idaho, emphasizing ongoing efforts to challenge these state measures nationally, the site pointed out. The documents were acquired through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request concerning Levine’s correspondence about pediatric transgender clinics.

Previously, in March 2023, Levine stated that the federal backing for transitioning children was comprehensive, even at presidential levels, and framed any opposition as politically motivated. The newly revealed records elaborate on the administration's covert operations with advocates to push this agenda.

One notable communication from June 2022 involves HHS Regional Director Ingrid Ulrey discussing an Idaho meeting about impending legislation aimed at prohibiting certain medical treatments for minors. Ulrey's message to Levine highlighted her empathy for Idaho's LGBTQ community, particularly in light of legislative efforts she described as harmful.

Among other things, the report noted that in her memo, Ulrey highlighted concerns about the impact of Idaho's proposed law on "Gender Affirming Care" (GAC), including a doctor shortage and the high costs of such treatments without insurance subsidies.

She noted that only one provider was offering GAC to a significant state prison population, with a few others too intimidated to attend a meeting or preferring to stay under the radar. Ulrey also relayed that the care providers had specific definitions of GAC, controversially suggesting the removal of parental consent requirements, which could include requiring consent from just one parent or both if divorced. This approach appears to be advocated by a high-ranking HHS official following discussions with these providers.

Ulrey's discussions with "gender-affirming care providers" led to a disturbing proposal to simplify legal barriers, including reducing parental consent requirements for such treatments, according to America First Legal

Following these meetings, a high-ranking HHS official advocated for the removal of parental consent as part of the definition of "gender-affirming care."

The meeting's summary called for federal intervention to override state laws restricting such care, with suggestions for using Medicaid to mandate coverage across all states and queries about providing such care in prisons, indicating a push to extend "gender-affirming care" despite local restrictions.

The summary also reflected provider concerns about parental rights obstructing children's access to these treatments. On June 5, 2022, Assistant Secretary Levine expressed ongoing support for the LGBTI+ community in Idaho, promising to continue advocacy efforts nationally.

Further details emerged from a June 2022 roundtable in Anchorage, Alaska, where discussions focused on integrating mental health counselors in schools amidst concerns about parental opposition. A local clinic, Identity, Inc., was noted for providing non-surgical gender-affirming care, with surgical treatments sought outside Alaska. The report also mentioned potential local legislation in Anchorage impacting transgender individuals' participation in school sports, signaling continued legislative challenges for the transgender community.

America First Legal Senior Advisor Ian Prior commented: “The Biden Administration is leveraging the full power of the federal government to engage in an anti-science war on reality, with America’s children as the collateral damage. While European nations are drastically pulling back on these dangerous experiments and a number of states are legislating against them, the Biden Administration is plowing full steam ahead in its goal of redefining the foundations of biology, from the doctors’ offices to the athletic fields. This comes even as the United States Supreme Court has held that states have a right to enact such legislation. The Biden Administration is supporting crimes against humanity, and America First Legal will continue to fight back until these dangerous practices end.”

You can read the full trove of emails here.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 19:20

Ford's $120,000 Loss Per Vehicle Shows California EV Goals Are Impossible

Zero Hedge -

Ford's $120,000 Loss Per Vehicle Shows California EV Goals Are Impossible

Authored by John Seiler via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

So much for California’s mandate that “all new passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs sold in California will be zero-emission vehicles by 2035,” according to the California Air Resources Board. It imposed the mandate at the request of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The all-electric F-150 Lightning from Ford is displayed at the Los Angeles Auto Show in Los Angeles on Nov. 18, 2021. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)

On April 24, Ford reported it lost $132,000 for each of its 10,000 electric vehicles sold in the first quarter of 2024, according to CNN. The sales were down 20 percent from the first quarter of 2023 and would “drag down earnings for the company overall.”

The losses include “hundreds of millions being spent on research and development of the next generation of EVs for Ford. Those investments are years away from paying off.” Ford is the only major carmaker breaking out EV numbers by themselves. But other marques likely suffer similar losses.

Californians bought 1.78 million new vehicles in 2023, reported the California New Car Dealers Association. Multiply that number by $132,000 and you get $235 billion. That would bankrupt every car manufacturer, meaning they just would pull out of selling anything in the state.

The California government would have to set up socialist, government-owned companies to make the cars, like the infamous Yugo. Dubbed “the worst car in history,” it was sold in America in the 1980s and was made by the communist Yugoslav government just before the country itself broke up in 1991.

