Month: July 2019

The New EU Is Even More Insane Than The Old EU

Authored by Tom Luongo,

The new leadership team of the EU is insane. They learned nothing from May’s vote which saw the middle ground occupied by Angela Merkel lose ground.

Euroskeptics doubled their representation while nationalist Greens gained ground as well. The European People’s Party lost significant clout and was forced into unprecedented haggling over the leadership bloc.

Merkel, now having no political future to protect, as her last act of betrayal to Germany engineered the ‘election’ of Ursula von der Leyen to replace Jean-Claude “When things get tough you have to lie” Juncker as European Commission President.

Von der Leyen is more of a euro-integrationist than Juncker was. It’s clear they circled the wagons knowing that, as Nigel Farage points out in this clip, the EU will look nothing like it does now in five years when her term is up.

Just like the EU today looks nothing like it did in 2014 when Juncker took over.

So, it’s time to go for broke and push for everything before it all falls apart. But the trends are clear. von der Leyen is the past and Nigel Farage is the future of Europe.

More of everything EU is expected from them and there’s every reason to take them at their word.

The only interesting thing von der Leyen said here was that they would be happy to offer another extension. That’s only interesting because it sets her at odds with French President Emmanuel Macron.

Of course the EU is happy to keep the UK in limbo.

But here’s the rub. The Brexit Party polling just behind Tories, who have rallied behind Boris Johnson to stabilize their poll numbers. Johnson has to keep talking No-Deal Brexit or the knives come out for him.

But the EU, regardless of what happens next week when the votes for Prime Minister are revealed, isn’t done with the UK.

They are still looking to send stern warnings to the rest of Europe.

Case in point is its pointless spat with Switzerland over stock market access, which went into effect on July 1st. The EU, spitefully and with full admission of sending a message to London, refused to extend existing agreements to allow Swiss traders to trade on EU bourses. The Swiss responded in kind.

And despite the worst hand-wringing it seems in these first few weeks of trading, nothing of note has occurred. But Bloomberg (see link above) will never back off on the future doom porn, because you know, reasons.

Swiss stocks have well bid, there are no significant price arbitrages and trading flows are adjusting because that’s what people do.

If the Swiss can stand up to the EU, who are surrounded by them and do much more business with them than the UK as a percentage of domestic trade, then so can London.

This was supposed to scare more City of Londoners into pushing for Merkel and May’s Terrible Treaty.

I think looking at the depths to which the EU will reach to maintain their present course is far scarier.

Mish has a great on the timeline of how to stop Brexit through a no-confidence vote. It’s worth every bit of your time. Basically, the window is closing quickly. And the Remainers, like Dominik Grieve, are running out of time to come up with a plan.

Parliament passed a motion that keeps Johnson from proroguing past the Halloween deadline. But, that’s wasted effort. They have less than a week to call for a vote of no-confidence to organize another election before October 31st.

Which brings us to the votes. Where do things stand?

Regardless of the votes in parliament, the polls are showing Remain will lose that fight. One poll from last weekend have the Tories (25%) and Brexit (21%) running first and second. An aggregate of recent polls yields a parliament could look something like this.

The time for a general election was back during the height of the Brexit focus and the original March 29th deadline. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had his chance before the EU elections, but his silence was deafening.

Because he didn’t have the votes. Now Labour have moved completely to the Remain camp and the polls create a lot of uncertainty. But that is their job, to muddy the waters and move public opinion, not reflect them.

If Corbyn goes for the vote of no-confidence it will be because he has the votes in parliament to force the election. But in doing so he will likely shift public sentiment the 3-5 points needed to create a Tory/Brexit majority that will deliver Brexit.

This is Mish’s point about how the currency markets are trading. With the pound collapsing this is your signal that the markets think Brexit is happening. It’s also helping the euro levitate along with lovey-dovey noises from various FOMC members.

All of this depends on if (and this is a big if) Boris Johnson is actually committed to Brexit and isn’t just another stalking horse for the EU, like Theresa May.

It should be shocking that in all the time May was negotiating with the EU she never once countered with a no-deal scenario. But it really isn’t. May was put in charge, like von der Leyen to keep the European Project on track.

She should be tried for treason, in my opinion.

Farage is forcing this. Brexit is now very likely, because Farage is pushing Johnson on what comes after Brexit. The Brexit Party is running a campaign on how to spend the savings from paying the EU’s blood money.

Check out #InvestInTheRest.

This is powerful stuff that speaks to the voters for the next election. Farage knows that the Brexit Party has to become more than just a single issue, that it has to brand itself as the solution for a post-Brexit UK. It’s the kind of branding that creates social movements and lasting political change, not fads.

The Tories + Brexit hold around 44-46% of the vote. Labour and the LibDems 38-40%. That seems to be the ceiling right now. They would need both the Scottish Nationalists and the Greens to form a government. It would scuttle Brexit and little else. But it couldn’t do it in time regardless.

Flavible’s projections are now a combined 297 seats. I suspect this is a minimum projection for Brexit and the Tories given the methodology and data inputs. But if Johnson delivers Brexit, the death of Labour and the LibDem will be swift heading into 2020.

And don’t think for a second that von der Leyen and the rest of the Eurocrats in Brussels don’t understand this dynamic. They are every day looking more like a gang of Baghdad Bobs rather than world leaders.

Germany’s economy is rotting. The massive safe-haven trade into euro-zone debt on the promise of even more negative interest rates has nearly reached its limit. Christine Lagarde heading the ECB will only ensure the rapid formalization of more consolidated power under it at the expense of national sovereignty.

When the dam breaks on EU monetary policy, a backroom deal between the IMF, ECB and the European Commission will come fast and at the last hour. There will be no votes on this loss of sovereigny for any euro-zone member.

As Germany’s economy rots, as Deutsche Banke falls and the rest of Europe is tied to the boat anchor known as the euro, the case against Remaining strengthens.

For simplicity’s sake, the fragile state of oil prices are your leading indicator on this. J.P. Morgan’s falling Composite Purchasing Manager’s Index is indicating this.

The crisis of confidence in the EU is coming at us full steam. Brexit has revealed not only the depths to which the people of Europe have been betrayed by their leadership but also the people pulling the strings behind the scenes.

Their collective insanity pushing for imperial, unaccountable control over the continent will be the thing that undoes their plans in the end.