A man works on one of the last Yugos at Serbia's Zastava car plant on the production line in Kragujevac on Nov. 9, 2008. The car became popular in the local market due to its low price and fuel consumption. (Aleksandar Stankovic/AFP via Getty Images) Battery Problems

The Epoch Times also reported that same day, April 24, “Ford Recalling More Than 55,000 SUVs and Trucks in Canada Over Battery Issues.” The Transport Canada notice read, “A sudden loss of power to the wheels or a vehicle that doesn’t restart after a start-stop event could increase the risk of a crash. Additionally, hazard lamps that don’t work could make the vehicle less visible and increase the risk of a crash.”

Also, most of Canada gets really cold in the winter. “The effects of cold weather on car batteries start to become pronounced when the temperature drops below freezing for an extended period,” explained United Tire & Service. “At a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit, your battery will lose about 30 percent of its power. Your battery will continue to get weaker as the temperatures get colder. In fact, your battery will lose about 60 percent of its power at 0 degrees Fahrenheit.”

In Montreal, the average low temperature in January is 10 degrees Fahrenheit. In Edmonton it’s 8 degrees.

Most of California enjoys the balmiest weather on earth. But in January 2023, the temperature around Bridgeport, near Yosemite National Park, dropped to minus 27 degrees. In such areas, EVs are almost completely useless except for rich people in the summer.

Cheap Electric Cars?

But isn’t Tesla working on cheaper models, not just the expensive ones? Aren’t they figuring out what Ford couldn’t? “Exclusive: Tesla scraps low-cost car plans amid fierce Chinese EV competition,” headlined Reuters on April 5.

However, on April 24 Yahoo Finance headlined, “Tesla stock surges as EV maker will ‘accelerate’ the launch of cheaper cars. Tesla had previously said it would focus on its robotaxi product after paring back plans for a lower-cost car.”

Who knows what’s going on with mercurial Tesla CEO Elon Musk? But I would never count him out.

So what about those cheap cars financed by communist China? In February, the Biden administration announced it would investigate Chinese “smart” cars, which like your cell phone—probably also made in China—scoop up increasing amounts of data about your life.

China is determined to dominate the future of the auto market, including by using unfair practices,’' President Joe Biden said. “China’s policies could flood our market with its vehicles, posing risks to our national security. I’m not going to let that happen on my watch.’’

On April 11, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) called for banning Chinese EVs as “an existential threat to the American auto industry. Ohio knows all too well how China illegally subsidizes its companies, putting our workers out of jobs and undermining entire industries, from steel to solar manufacturing. We cannot allow China to bring its government-backed cheating to the American auto industry.”

So far no action has been taken. But presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump in March promised he would impose a 100 percent tariff on Chinese cars, EV or otherwise, built in Mexico.

No CO2 Threat

Meanwhile, the carbon monoxide emitted by gas and diesel engines is being shown not to cause global warming. Reported No Tricks Zone, “Three Polish physicists have focused their attention on this saturation principle as it applies to CO2 in three recently published papers (Kubicki et al., 2024, 2022, and 2020). Their latest (Kubicki et al., 2024), published in Applications in Engineering Science, summarizes the experimental evidence from their 2020 and 2022 publications substantiating the conclusion that ‘as a result of saturation processes, emitted CO2 does not directly cause an increase in global temperature.’

The authors are concerned about the recent push to rely on modeling and assumptions about CO2’s capacity to drive changes in global temperature rather than observational evidence. They point out the current CO2-is-the-climate-control-knob zeitgeist is no more than a hypothesis.”

The scientists themselves wrote: “This unequivocally suggests that the officially presented impact of anthropogenic CO2 increase on Earth’s climate is merely a hypothesis rather than a substantiated fact.”

As I have written several times in The Epoch Times, the CO2 from California vehicles is minuscule compared to the massive spewing from coal plants still being built in massive numbers in communist China. See from March 25, “‘Green Innovation’ Study Shows California CO2 Policies Mainly Help China.”

Conclusion: EV Mandates Are a Delusion

California’s 100 percent zero-emission vehicle mandate by 2035 is a tailpipe dream. It’s pushed by ambitious politicians like Mr. Newsom and financed by billionaire environmentalists like Bill Gates. It has no basis in reality.

At some point in a couple of years, a coalition will form to get rid of these mandates, as well as President Biden’s national goal of more than half of all vehicles sold being EVs by 2030. Auto dealers, especially in California, will work with automakers and the Democratic-aligned United Auto Workers union to push the mandates further into the future, say 2045. Later, the date will be pushed to 2055, and so on.

Mr. Newsom’s term as governor ends in January 2027. President Biden, if reelected, must leave in January 2029. California’s term limits also mandate a maximum of 12 years in the Legislature.

Today’s politicians will be gone soon enough, their green battery dreams wafted away like the thick exhaust from a classic 1957 Chevy.