*  *  *

Join my Patreon if you think collectivists are insane. Install Brave if you don’t want Google and Facebook to control your access to information.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2O6kZU2 Tyler Durden

The Apollo Missions Were Cool, But Private Enterprise Has Been Better for Innovation

Fifty years ago, Apollo 11 fulfilled President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 promise to land Americans on the Moon. It was exactly the sort of project at which government was supposed to excel: a grand endeavor with no immediate payoff harnessing the resources of an entire nation.

Arguably, all it really demonstrated was that, if you could mug the taxpayers of an extremely wealthy nation to fund a scheme with no obvious benefit, you could orchestrate history’s coolest photo opportunity and show up those damned Russkies.

Some people mourn the end of the Apollo era as the end of heroic projects. It’s more accurate to say that it was the end of federal dominance of the public image of innovation and the dawn of an era of lower-profile but more-beneficial developments that improve human health, happiness, and wealth.

More beneficial? But didn’t the space program give us Tang? Actually, no—the stuff was already around, just not particularly popular until NASA made the astronauts drink it. But sure, let’s give NASA credit for marketing drink mix (it’s got the electrolytes Moon rocks crave!).

The private sector, on the other hand, has transformed the world around us with communications technology, computers, medicines and medical devices, and innovations in biotechnology. I’m probably missing something there, so feel free to email or tweet my oversight to me (in Apollo days, you’d have had to entrust your jabs to the government mail or a federally guaranteed telephone monopoly).

These transformations come courtesy of a host of sources, some involving government endeavors, many purely private, and others conflating the two—especially when it comes to defense spending, which has flowed in copious quantities over the years to many takers.

Increasingly, the researchers changing and improving the world in which we live do so for private businesses and independent organizations, seeking to solve specific problems or meet the perceived needs of consumers.

“U.S. [research and development] funding reached an all-time high of $499 billion in 2015,” according to estimates from the National Science Foundation‘s National Center for Science and Engineering. “This will represent the largest amount the U.S. or any nation has ever spent on R&D in a single year,” reported the American Institute of Physics (AIP) in 2016.

Of that $499 billion, “the federally sponsored share fell to a record-low 23 percent while the business sector’s share rose to a record-high 69 percent,” AIP noted. The federal government’s share of spending was at its lowest level since 1953, the year the National Science Foundation started measuring.

In 2016, the private sector funded 73 percent of U.S. research and development—$374.7 billion of $515.3 billion—the National Science Foundation announced earlier this year.

Meanwhile, the world has morphed in recent years in strange and interesting ways that may not be as dramatic as a Moon landing but are at least as important. These changes are apparent from the fact that I’m typing this article on a laptop computer on the back patio of my rural Arizona home. When finished, I’ll transmit it almost instantaneously to my editor in Washington, D.C. As I work, I’m doing my best to ignore the noisy endeavors of my teenage son, who himself is a result of fertility treatments unavailable a few decades ago and who has acquired most of his education remotely, using a variety of lessons and resources available to him far from any traditional classroom.

Even the internet that makes much of this possible and is sometimes credited to government is more accurately described as the result of a private efforts building on earlier public initiatives, with heavy emphasis on entrepreneurialism departing from and prevailing over Defense Department priorities.

Not everything new and cool is sitting on or near my patio table, though.

The world around us would be almost unimaginable—for good or ill—without cell phones. Lots of people contributed to the development of the technology, but the final spur came from rivalry between engineers at Bell Laboratories and Motorola. “Joel, this is Marty. I’m calling you from a cellphone, a real, handheld, portable cellphone,” Motorola’s Marty Cooper reportedly boasted to his rival, Bell’s Joel Engel, in the very first public call, placed as reporters looked on.

Golden rice, which started as a Rockefeller Foundation initiative, “has the potential to reduce or eliminate much of the death and disease caused by a vitamin A deficiency,” according to a letter signed by 144 Nobel Laureates. The modified rice is prominent among the low-key but potentially world-changing developments of the biotechnology revolution in general, and genetically modified organisms in particular.

Perhaps less important in terms of biotechnology, but still intriguing, is the looming challenge to vegans: is lab-grown meat ethically acceptable? The schism should be GMO popcorn-worthy.

3D printing has picked up buzz since the 1980s as a means of lowering manufacturing costs, speeding production—especially of prototypes and small runs—and evading government restrictions. “The simplicity and low cost of [3D printing] machines, combined with the scope of their potential creations, could profoundly alter global and local economies and affect international security,” the RAND Corporation noted last year.

Tellingly, as the innovations accumulate and transform society, the world is becoming more prosperous, with per-capita income soaring over recent decades (nope—no post-Apollo slump!) in an important break from agonizingly slow historical gains.

“The speed of poverty alleviation in the last 25 years has been historically unprecedented,” Alexander C. R. Hammond wrote in 2017 for the Foundation for Economic Education. “Not only is the proportion of people in poverty at a record low, but, in spite of adding 2 billion to the planet’s population, the overall number of people living in extreme poverty has fallen too.”

Economic liberalization—free markets—get much of the credit for this. Freer markets have opened the floodgates of innovation, research, and development. As a result, “agricultural productivity has greatly improved due to more scientific methods of farming, access to plentiful and much improved fertilisers and pesticides, and new high-yield and disease-resistant plants,” Marian Tupy pointed out last year for CapX.

Yeah, maybe it’s not as overtly heroic as a Moon landing. But people are healthier, happier, and wealthier because of these and myriad other private innovations, inspiring and building on one another.

And yes, that applies to space exploration, too. Recent innovations in launch vehicles and reusable craft come courtesy of private innovators. You can even get spectacle, if that’s what you want, in the form of the Tesla Roadster and mannequin “astronaut” that SpaceX launched into the interplanetary void.

Sure, that was pure marketing, just like the culmination of the original space race. But it was marketing done with the company’s own money. And it was viewed across the world on a host of devices invented and improved by private initiative in the 50 years since the Apollo astronauts took those first steps on the Moon.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2LwvrCb
via IFTTT

Italy’s Salvini Draws Up Plans To Raid “Illegal Settlements”: Deport Roma, Sinti 

Italy’s Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has given the ministry’s regional offices two weeks to compile “a report on the presence of Roma, Sinti and Camminanti settlements” in order to begin mass deportations, according to Italian media.

In a Tuesday memo, Salvini laid out his campaign to “verify the presence of illegal camps to draw up an eviction plan,” according to DW. 

According to the Council of Europe, Italy has one of the lowest concentrations of these groups in the EU, with a population of between 120,000 and 180,000, according to the AFP. More than half of these people are Italian citizens who have integrated into mainstream society, AFP claims.

Despite this, hate crimes and prejudice against Roma, Sinti, and Camminanti are rampant, particularly against the less fortunate, some of whom still live in unofficial settlements. –DW

In June of 2018, Salvini ordered a “Special Census” of the Roma community, saying that he planned to boot illegals from the country.

“I’ve asked the ministry to prepare a dossier on the Roma question in Italy,” Salvini told TeleLombardia, adding that the country’s large community of Roma, also known as Gypsies, was “chaos” several years after a crackdown.

DW reports that there are some 26,000 members of these groups living in emergency shelters or in vagrant camps across Italy in 2017, according to advocacy group Associazione 21 Luglio. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YcHVF7 Tyler Durden

Germany: Nest Of Middle-Eastern Spies

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

  • The report, considered the most important indicator of internal security in Germany, draws a bleak picture and raises questions about the government’s apparent passivity in face of mounting threats…. Meanwhile, the Erdoğan-aligned Islamist movement Millî Görüş (Turkish for “National Vision”), which has around 10,000 members in Germany, is the second-largest Islamist group in the country (the Salafist movement is now the largest Islamist grouping in Germany). Millî Görüş is strongly opposed to Muslim integration into European society.

  • “The BfV has found that all Islamist organizations active in Germany harbor anti-Semitic ideas and disseminate them in various ways. These ideas represent a considerable challenge for peaceful and tolerant coexistence in Germany.” — Annual report of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV), 2019

  • “The goal of HAMAS is the establishment of an Islamist state in the entire territory of ‘Palestine’ — also through armed struggle. A strategy paper written in 2017 states: ‘Resistance to occupation by all means is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws. At the heart of it lies the armed resistance.’ By ‘Palestine’ HAMAS means the area between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordan, which also includes the territory of the State of Israel. Western countries such as Germany are seen by HAMAS as a haven where the organization focuses on collecting donations, recruiting new supporters, and propagating its propaganda.” — Annual report of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV), 2019

  • The BfV noted a “high number” of attempts by “covert Pakistani procurement structures” illegally to obtain technology for use in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. The BfV also observed a “significant increase” in attempts by Iran to obtain technology for its missile program, which was not part of the Iran nuclear deal. The BfV reported that Syrian intermediaries were also continuing efforts to obtain products for weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons.

Foreign intelligence services, especially those from Turkey, Syria and Iran, have increased their activities in Germany during the past 12 months, according to Germany’s BfV domestic intelligence agency. The foreign intelligence services are not only pursuing dissidents among the large diasporas in Germany, they are also targeting Jewish and Israeli interests in the country.

Pictured: Seehofer (left) and Haldenwang (right) at a press conference on June 18, 2019, with Federal Crime Office head Holger Muench. (Photo by Michele Tantussi/Getty Images)

At the same time, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood appear to be operating with impunity in Germany, while, according to the BfV, the number of Salafists in the country has tripled in recent years and now exceeds 11,000. Overall, the BfV estimates that Germany is home to more than 26,000 Islamists, an unknown number of whom pose an immediate threat of attack.

The new figures are included the latest annual report of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV), and were presented by Interior Minister Horst Seehofer and BfV President Thomas Haldenwang in Berlin on June 27.

The report, considered the most important indicator of internal security in Germany, draws a bleak picture and raises questions about the government’s apparent passivity in face of mounting threats.

Iran

Iranian intelligence activities in Germany are carried out by Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), as well as the secret service of the Quds Force, a unit of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) responsible for foreign operations. According to the BfV, Iranian intelligence services in Germany are focused primarily on monitoring regime opponents, but also Israeli interests:

“The Iranian intelligence services are a central instrument of the political leadership to secure their claim to power. As a result, the Iranian opposition will continue to be a target of the MOIS….

“General Yahya Rahim Safavi, military adviser to Iranian revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said that the Islamic Republic has the authority to destroy any potential aggressors, not only within Iran but also beyond its borders….

“The State of Israel, its representatives and supporters, are among the declared enemies of Iran. This may include leading representatives of Jewish organizations in the Diaspora. The nuclear agreement between Iran and the West has not changed this attitude. Spying activities against Israeli and Jewish targets in Germany therefore continue to be part of the task area of Iranian intelligence services.”

The BfV report noted only three successful operations in 2018 against Iranian activities in Germany:

  • In January 2018, German police in seven federal states arrested ten alleged agents of the Quds Force. The agents were accused of spying on Israelis in Germany.

  • In March 2018, a court in Frankfurt sentenced an Iranian national to seven years in prison for purchasing, on behalf of the Quds Force, printing presses that produce counterfeit currency. The man, with German residency, also set up a series of front companies to purchase and ship to Iran specialized paper and ink. During the trial, it emerged that the presses were used to print more than 50 million Yemeni banknotes.

  • On July 1, an Iranian MOIS agent was arrested in Germany on an international warrant for plotting to bomb the annual meeting of the MEK, an Iranian opposition group, near Paris on June 30. The agent was extradited to Belgium in October 2018.

Turkey

The Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT), the BfV notes, is controlled by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) to enforce government policy and ensure internal security.

MIT’s activities in Germany are focused on targeting dissidents and opposition groups as well as trying to influence the Turkish diaspora in the country. Targeted dissidents include the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Gülen Movement of the U.S.-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gülen, a former Erdoğan ally whom Erdoğan accuses of staging a failed coup in July 2016. According to BfV:

“The MIT’s activities are flanked by attempts to exert influence on Turkish communities in Germany and the political decision-making process in German society as a whole. Government-related organizations with different structural links to Ankara promote Turkish politics in Germany and other European countries and protect those politics from criticism….

“An essential part of this strategy of influence is to inform the public in an innocuous way on alleged and actual cases of racism, Islamophobia and hostility toward Turkey or other undesirable developments in Germany and Europe, in order to confront criticism of political developments in Turkey.”

The two largest Turkish-dominated, state or government-related interest groups in Germany are the “Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB) and the “Union of European-Turkish Democrats” (UETD), which was recently renamed “Union of International Democrats” (UID). According to BfV:

“DITIB and UID are umbrella organizations that include a variety of local and regional (branch) associations with membership status. They emphasize their commitment to the public in a moderate way and endeavor to emphasize the autonomous and independent nature of their organizations and downplay the links and dependencies they have to Turkey.”