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 18:20

The Golden Age Of Disinformation Has Only Just Begun

Zero Hedge -

The Golden Age Of Disinformation Has Only Just Begun

Authored by Boyan Radoykov via The Epoch Times,

Disinformation is all about power, and because of the harmful and far-reaching influence that disinformation exerts, it cannot achieve much without power.

As a tool for shaping public perceptions, disinformation can be used by authoritarian regimes and democracies alike. The dissemination of false information is not a new practice in human history. However, over the last few decades, it has become professionalized and has taken on exorbitant proportions at both national and international levels.

The Origins of Disinformation

Disinformation can be understood as misleading information, intentionally produced and deliberately disseminated, to mislead public opinion, harm a target group, or advance political or ideological objectives.

The term disinformation is a translation of the Russian дезинформация (dezinformatsiya). On Jan. 11, 1923, the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union decided to create a Department of Disinformation. Its mission was “to mislead real or potential adversaries about the true intentions” of the USSR. From then on, disinformation became a tactic of Soviet political warfare known as “active measures,” a crucial element of Soviet intelligence strategy involving falsification, subversion, and media manipulation.

During the Cold War, from 1945 to 1989, this tactic was used by numerous intelligence agencies. The expression “disinformation of the masses” came into increasing use in the 1960s and became widespread in the 1980s. Former Soviet bloc intelligence officer Ladislav Bittman, the first disinformation professional to defect to the West, observed in this regard that ”The interpretation [of the term] is slightly distorted because public opinion is only one of the potential targets. Many disinformation games are designed only to manipulate the decision-making elite, and receive no publicity.”

With its creation in July 1947, the CIA was given two main missions: to prevent surprise foreign attacks against the United States and to hinder the advance of Soviet communism in Europe and Third World countries. During the four decades of the Cold War, the CIA was also at the forefront of U.S. counter-propaganda and disinformation.

The Soviet Union’s successful test of a nuclear weapon in 1949 caught the United States off guard and led to the advent of the two nuclear powers clashing on the world stage in an international atmosphere of extreme tension, fear, and uncertainty. In 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower received a top-secret report from a commission chaired by retired Gen. James H. Doolittle, which concluded: “If the United States is to survive, long-standing American concepts of ‘fair play’ must be reconsidered. We must develop effective espionage and counterespionage services and must learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies by more clever, more sophisticated and more effective methods than those used against us. It may become necessary that the American people be acquainted with, understand and support this fundamentally repugnant philosophy.” Of course, “repugnant” philosophy includes subversion through disinformation.

Although the United States had high expertise in this field, it did not react much to the disinformation that was sent its way until 1980, when a false document claimed that Washington supported apartheid in South Africa. Later on, they also took offense at Operation Denver, a Soviet disinformation campaign aimed at having the world believe that the United States had intentionally created HIV/AIDS.

In the United States, the intellectual influence of Edward Bernays is at the root of institutional political propaganda and opinion manipulation. A double nephew of Sigmund Freud, he worked as a press agent for Italian tenor Enrico Caruso and for the Ballets Russes. He took part, alongside President Woodrow Wilson, in the Creel Commission (1917), which helped turn American public opinion in favor of going to war. His wife and business partner, Doris Fleischman, advised him to avoid using the overused term “propaganda.” Instead, she coined the term “public relations” to replace it, a term still in use today.

China and Its Digital Authoritarianism

In China, deception, lies, and the rewriting of history are disinformation techniques used by the Chinese Communist Party, according to tactics learned in the Soviet Union in the 1950s. Today, the CCP has a sophisticated arsenal of disinformation on all fronts. Its main objectives are to turn public opinion upside down, interfere in foreign political circles, influence elections, discredit its opponents, and hide its own intentions and priorities.

In September 2021, the French Institute for Strategic Research at the École Militaire published a report on China’s influence operations, which warned: “For a long time, it could be said that China, unlike Russia, sought to be loved rather than feared; that it wanted to seduce, to project a positive image of itself in the world, to arouse admiration. Beijing has not given up on seduction ... but, at the same time, Beijing is increasingly taking on the role of infiltrator and coercer: its influence operations have become considerably tougher in recent years, and its methods increasingly resemble those employed by Moscow.”

On Sept. 28, 2023, the U.S. government published a report in which it accused China of seeking to “reshape the global information landscape” through a vast network specialized in disinformation. “[China’s] global information manipulation is not simply a matter of public diplomacy—but a challenge to the integrity of the global information space.” This “manipulation” encompasses “propaganda, disinformation, and censorship.”

“Unchecked, [China’s] efforts will reshape the global information landscape, creating biases and gaps that could even lead nations to make decisions that subordinate their economic and security interests to Beijing’s,” according to the report.