DITIB and UID are financed by the Turkish government’s Directorate for Religious Affairs, known in Turkish as Diyanet, and, according to BfV, both organizations cooperate closely with Turkish intelligence. The Turkish government pays the salaries of nearly 1,000 conservative imams in Germany who are leading more than 900 DITIB-controlled mosques across the country.

Meanwhile, the Erdoğan-aligned Islamist movement Millî Görüş (Turkish for “National Vision”), which has around 10,000 members in Germany, is the second-largest Islamist group in the country (the Salafist movement is now the largest Islamist grouping in Germany). Millî Görüş is strongly opposed to Muslim integration into European society:

“According to Millî Görüş, Western Civilization is presently dominated by a ‘vain’ order based on violence, injustice and exploitation of the weak. This ‘vain’ system must be replaced by a ‘just order’ that is based exclusively on Islamic principles, rather than on man-made and therefore ‘arbitrary rules.’ All Muslims should participate in the realization of the ‘just order.’ To do this, they must adopt a certain attitude and gain a certain vision (‘Görüş’) on earth, namely a national/religious (‘Millî) vision, a ‘Millî Görüş.'”

Syria

Germany, the report relates, is a priority for Syrian intelligence services as it is the main host country for Syrian refugees in Europe. The main focus of Syrian intelligence in Germany is to monitor opponents of the Syrian regime. According to the BfV, “the Syrian intelligence services appear to have used the influx of Syrian refugees to Germany in 2015 to establish new structures and networks of agents.”

Salafists and other Islamists

The BfV estimates that the number of Islamists in Germany increased to at least 26,560 by the end of 2018, up from 25,810 in 2017 and 24,425 in 2016.

The report does not provide estimates for the number of followers of the Islamic State or al-Qaeda living in Germany. As a result, the actual number of Islamists in Germany is undoubtedly higher than 26,560.

According to the report, Salafists comprise the single largest Islamist group in Germany. The number of Salafists in Germany jumped to 11,300 in 2018, up from 10,800 in 2017; 9,700 in 2016; 8,350 in 2015; 7,000 in 2014; 5,500 in 2013; 4,500 in 2012 and 3,800 in 2011.

The BfV report describes Salafism as an Islamist ideology that is at the same time an extremist counterculture:

“Salafism promotes a segregated lifestyle through unique selling points (clothing and language). Salafism wants to create a committed community with an intense sense of togetherness. This particularly attracts people who feel marginalized by the majority society. Unstable persons [ungefestigte Personen] who are looking for a purpose in life, for orientation and security, are especially influenced by the comprehensive Salafist rules, which determine daily life into its minute details. The individual, through Salafist propaganda, becomes part of an elite, the champion of ‘true Islam,’ distinguished by his moral superiority over a ‘world of the corrupt.’

“These subcultural elements are essentially the attractions of the Salafist ideology, which is marked by Wahhabism, the ‘state doctrine’ of Saudi Arabia, and represents a particularly severe and radical current within Islamism. Salafists see themselves as advocates of an original, unadulterated Islam. They claim to base their religious practice and lifestyle solely on the principles of the Koran, the model of the Prophet Muhammad and the first three Muslim generations, the so-called righteous ancestors (known in Arabic as al-Salaf al-Salih). As a consequence, Salafists are trying to establish a ‘theocracy’ according to their interpretation of the rules of sharia in which the liberal democratic order would no longer be valid.

“According to Salafism, Islam’s universal claim to validity must be accepted, by force if necessary, by all of humanity due to its superiority and Allah’s divine plan of salvation. Thus, the basic affirmation of violence is an inherent part of Salafist ideology.”

The BfV report also offers demographic data about Salafists in Germany:

“Although Salafist propaganda activities are increasingly aimed at young people, Salafism in Germany is not purely a youth phenomenon. About 27% of followers are 25 years old or younger; 38% are between 26 and 35 years; and 35% are 36 years or older.

“The Salafist scene is clearly male-dominated. Only about 12% of the Salafist supporters known to the BfV are women. Salafism in Germany is dominated by immigrants and their children. About 90% of the followers have a migration background; the rest are converts. New followers find themselves in a scene marked by a ‘siege mentality’ [Wagenburgmentalität] towards a defamed ‘disbelieving’ environment that includes not only Christians, Jews and non-believers but also non-Salafist Muslims. Therefore, all outside influences are discouraged. Contacts with non-Salafists are legitimate only if they serve to spread their own ideology.”

The report warns that returnees from jihadi warzones in the Middle East will have a radicalizing impact on the German Salafist scene:

“The Salafist scene represents the essential recruitment field for jihad. Almost without exception, all persons with a German connection who have joined the jihad were previously in contact with the Salafist scene….

“In almost all cases, the returnees return to known Salafist circles, into which they are accepted without delay. Since the environment is very often the same as before the departure, it is questionable whether the returnees really have freed themselves from Islamic State ideology. Furthermore, it can be assumed that at least parts of the IS ideology will increasingly find its way into German Salafist circles in the medium to long term as a result of these returnees…. In the medium term, the returnees could take on formal and informal key positions and, as role models, influence others and possibly radicalize them.”

The BfV report makes a direct link between the increase in anti-Semitism in Germany and the rise of Islamist movements in the country:

“Anti-Semitism is not only a topic of agitation by right-wing and left-wing extremists, but also constitutes an essential element in the ideology of the entire Islamist spectrum….

“In Islamist propaganda, religious, territorial and/or national-political motives often combine to form an anti-Semitic worldview. The stereotypical image of Judaism as the enemy [Feindbild Judentum] therefore forms a central pillar in the propaganda of all Islamist groups. Stereotypes and prejudices are used which can be associated with the anti-Semitic hate in Europe from the Middle Ages to the National Socialist racial ideology in the 20th century.

“Of particular importance in Islamist anti-Semitism is the ‘Jewish world conspiracy.’ Similar to right-wing extremism, Jews are seen as the ‘masterminds’ of a worldwide political conspiracy and collectively held responsible for various national and international evils and grievances.

“The BfV has found that all Islamist organizations active in Germany harbor anti-Semitic ideas and disseminate them in various ways. These ideas represent a considerable challenge for peaceful and tolerant coexistence in Germany. The number of physical attacks against Jewish persons is currently still low. However, even these isolated cases make it clear that the ideological radicalization of people and the incitement to hatred and violence by anti-Semitic ideas can lead to violent anti-Semitic attacks, even if the perpetrators are neither members nor supporters of an Islamist organization. This applies not least to those who have been socialized in the Arab world in social milieus in which anti-Semitic attitudes are widespread. An example of this is a young man from Syria who attacked a kippah-wearing Israeli in Berlin in April 2018 on the street with a belt.”

Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas

In addition to the Salafists and Millî Görüş, BfV estimates that Germany is now home to 1,050 members of Hezbollah, 1,040 members of the Muslim Brotherhood and 320 members of Hamas.

“The Shiite-Islamist ‘Hizb Allah’ [the party of Allah] denies Israel’s right to exist. It is propagating the armed, terrorist-led struggle, referred to as ‘legitimate resistance,’ against Israel as an ‘unlawful occupier’ of Palestinian land. It must be expected that the ‘Hizb Allah’ continues to plan terrorist actions against Israel or Israeli interests outside the Middle East. In Germany, the followers of the ‘Hizb Allah’ maintain organizational and ideological cohesion in local mosque associations, which are financed primarily through donations….

“The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is considered the oldest and most influential Sunni Islamist movement. It claims to be represented in more than 70 countries in varying degrees. The aim of the MB, which is still shaped today in essential elements by the ideology of its founder Hasan al-Banna, is the establishment of a political and social system based on the Koran and Sunnah. The credo of the MB is unchanged: ‘Allah is our goal. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our constitution. Jihad is our way. Death for Allah is our noblest wish.’ This ideology, as well as the Islamist form of government aspired to by the MB, are incompatible with basic democratic principles such as the right to free elections, the right to equal treatment, and freedom of expression and religion….

“The goal of HAMAS is the establishment of an Islamist state in the entire territory of ‘Palestine’ — also through armed struggle. A strategy paper written in 2017 states: ‘Resistance to occupation by all means is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws. At the heart of it lies the armed resistance.’ By ‘Palestine’ HAMAS means the area between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordan, which also includes the territory of the State of Israel. Western countries such as Germany are seen by HAMAS as a haven where the organization focuses on collecting donations, recruiting new supporters, and propagating its propaganda.”

Weapons Proliferation

The BfV noted a “high number” of attempts by “covert Pakistani procurement structures” illegally to obtain technology for use in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. The BfV also observed a “significant increase” in attempts by Iran to obtain technology for its missile program, which was not part of the Iran nuclear deal. The BfV reported that Syrian intermediaries were also continuing efforts to obtain products for weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32AXypc Tyler Durden

It’s Un-American To Be Anti-Free Speech: Protect The Right To Criticize The Government

Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.” – Justice William O. Douglas

Unjust. Brutal. Criminal. Corrupt. Inept. Greedy. Power-hungry. Racist. Immoral. Murderous. Evil. Dishonest. Crooked. Excessive. Deceitful. Untrustworthy. Unreliable. Tyrannical.

These are all words that have at some time or other been used to describe the U.S. government.

These are all words that I have used at some time or other to describe the U.S. government. That I may feel morally compelled to call out the government for its wrongdoing does not make me any less of an American.

If I didn’t love this country, it would be easy to remain silent. However, it is because I love my country, because I believe fervently that if we lose freedom here, there will be no place to escape to, I will not remain silent.

Nor should you.

Nor should any other man, woman or child—no matter who they are, where they come from, what they look like, or what they believe.

This is the beauty of the dream-made-reality that is America. As Chelsea Manning recognized, “We’re citizens, not subjects. We have the right to criticize government without fear.”

Indeed, the First Amendment does more than give us a right to criticize our country: it makes it a civic duty. Certainly, if there is one freedom among the many spelled out in the Bill of Rights that is especially patriotic, it is the right to criticize the government.

The right to speak out against government wrongdoing is the quintessential freedom.

Unfortunately, those who run the government don’t take kindly to individuals who speak truth to power. In fact, the government has become increasingly intolerant of speech that challenges its power, reveals its corruption, exposes its lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.

This is nothing new, nor is it unique to any particular presidential administration.

President Trump, who delights in exercising his right to speak (and tweet) freely about anything and everything that raises his ire, has shown himself to be far less tolerant of those with whom he disagrees, especially when they exercise their right to criticize the government.

In his first few years in office, Trump has declared the media to be “the enemy of the people,” suggested that protesting should be illegal, and that NFL players who kneel in protest during the national anthem “shouldn’t be in the country.” More recently, Trump lashed out at four Democratic members of Congress—all women of color— who have been particularly critical of his policies, suggesting that they “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

Fanning the flames of controversy, White House advisor Kellyanne Conway suggested that anyone who criticizes the country, disrespects the flag, and doesn’t support the Trump Administration’s policies should also leave the country.

The uproar over Trump’s “America—love it or leave it” remarks have largely focused on its racist overtones, but that misses the point: it’s un-American to be anti-free speech.

It’s unfortunate that Trump and his minions are so clueless about the Constitution. Then again, Trump is not alone in his presidential disregard for the rights of the citizenry, especially as it pertains to the right of the people to criticize those in power.

President Obama signed into law anti-protest legislation that makes it easier for the government to criminalize protest activities (10 years in prison for protesting anywhere in the vicinity of a Secret Service agent). The Obama Administration also waged a war on whistleblowers, which The Washington Postdescribed as “the most aggressive I’ve seen since the Nixon administration,” and “spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records.”

Part of the Patriot Act signed into law by President George W. Bush made it a crime for an American citizen to engage in peaceful, lawful activity on behalf of any group designated by the government as a terrorist organization. Under this provision, even filing an amicus brief on behalf of an organization the government has labeled as terrorist would constitute breaking the law.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the FBI to censor all news and control communications in and out of the country in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt also signed into law the Smith Act, which made it a crime to advocate by way of speech for the overthrow of the U.S. government by force or violence.

President Woodrow Wilson signed into law the Espionage and Sedition Acts, which made it illegal to criticize the government’s war efforts.

President Abraham Lincoln seized telegraph lines, censored mail and newspaper dispatches, and shut down members of the press who criticized his administration.

In 1798, during the presidency of John Adams, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which made it a crime to “write, print, utter or publish … any false, scandalous, and malicious” statements against the government, Congress or president of the United States.

Clearly, the government has been undermining our free speech rights for quite a while now, but Trump’s antagonism towards free speech is much more overt.

For example, at a recent White House Social Media Summit, Trump defined free speech as follows: “To me free speech is not when you see something good and then you purposely write bad. To me that’s very dangerous speech, and you become angry at it. But that’s not free speech.”