According to the U.S. State Department, China spends billions of dollars every year on these “foreign information manipulation” operations. At the same time, Beijing suppresses critical information that runs counter to its rhetoric on politically sensitive subjects. The report goes on to state that China manipulates information by resorting to “digital authoritarianism,” exploiting international and UN organizations and controlling Chinese-language media abroad.

When Disinformation Becomes Military Doctrine

In some countries, policymakers may turn to their national history to justify the implementation of certain regulations on information. German politicians, for example, frequently refer to the Nazi past or that of the communist Stasi to justify the regulations they want to put in place. Yet these historical comparisons don’t always hold water. The Nazis, for example, did not come to power because they controlled the then-new technology of radio. Rather, once in power, they used the state control on radio stations that the previous Weimar governments had put in place—in the hope of saving democracy—to their own benefit. This decision by the Weimar governments had the perverse effect of enabling the Nazis to control radio much more quickly than with newspapers.

Disinformation is mainly orchestrated by government agencies. In the post-Soviet era, and with the advent of the information society, when the media and social networks became a central relay for the dissemination of fake news, disinformation evolved to become a fundamental tactic in the military doctrine of powerful countries. In the early 2000s, the European Union and NATO realized that the problem of Russian disinformation was such that they had to set up special units to process and debunk mass-produced false information.

The Methods and Processes of Disinformation

There are four main methods of spreading disinformation: selective censorship, manipulation of search indexes, hacking and dissemination of fraudulently obtained data, and amplification of disinformation through excessive sharing.

By way of example, disinformation activities involve the following processes:

  • The creation of fabricated characters or websites with networks of fake experts who disseminate supposedly reliable references.

  • The creation of “deep-fakes” and synthetic media through photos, videos, and audio clips that have been digitally manipulated or entirely fabricated to deceive the public. Today’s artificial intelligence (AI) tools can make synthetic content almost impossible to detect or distinguish from reality.

  • The development or amplification of conspiracy theories, which attempt to explain important events through the secret actions of powerful actors acting in the shadows. Conspiracy theories aim not only to influence people’s understanding of events, but also their behavior and worldview.

  • Astroturfing and inundation of information environments. At the root of disinformation campaigns are huge quantities of similar content, published from fabricated sources or accounts. This practice, called astroturfing, creates the impression of widespread support or opposition to a message while concealing its true origin. A similar tactic, inundation, involves spamming social media posts and comment sections with the aim of shaping a narrative or stifling opposing viewpoints. In recent years, the use of troll factories to spread misleading information on social networks has gained momentum.

  • Exploiting alternative social media platforms to reinforce beliefs in a disinformation narrative. Disinformation actors take advantage of platforms offering fewer protections for users and fewer options for detecting and removing inauthentic content and accounts.

  • Amplification of information gaps, when there isn’t enough credible information to answer a specific search. Misinformation leaders can exploit these gaps by generating their own content and feeding the search.

  • Manipulating unsuspecting protagonists. Disinformation facilitators target high-profile individuals and organizations to corroborate their stories. Targets are often not even aware that they are repeating a disinformation actor’s narrative, or that this narrative is intended to influence or manipulate public opinion.

  • Dissemination of targeted content: The instigators of disinformation produce customized influential content likely to resonate with a specific audience, based on its worldview, beliefs, and interests. It’s a long-term tactic that involves disseminating targeted content over time to build trust and credibility with the target audience, making it easier to manipulate them.

A Race Against Time to Protect the Younger Generation

In the early 2000s, most publications about the internet hailed its unprecedented potential for development. Only a few years later, commentators, analysts, and policymakers began to worry that the internet, and social media platforms in particular, posed new threats to democracy, global governance, and the integrity of information.

Since then, the world has become increasingly interconnected and interdependent, and the opportunities for misinformation have become almost limitless. With more than 5.5 billion internet users and more than 8.58 billion mobile subscriptions worldwide by 2022, compared to a global population of 7.95 billion at mid-year, the great paradox is that the rise of information technology has created a much more conducive, even thriving, environment for misinformation, and that the development of AI is leading to even worse and more rampant misinformation.

Some experts agree that while online misinformation and propaganda are widespread, it is difficult to determine the extent to which this misinformation has an impact on the public’s political attitudes and, consequently, on political outcomes. Other data have shown that disinformation campaigns rarely succeed in changing the policies of targeted states, but it would be irresponsible to believe that misinformation has little impact. If that were the case, major countries would have abandoned the practice long ago. The opposite is true. With the gradual increase in the foolishness of ruling elites and the rise of new technologies, the policy of destabilization through disinformation has a bright future ahead of it. The risks and stakes remain enormous, and the erosion of public trust in institutions and the media is deeply significant in this regard.

The fight against disinformation must go beyond simplistic solutions such as shutting down Facebook or X (formerly Twitter) accounts, publicly denouncing the actions of one’s adversary, or containing false information through technical means. And it is certainly not enough to focus on measures such as fact-checking or media education to help individuals master and consume information; the average person carries little weight in the face of government disinformation machines.

It would therefore be preferable to address the political and economic operating conditions of the structures that facilitate the spread of disinformation, such as large technology companies, the state actors involved, the media, and other information systems.

Of course, the human factor must remain at the center of leaders’ concerns in the face of growing state and media disinformation. The price of educating young people will always be less than the price of their ignorance.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 17:40

Houthis Warn Drone & Missile Attack Coverage Expanding To Mediterranean Sea

Zero Hedge -

Houthis Warn Drone & Missile Attack Coverage Expanding To Mediterranean Sea

Yahya Saree, spokesperson for the Iranian-backed Houthi terror group, declared in a televised speech to supporters at a Friday rally in Al-Sabeen Square, Sana, that they intend to target Israel-linked ships in the eastern Mediterranean. The risk of conflict spilling over from the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden remains high. 

"We will target any ship heading to Israeli ports in the Mediterranean, in any area we are able to reach," Saree said. 

Given that the eastern Mediterranean is 1,900 kilometers (1,180 miles) from Yemen, this may indicate that the conflict area is broadening, triggering a new escalation of the multi-month war. 

Fernando Ferreira, energy analyst at Rapidan Energy Group, noted:

"The Houthi nuisance continues, but they are at the limit of their ability to cause disruptions. The real risk of escalation comes from Israeli retaliation on IRGC officers/assets helping the Houthis."

This comes as Houthis have attacked dozens of Western and Israel-linked commercial vessels and military ships across the southern Red Sea, Bab al-Mandab Strait, Gulf of Aden, and even the Strait of Hormuz since last November. The group claims these maritime attacks are in solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza. 

Saree warned if the Israel Defense Forces launched an attack on the southern Gaza city of Rafah, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are sheltering from the seven-month-long war. They would've no other choice but to impose sanctions on all ships of the companies that are supplying Israel and entering Israeli ports. 

What's clear—and the West won't like it—is that the Houthis appear to be expanding their attack coverage as numerous maritime chokepoints in the region are under constant threat. 

We pointed out Thursday that Operation Prosperity Guardian, the US-led maritime coalition launched by the Biden administration earlier this year, has been largely a failure

Maritime traffic data from Bloomberg shows not one single LNG vessel with destinations to Europe and the US was transiting the Red Sea for fear of being attacked by Houthi drones and missiles. 

Conflict spillover risks are mounting in the Middle East. Yet the war risk premium in Brent crude has been subsiding in recent weeks. 

 

 

 

 

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 17:20

Americans Continue To Name Inflation As Top Financial Problem: Gallup

Zero Hedge -

Americans Continue To Name Inflation As Top Financial Problem: Gallup

By Jeffrey Jones at Gallup

For the third year in a row, the percentage of Americans naming inflation or the high cost of living as the most important financial problem facing their family has reached a new high.

The 41% naming the issue this year is up slightly from 35% a year ago and 32% in 2022. Before 2022, the highest percentage mentioning inflation was 18% in 2008. Inflation has been named by less than 10% in most other readings since the question was first asked in 2005.

The latest results are from Gallup’s annual Economy and Personal Finance poll, conducted April 1-22.

Gallup has asked Americans at least annually since 2005 to name, without prompting, the top financial problem facing their family. Inflation has topped the list for the past three years. The cost of owning or renting a home ranks second this year at 14%, a new high for that issue.

Other significant problems Americans identify include having too much debt (8%), healthcare costs (7%), lack of money or low wages (7%), and energy costs or gas prices (6%).

Over the past 19 years, healthcare costs and lack of money or low wages have frequently ranked near the top of the list, while the cost of energy or gas has done so at times of elevated gas prices, as in 2005, 2006 and 2008.

Inflation Named Most Often by All Subgroups

Inflation is named the most important financial problem by all key societal subgroups but garners higher mentions from certain age, income and political groups.

  • 46% of older Americans (those aged 50 and older) mention inflation, in contrast with 36% of younger Americans (those under 50).
  • Inflation is a more top-of-mind concern for middle-income (46%) and upper-income Americans (41% of those with an annual household income of $100,000 or more) than for lower-income Americans (31% of those with a household income of less than $40,000).
  • 56% of Republicans, compared with 39% of independents and 26% of Democrats, name the issue as the most important financial problem facing their family.