Except Trump is about as wrong as one can be on this issue.

Good, bad or ugly, it’s all free speech unless as defined by the government it falls into one of the following categories: obscenity, fighting words, defamation (including libel and slander), child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats, and solicitations to commit crimes.

This idea of “dangerous” speech, on the other hand, is peculiarly authoritarian in nature. What it amounts to is speech that the government fears could challenge its chokehold on power.

The kinds of speech the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation, prosecution and outright elimination include: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, left-wing speech, extremist speech, politically incorrect speech, etc.

Conduct your own experiment into the government’s tolerance of speech that challenges its authority, and see for yourself.

Stand on a street corner—or in a courtroom, at a city council meeting or on a university campus—and recite some of the rhetoric used by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams and Thomas Paine without referencing them as the authors.

For that matter, just try reciting the Declaration of Independence, which rejects tyranny, establishes Americans as sovereign beings, recognizes God (not the government) as the Supreme power, portrays the government as evil, and provides a detailed laundry list of abuses that are as relevant today as they were 240-plus years ago.

My guess is that you won’t last long before you get thrown out, shut up, threatened with arrest or at the very least accused of being a radical, a troublemaker, a sovereign citizen, a conspiratorialist or an extremist.

Try suggesting, as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin did, that Americans should not only take up arms but be prepared to shed blood in order to protect their liberties, and you might find yourself placed on a terrorist watch list and vulnerable to being rounded up by government agents.

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms,” declared Jefferson. He also concluded that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Observed Franklin: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

Better yet, try suggesting as Thomas Paine, Marquis De Lafayette, John Adams and Patrick Henry did that Americans should, if necessary, defend themselves against the government if it violates their rights, and you will be labeled a domestic extremist.

“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government,” insisted Paine. “When the government violates the people’s rights,” Lafayette warned, “insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensable of duties.” Adams cautioned, “A settled plan to deprive the people of all the benefits, blessings and ends of the contract, to subvert the fundamentals of the constitution, to deprive them of all share in making and executing laws, will justify a revolution.” And who could forget Patrick Henry with his ultimatum: “Give me liberty or give me death!”

Then again, perhaps you don’t need to test the limits of free speech for yourself.

One such test is playing out before our very eyes on the national stage led by none other than the American Police State’s self-appointed Censor-in-Chief, who seems to believe that only individuals who agree with the government are entitled to the protections of the First Amendment.

To the contrary, James Madison, the father of the Constitution, was very clear about the fact that the First Amendment was established to protect the minority against the majority.

I’ll take that one step further: the First Amendment was intended to protect the citizenry from the government’s tendency to censor, silence and control what people say and think.

Having lost our tolerance for free speech in its most provocative, irritating and offensive forms, the American people have become easy prey for a police state where only government speech is allowed. You see, the powers-that-be understand that if the government can control speech, it controls thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

This is how freedom rises or falls.

As Hermann Goering, one of Hitler’s top military leaders, remarked during the Nuremberg trials:

It is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

It is working the same in this country, as well.

Americans of all stripes would do well to remember that those who question the motives of government provide a necessary counterpoint to those who would blindly follow where politicians choose to lead.

We don’t have to agree with every criticism of the government, but we must defend the rights of allindividuals to speak freely without fear of punishment or threat of banishment.

Never forget: what the architects of the police state want are submissive, compliant, cooperative, obedient, meek citizens who don’t talk back, don’t challenge government authority, don’t speak out against government misconduct, and don’t step out of line.

What the First Amendment protects—and a healthy constitutional republic requires—are citizens who routinely exercise their right to speak truth to power.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, tolerance for dissent is vital if we are to survive as a free nation.

While there are all kinds of labels being put on so-called “unacceptable” speech today, the real message being conveyed by those in power is that Americans don’t have a right to express themselves if what they are saying is unpopular, controversial or at odds with what the government determines to be acceptable.

By suppressing free speech, the government is contributing to a growing underclass of Americans who are being told that they can’t take part in American public life unless they “fit in.”

Mind you, it won’t be long before anyone who believes in holding the government accountable to respecting our rights and abiding by the rule of law is labeled an “extremist,” is relegated to an underclass that doesn’t fit in, must be watched all the time, and is rounded up when the government deems it necessary.

It doesn’t matter how much money you make, what politics you subscribe to, or what God you worship: we are all potential suspects, terrorists and lawbreakers in the eyes of the government.

In other words, if and when this nation falls to tyranny, we will all suffer the same fate: we will fall together.

The stamping boot of tyranny is but one crashing foot away.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Lv6Z4b Tyler Durden

Cops Bust Fake Ferrari And Lamborghini Factory In Brazil

O Globo, a Brazilian newspaper based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, reported on Tuesday that a small factory in the southern state of Santa Catarina was producing fake Ferraris and Lamborghinis for $45,000 to $60,000, a substantial discount versus the retail price of a genuine supercar.

The investigation behind the counterfeit vehicles started when representatives of Ferrari and Lamborghini began to notice pictures of the fake supercars circulating social media contacted the Civil Police of Santa Catarina. From there, police launched a raid on Monday of the factory where they discovered a father and son team, along with other employees, working on at least eight replicas at the time. The police used flatbed trucks and seized all vehicles inside the facility for evidence.

Police said there were only three models being produced at the time of the raid: Lamborghini Gallardo and Huracan, and a Ferrari 430 lookalike.

Fake parts, with some including fraudulent engravings of the original manufacturer, were also seized in operation.

Police aren’t sure how many cars were manufactured at the unauthorized facility, nor do they know if other models were sold. Former employees are expected to testify where more clarity into the size of the operation could be determined.

The raid comes several weeks after Ferrari won a court case against a company offering to build replicas of the 250 GTO, an authentic version of the 1960s supercar has a price tag of $38 million to $48 million.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2y12WDO Tyler Durden

Escobar: Western Intellectuals Freak Over “Frankenstein” China

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

China seen as a rich Communist monster buying support from poor and corrupt states worldwide…

Western economists and intellectuals obsessed with demonization of China are never shy of shortcuts glaringly exposing their ignorance.

The latest outburst posits that “we” – as in Western intellectuals – “are the modern version of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein,” who electro-shocked a dead body (China) into a resurrected “murderous monster.”

So, welcome to the Sino-Frankenstein school of international relations. What next? A black and white remake with Xi Jinping playing the monster? Anyway, “we” – as in mankind’s best hope – should “avoid carrying on in the role of Frankenstein.”