Younger and lower-income Americans may be less likely to name inflation than their counterparts because other immediate financial concerns are more pressing for them. For example, 21% of adults under age 50 say housing or rental costs are their top concern, compared with 8% of those aged 50 and older.

Lower-income Americans are more inclined than upper-income and middle-income Americans to say personal debt, healthcare costs, lack of money and job loss are the top concerns facing their family.

Retirement, Medical Emergencies Also Worrisome

A separate question in the survey asks Americans to say how much they worry about each of eight specific personal financial matters. Inflation is not one of those issues, but its influence is apparent in the heightened percentage who worry about not being able to maintain their standard of living. Fifty-five percent are very or moderately worried about maintaining their living standards, the third straight year a majority has done so after being below that level from 2017 through 2021.

Since the question was first asked in 2001, an average of 47% of U.S. adults, including a high of 58% in 2011, have worried about being able to maintain their standard of living.

Maintaining one’s standard of living ranks as one of the three economic matters Americans worry most about, along with not having enough for retirement and being unable to pay medical bills in the event of a serious illness or accident. The latter two issues have consistently ranked first or second each year in Gallup polling dating back to 2001.

Less than half of U.S. adults worry about the five other financial matters, including normal medical costs, normal monthly bills, housing costs, paying for their children’s college and making minimum payments on credit cards.

Compared with last year, there have been slight declines in the percentages worried about medical costs for a serious illness or accident (from 60% to 56%) and not having enough money for retirement (from 66% to 59%). Both issues are now closer to their historical averages after being slightly above them last year. For the other six financial matters, the percentages worried about them are essentially unchanged from a year ago.

As would be expected, those with a lower household income worry more than those with greater resources about nearly all of these financial matters. The one exception is affording college for a child, which shows no meaningful differences by income. Across the eight financial matters, an average of 60% of lower-income Americans express worry, compared with 47% of middle-income and 31% of upper-income Americans.

Majorities of lower-income adults worry about six of the eight financial matters, compared with three issues for middle-income adults and only one for those in upper-income households.

The greatest disparity in worry on any single issue between income groups is being able to pay one’s normal monthly bills, which concerns 67% of lower-income adults but only 21% of upper-income adults.

Ratings of Personal Finances Remain Subdued

Forty-six percent of Americans rate their personal finances as excellent or good, similar to what Gallup has measured the past two years but a worse evaluation than in 2017 through 2021. Meanwhile, 36% describe their finances as “only fair,” while 17% rate them as “poor.”

Americans’ ratings of their personal financial situation were worse than now between 2009 and 2012, as the U.S. was coming out of the Great Recession and unemployment was high. During those years, an average of 42% of Americans rated their personal finances positively.

All income groups remain less positive about their financial situation now compared with 2021. Currently, 72% of upper-income, 42% of middle-income and 25% of lower-income Americans rate their situation as excellent or good.

Another question in the survey finds 62% of Americans saying they have enough money to live comfortably, similar to the 64% recorded last year but down from 2022 (67%) and 2021 (72%). Gallup has only had one lower reading on this question since 2002 -- 60% in 2012. The high point was 75% in 2002, the first year the question was asked.

Eighty-three percent of upper-income, 62% of middle-income and 37% of lower-income adults say they have enough to live comfortably, with similar declines in each group since 2021.

Americans Slightly More Optimistic Their Financial Situation Is Improving

There has been a slight increase in the percentage of Americans who say their financial situation is getting better -- 43% say this, up from 37% in both 2022 and 2023. The current figure is still significantly below the 52% measured in 2021.

At the same time, 47% say their financial situation is getting worse, up by 17 percentage points since 2021.

A slim majority of upper-income Americans, 52%, believe their financial situation is improving, as do 43% of middle-income and 34% of lower-income Americans.

Bottom Line

Inflation continues to be an issue for Americans and is likely why less than half are positive about their financial situation. In addition to being named the most important financial problem facing their family, inflation also ranks as one of the domestic problems Americans worry most about. The issue trails only immigration, the government and the economy in general when Americans are asked to name the most important problem facing the country.

The U.S. inflation rate has declined significantly since its peak in 2022, but that has done little to alter Americans’ perceptions of their finances. This could reflect the cumulative effect of higher prices for the past few years and the fact that inflation has remained above the lower rates in the U.S. between 2012 and 2020. The latest government reports suggest inflation may be increasing again. That news persuaded the Federal Reserve to delay interest rate cuts it was expected to make this year.

The issue also stands to be a key election issue, and renewed inflation would hamper President Joe Biden’s chances of reelection.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 17:00

Fed F**kery Turns $37BN 'Unadjusted' Bank Deposit OUTFLOW Into $126BN INFLOW

Zero Hedge -

Fed F**kery Turns $37BN 'Unadjusted' Bank Deposit OUTFLOW Into $126BN INFLOW

Money market funds added $23.6BN in assets last week, pushing the total funds under management back above $6 Trillion - still well off the highs (as some tax-related withdrawals remain lost)...

Source: Bloomberg

Both retail and institutional funds saw inflows last week...

Source: Bloomberg

Amid all the talk of tapering, The Fed's balance sheet plunged $40BN last week to its lowest since Jan 2021 (with QT continuing at around $35BN)...

Source: Bloomberg

The Fed's now-expired Bank Bailout fund (BTFP) saw a small decrease of just $1.375BN - inching closer to erasing all the arb-driven surge in demand for the facility, but leaving a whopping $12BN left out there filling holes in bank balance sheets...

Source: Bloomberg

And after last week's almost unprecedented outflows, total bank deposits (seasonally-adjusted) rose by a huge $129BN to $17.58TN - that was the biggest rise in deposits since March 2021...

Source: Bloomberg

But, by the magical power of Federal Reserve 'science', on a non-seasonally-adjusted basis, total bank deposits dropped $24BN...

Source: Bloomberg

Excluding foreign deposits, the picture was just as farcical with seasonally-adjusted domestic deposits rising $126BN (Large banks +$111BN - biggest since April 2020, Small banks +$15BN), while non-seasonally-adjusted domestic deposits tumbled $36.7BN (Large banks -$7.2BN, Small banks -$29.5BN)...

Source: Bloomberg

Don't try to make sense of the fact that the so-called seasonally-adjusted levels are more noisy than the unadjusted... ... it's PhD-based 'science' stuff, you'd never understand!

For the third week in a row, total loan volumes rose (by $5.8BN) with large bank volumes rising $4.2BN and small bank volumes rising $1.6BN

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, bank reserves at The Fed continues to contract, while US equity market cap remains dramatically decoupled...

Source: Bloomberg

Is Powell's acquiescence to a bigger, sooner 'QT taper' (in the face of not-under-control inflation) to soften the blow when this crocodile mouth snaps shut.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 16:40

"The Whole Rotten Train Is Going Off The Rails"

Zero Hedge -

"The Whole Rotten Train Is Going Off The Rails"

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

Nostalgia For The Mind

“Resentful childless harpies unconsciously longing for domination. Why else worship at the altar of Hamas? Why else would it be so overwhelmingly female?”

- Dr. Jordan Peterson

Wasn’t it cute how the youngsters who “occupied” Columbia U’s Hamilton Hall - and were busy smashing things up inside - demanded restaurant-grade meals sent in to avert “starvation and dehydration” amongst their dauntless ranks? You could imagine a colossal mommy breast with three hundred nipples descending from the sky over upper Manhattan to nourish them back to action. “Feed me. . . !”

It turns out, actually, that at least half the troops inside were not students at all, but rather semi-pro activists paid up to $7,000 each by George Soros’s Open Society Institute and other overtly insurrection-themed orgs, so you’d think that the troops could afford to load-up their ever-ready backpacks with Cliff bars and bottles of Smart Water. The order-in food and beverage gambit suggests we should understand that this is not so much politics as the acting out of a game — which is exactly what you might expect of people who spend more time on video screens than in the real world — in which something like a half-time intermission for refreshments is de rigueur.

Alas, they were not obliged with Doordash servings of Alitcha (“Ensemble of potatoes, carrots, collard greens, and cabbage baked in turmeric,” $22.30) from the nearby Massawa Ethiopian bistro, or Firecracker Chicken from Junzi Kitchen over on Broadway and 113th Street. And then, when the cops came to roust them out into the big buses now used as paddy-wagons for such events, the occupiers were heard to whine, “I have finals and I need to go home!” You’ve got to wonder how they’ll make out when “Joe Biden” drafts their ass to go fight the Russians out on the Ukrainian buzzard flats, about which the White House is just now sending out early signals.

It has been observed that a clear majority of the pro-Hamas activists are young women — which makes sense considering that they are the largest demographic evincing mental illness on America’s social landscape these days. Thus, they are marching in support of a sect that specializes in the rape, mutilation, and murder of young women like themselves, or at least treats them as chattels, hidden under black bag-like garments. The group psychology on display has more occult angles than any movie by the Wachowski sisters.