The author is an economics professor emeritus at Harvard. He cannot even identify who’s to blame for Frankenstein – the West or the Chinese. That says much about Harvard’s academic standards.

Now, compare this with what was being discussed at a trade war symposium at Renmin University in Beijing this past Saturday.

Chinese intellectuals were trying to frame the current geopolitical dislocation provoked by the Trump administration’s trade war – without naming it for what it is: a Frankenstein gambit.

Li Xiangyang, director of the National Institute of International Strategy, a think tank linked to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, stressed that an “economic decoupling” of the US from China is “completely possible,” considering that “the ultimate [US] target is to contain China’s rise… This is a life-or-death game” for the United States.

Decoupling

Assuming the decoupling would take place, that could be easily perceived as “strategic blackmail” imposed by the Trump administration. Yet what the Trump administration wants is not exactly what the US establishment wants – as shown by an open letter to Trump signed by scores of academics, foreign policy experts and business leaders who are worried that “decoupling” China from the global economy – as if Washington could actually pull off such an impossibility – would generate massive blowback.

What may actually happen in terms of a US-China “decoupling” is what Beijing is already, actively working on: extending trade partnerships with the EU and across the Global South.

And that will lead, according to Li, to the Chinese leadership offering deeper and wider market access to its partners. This will soon be the case with the EU, as discussed in Brussels in the spring.

Sun Jie, a researcher at the Institute of World Economics and Politics at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said that deepening partnerships with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) will be essential in case a decoupling is in the cards.

For his part Liu Qing, an economics professor at Renmin University, stressed the need for top international relations management, dealing with everyone from Europe to the Global South, to prevent their companies from replacing Chinese companies in selected global supply chains.

And Wang Xiaosong, an economics professor at Renmin University, emphasized that a concerted Chinese strategic approach in dealing with Washington is absolutely paramount.

All about Belt and Road

A few optimists among Western intellectuals would rather characterize what is going on as a vibrant debate between proponents of “restraint” and “offshore balancing” and proponents of “liberal hegemony”. In fact, it’s actually a firefight.

Among the Western intellectuals singled out by the puzzled Frankenstein guy, it is virtually impossible to find another voice of reason to match Martin Jacques, now a senior fellow at Cambridge University. When China Rules the World, his hefty tome published 10 years ago, still leaps out of an editorial wasteland of almost uniformly dull publications by so-called Western “experts” on China.

Jacques has understood that now it’s all about the New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative:

“BRI has the potential to offer another kind of world, another set of values, another set of imperatives, another way of organizing, another set of institutions, another set of relationships.”

Belt and Road, adds Jacques, “offers an alternative to the existing international order. The present international order was designed by and still essentially privileges the rich world, which represents only 15% of the world’s population. BRI, on the other hand, is addressing at least two-thirds of the world’s population. This is extraordinarily important for this moment in history.”

In fact, we are already entering a Belt and Road 2.0 scenario – defined by Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi as a “high-quality” shift from “big freehand” to “fine brushwork.”

At the Belt and Road Forum this past spring in Beijing, 131 nations were represented, engaged in linked projects. Belt and Road is partnering with 29 international organizations from the World Bank to APEC, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation.

Apart from the fact that Belt and Road is now configured as a vast, unique, Eurasia-wide infrastructure and trade development project extending all the way to Africa and Latin America, Beijing is now emphasizing that it’s also a portmanteau brand encompassing bilateral trade relations, South-South cooperation and UN-endorsed sustainable development goals.

China’s trade with Belt and Road-linked nations reached $617.5 billion in the first half of 2019 – up 9.7% year-on-year and outpacing the growth rate of China’s total trade.

Chinese scholar Wang Jisi was right from the start when he singled out Belt and Road as a “strategic necessity” to counter Barack Obama’s now-defunct “pivot to Asia”.

So now it’s time for Western intellectuals to engage in a freak-out: as it stands, Belt and Road is the new Frankenstein.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32FR7ky Tyler Durden

These Two Charts Reveal The Extraordinary Collapse In Australian Homeownership 

A housing affordability crisis has been gaining momentum in Australia over the last several decades as the number of people outright owning a home has collapsed by a third as home prices soared 400%.

The Age, a daily newspaper in Melbourne and Victoria, Australia, reports that in the mid-1990s, nearly 44% of people living in New South Wales (NWS), a southeastern Australian state, outright owned their home, but according to new data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, this rate has now plummeted to just 29.7%.

So what happened over the last twenty years? Why have Australians resorted to hefty mortgages instead of buying homes in cash?

Well, the swing from outright ownership to financing has primarily been due to a 460% jump in the median house price in Sydney, approaching levels that are considered out of reach for many.

The Age reveals a similar crisis in Victoria, wherein the mid-1990s, more than 45% outright owned a home, but now that number has declined to just 31%.

Over the same period, the median house price in Melbourne has skyrocketed from $126,131 to $806,000, forcing homebuyers in the last decade to resort to mortgages more than ever.

The Northern Territory has the smallest population of people who own their home mortgage-free, at just 17%. Among the states, just 27% of residents in Queensland and Western Australia live without a mortgage or rental payments.

Despite a housing bubble that has shown cracks, the median outstanding mortgage in Western Australia is $315,000. The median mortgage in Victoria is $260,000 while it is $265,000 in NSW.

The single largest age group of new mortgages were those aged between 55 and 64, suggesting as the housing market falters – older adults will experience the most financial pain.

“There are more and more people who are getting into retirement with a mortgage over their heads,” said National Seniors chief advocate Ian Henschke.

“The number of people on Newstart aged between 55 and 64 is increasing sharply. These are people having to access their super to try and get on top of their mortgage because they don’t want to retire with such large debts.”

The affordability crisis has crushed low-income households. In the mid-1990s, the poorest of NSW resident spent 21% of their weekly income on housing; now they spend more than a third.

The low-income segment in Victoria is paying 25% of their income on rents or mortgages.

NAB senior economist Kieran Davies, in a recent note, warned that the newly created mortgage debt over the last several decades is mostly carried by older people.

“Gearing has increased sharply among older Australians, broadly reflecting the changing pattern of homeownership,” he said.

Earlier this week, the Reserve Bank of Australia said interest rate cuts were going to have little effect in boosting house prices.

“A decline in interest rates was unlikely to encourage an unwelcome material pick-up in borrowing by households that would add to medium-term risks in the economy,” it said.