Among the marching Columbia students who are not paid outside activists, a few are apparently Jewish, such as spokesperson Johanna King-Slutzky (actual name, hat-tip Alex Berenson, who ID’d her), the winsome creature who complained about the lack of order-in meals at Hamilton Hall. Another observer on “X” who styles himself @J9_ATX identified the syndrome in play as “oppression envy,” among women seeking compensatory validation for occupying such a privileged niche on Planet Earth as a cushy Ivy League college — featuring international cuisine stations in the dining halls — while their third world sisters trudge through the burning sands of Al-Kufra carrying water-jugs on their heads as they dodge the odious “wind scorpions” of the region.

Higher Ed in the USA was already chugging down the suicide track before this spring’s eruption of pro-Hamas fury. The college loan racket (government-backed) had the perverse effect of pumping up tuition costs beyond what even many pretty well-off families could afford, while loading up young people with life-wrecking obligations (debt which “Joe Biden is now shifting onto the creditors, US tax-payers). Decades of DEI have filled the faculties with incompetents and assorted malcontents teaching fantasy curricula with no real-life value, and burdened the schools with cadres of overpaid diversity busybodies and thought-police. Diversity college presidents are very publicly failing to cope. The whole rotten train is going off the rails.

I’m not at all sanguine that the society we are becoming will need this vast infrastructure for babysitting young adults who could otherwise make themselves useful and productive on-the-ground in lines of work that actually keep civilized life going. This is too self-evident now to belabor, though there is an awful lot of confusion about what kind of society we might become.

I doubt that it is to be the utopia of robots, A-I, and non-stop sexual titillation that the techno-narcissists dream of. Rather, it will be a society struggling to keep too much complex stuff running with insufficient energy resources and capital — that is, a society falling apart, losing knowledge, technical know-how, comfort, and convenience while having a hard time feeding itself.

The campus Hamas zealots ironically (and tragically) represent exactly the sort of rough medievalism that the citizens of Western Civ countries would be chary of sliding into. You’d have to sadly conclude that many young people really can’t take much more Modernity, and are now pretty avid to opt out of it, even as they gaze into the magic, glowing pixels of their iPhone screens.

*  *  *

Support his blog by visiting Jim’s Patreon Page or Substack

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 16:20

Big Taper, Bad Data, & Buyback Bonanza Sparks Buying Frenzy In Bonds & Stocks

Zero Hedge -

Big Taper, Bad Data, & Buyback Bonanza Sparks Buying Frenzy In Bonds & Stocks

The markets took on a Dickensian dimension this week as while "it was the worst of times (for economic data), it was the best of times (for stocks)"...

The US Macro Surprise Index continued its serial disappointment plunge into the red - the weakest since Feb 2023 (not helped at all by today's payrolls miss)...

Source: Bloomberg

With growth data plunging while inflation data soared...

Source: Bloomberg

Bad news was good news though as the market only had eyes for Powell's big taper and the buyback bonanza (from AAPL and the rest), and today's NFP Goldilocks results (175k vs. 240k expected) as wage softness helps to ease inflation fears.

Small Caps leading the bunch amid a big short-squeeze and S&P lagging (but all green on the week)...

All the majors rallied up to their 50DMAs but were unable to breakout...

Nasdaq performed well with MAG7 stocks wildly choppy, but overall pushing back up towards record highs...

Source: Bloomberg

'Most Shorted' stocks suffered the biggest squeeze in two months (and biggest two-week squeeze since Jan 2023)...

Source: Bloomberg

Of particular note was Utes outperforming (while energy lagged) as the 'Next AI Trade' goes mainstream. Financials were also red on the week...

Source: Bloomberg

Bonds were also bid all week with yields down 12-20bps as the short-end outperformed...

Source: Bloomberg

And 2Y yields at 5.00% were thoroughly rejected as yields plunged today back below pre-CPI spike levels..

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar dropped this week, erasing almost all of the post-CPI gains...

Source: Bloomberg

Gold prices were lower on the week (second week in a row), despite the weak dollar and 'easing' by The Fed...

Source: Bloomberg

Despite a decent bounce back today, bitcoin was down on the week, testing back up to $62,000...

Source: Bloomberg

...after an ugly week of aggregate net outflows from BTC ETFs...

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices plunged this week - down all five days for the worst in three months - back to near two-month lows...

Source: Bloomberg

And finally, rate-cut expectations have surged this week with 2024 now pricing in two full cuts and 2025 three more cuts...

Source: Bloomberg

Is this what Powell wanted? To ease financial conditions again!?

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/03/2024 - 16:00

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus

Financial Armageddon -


Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.






Dump the Dollar before Bank Runs start in America -- Economic Collapse 2020

Financial Armageddon -












We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

Hillary Clinton's Top Secret Files Revealed Here

Financial Armageddon -

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.





Pages