With Australians saddled up with the most debt ever – many are soon going to discover that an era of cheap money will be the financial death of them as the housing market implodes.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1yiX5 Tyler Durden

Move Over, Millennials: GEN X Is The Generation In The Most Financial Trouble

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

Everyone picks on Millennials these days but a new study by Lending Tree shows that out of all the generations, Gen X is the one dealing with the deepest financial problems.

First, some definitions.

  • Gen Z or Centennials: Born 1996 – current day

  • Millennials: Born 1977 – 1995.

  • Gen X: Born 1965 – 1976.

  • Baby Boomers: Born 1946 – 1964.

  • The Silent Generation: Born 1945 or before

We all know that two major financial mistakes are getting into debt and failing to have an emergency fund. A recent study looked into the debt levels of each generation.

The study

Lending Tree, an online lending marketplace, did a study on the 3-year changes in each generation’s debt.

As each generation moves into different stages of their personal and economic lives, the amounts and types of debt they carry shifts, too. We compared the debts of members of the four adult generations — millennials, Gen Xers, baby boomers and silents — between March 2016 and March 2019 to see what’s changed.

Specifically, we calculated the changes in the average balance of each major debt category — personal loans, credit cards, auto loans, student loans and mortgages — and the change in the percentage of each generation that carries each type of debt. (source)

Here were the key findings:

  • Millennials saw the greatest spike in overall debt. Their total balances rose by an average of $16,714 — almost 29% — between 2016 and 2019.

  • Gen Xers now have the highest average debt burden of any generation. They increased their average debt burdens by about 10%, or $11,898, between 2016 and 2019, thanks to steady dollar increases across all debt categories.

  • Older generations — boomers and silents — are winding down their debt, thanks to decreases in average mortgage balances. However, they’ve increased their average debt across all other categories.

  • Boomers decreased their debt burdens by 7%, or $10,424. Members of the silent generation dropped their overall debt by $9,486, or 8%. (source)

But what about Gen X? Why are they in so much trouble?

Gen X has financial problems in many ways.

Marketwatch did an analysis on that the ways that Gen X is financially wrecked and it’s not pretty. This is my generation so I was especially interested in their analysis.

They’ve got the most credit card debt of anyone – yet still spend more than anyone on non-essentials…

Despite their sky high credit card debt, Gen X spends big on non-essentials, according to data released in 2018 from finance site Bankrate.com. Indeed, “Gen Xers (ages 38-53) spend $3,473 annually on restaurant food, prepared beverages and lottery tickets, the most of any generation,” the report reveals.

They’re woefully under-saved for retirement… Median retirement savings for Gen X is only $35,000, the same median amount as millennials, despite Gen Xers being much closer to retirement,” according to a study of 3,000 Americans by Allianz Life. Having just $35,000 in retirement savings — especially when you’re a Gen Xer ages 37- 51 — is not even close to enough. Fidelity recommends that by age 40 you have three times your salary saved for retirement. Gen Xers may be so under-saved thanks to the competing financial demands of children… and caring for aging parents.

Their average debt now tops $150,000. Not only is their credit card debt high, the total amount of debt they have is. Those in the 35-44 age group have “the highest debt levels of any age bracket,” SmartAsset notes, citing Federal Reserve data. 

They’re more likely than other generations to say they can’t meet their financial goals. All of this debt and the lack of savings may explain why fewer than 1 in 3 members of Gen X says they think they can reach their long-term financial goals, according to a survey released in 2017 by FICO.  (source)

That’s not a pretty picture for people between the ages of 37 and 51.

Some of the reasons for this financial mess

Reading over the data, the thing that jumps out at me is that people of my generation are at the point where they’re taking care of everyone. Some still have kids at home, while others have adult kids who have returned home.  We are often lending a helping hand to our adult children who are in college or trying to get their feet on the ground. Some of this generation are taking care of aging parents.

It’s pretty tough to save for retirement when you have all these people depending on you.

Regarding the credit card debt, that one is kind of a mystery to me. While I have used credit cards to fund medical care I couldn’t fully pay for with my emergency fund, I rarely use them otherwise. It seems to me that it is essential to get this high-interest debt under control immediately. (If this is a problem for you, check out this article about paying down debt fast.

Spending on non-essentials seems to be a problem too. A lot of folks think that being on a budget means you can never have any fun, you can’t travel, you can’t go out to eat. So instead of creating a budget, they throw caution to the wind, spend while they have money, and complain when they don’t. I’d never say that you cannot travel, dine out, or do fun things. I do all of these and on a fairly tight budget. But I work it into my budget, I fund it with cash, and this comes after savings and all my other bills.

The biggest concern I see is that the money we Gen X-ers are paying into social security right now is going to fund the retirements of the Baby Boomers. The social security system is at a near-breaking point right now and most folks believe it may not even be there by the time we get to retirement age, much less for millennials. All that money that has been taking from our paychecks our entire working life…and none left when we need it. And if you think times are tight now, just wait until you’re too old to work and there’s no social security.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZbvK8A Tyler Durden

China’s Top Carmaker Guides For First Annual Sales Drop In 14 Years

SAIC Motor – China’s top carmaker and General Motors’ biggest Chinese partner – expects sales to fall annually for the first time in at least 14 years, according to Bloomberg.

The company is based in Shanghai and projects that for 2019, sales will be down about 7%. The company’s new target of 6.54 million sales is about 8% below the company’s public forecast for a slight increase in sales and would be the company’s first full year drop on record.

SAIC also has a venture with VW, where sales are expected to fall by about 3% to 2 million units. Deliveries at SAIC General Motors are projected to fall by about 8% to 1.2 million vehicles. These numbers would be the first full year drop for the VW venture and the second straight decline for the GM partnership.

A representative for SAIC said that the company plans to “sustain its marketshare”, even if the overall market slides this year.

SAIC reported a 17% drop in first half sales and said it saw declines across its various ventures. The company has offered buyers incentives of as much is 50% over the past few months to help clear out inventory. We reported on this fire sale earlier this month. 

We noted that passenger car vehicles in China finally showed their first tepid signs of recovery after a historic and record-breaking plunge in the country over the last two years, according to data from the China Passenger Car Association. 

China was able to – at least temporarily – shake itself from its rut as a result of offering significant discounts to clear inventory before new emissions rules took place on July 1.

Retail sales of passenger vehicles were up 4.9% to 1.8 million units in June from the year prior. This is the first increase since May 2018 for China, according to the CPCA data.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2XZv8BT Tyler Durden