Bringing the Child Tax Credit Back to Life Is Too Costly


Why Expanding the Child Tax Credit Is a Costly and Bad Idea

At the end of 2021, not quite a year into Joe Biden’s presidency, something unusual happened: Congress actually allowed a massive government program to expire. That program was the expanded child tax credit, which had been enacted as a temporary program under the American Rescue Plan (ARP), a roughly $2 trillion spending package passed exclusively with Democratic votes in March 2021.

A year after the expansion expired, however, Democrats began looking for ways to bring it back. The cost of doing that would be very high.

The ARP raised the maximum child tax credit from $2,000 to $3,600 per child for families making up to $150,000 a year. The one-year program made the credit fully refundable, meaning that people would qualify for it even if they owed no income taxes. That change expanded the benefit to millions of households that previously had earned too little to qualify.

The ARP also turned what had been an annual lump sum around tax season into a monthly payment that in many cases was directly deposited into parents’ bank accounts. In effect, the law set up a program of monthly checks, sent directly to the bank accounts of most families.

Although the program was initially designed as a one-year expansion, supporters hoped it would become permanent. As The New York Times reported in January 2022, the benefit “was never intended to be temporary,” and “many progressives hoped that the payments, once started, would prove too popular to stop.”

Yet at the end of the program’s first year, after paying out about $80 billion, Congress declined to extend the program. Even with Democrats in control of both the House and the Senate, there simply weren’t enough votes to keep it going. Sen. Joe Manchin, the moderate Democratic senator from West Virginia, was vocally opposed, citing cost concerns and warning that the expanded eligibility would subsidize unemployment. Progressive ambitions were foiled—or at least they seemed to be.

In late 2022, after Democrats performed far better than expected in the midterm elections, picking up a seat in the Senate as Republicans gained only a narrow majority in the House, some Democrats pushed to restart the program. Sen. Michael Bennet (D–Colo.) argued that a renewed expansion of the child tax credit should be tied to the extension of some corporate tax breaks in an end-of-year budget deal.

In October 2022, Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation reported that a permanent expansion would cost more than $1.4 trillion over a decade. And because it would provide benefits to people with no tax liability, the committee said, it would create a new incentive to eschew work. The negative effects on the labor market would, in turn, reduce long-run economic growth.

The labor market effects also would undermine one of the key arguments in favor of the child tax credit—that it reduces child poverty. A 2021 study from a group of University of Chicago economists found that the program would reduce child poverty, but by far less than expected, since many workers would respond by exiting the labor force. Because the labor market effects would be concentrated among the poorest households, the authors reported, “deep child poverty would not fall at all.”

And then there was inflation. Despite Democrats’ better-than-expected performance in the midterms, voters gave them poor marks on the economy, especially regarding price increases. The year prior to the election saw some of the biggest price jumps in 40 years. Inflation was partly due to pandemic-related supply-chain disruptions, but it was exacerbated by the checks that the government sent to millions of Americans.

Voters, meanwhile, were less than enthusiastic about Biden’s tax credit experiment. According to a Morning Consult poll conducted at the end of 2021, just 47 percent favored an extension of the program, while 42 percent opposed it and the rest offered no opinion.

Congress laid to rest the expanded child tax credit. More than a year later, there is no sense in bringing it back from the grave.

The post Bringing the Child Tax Credit Back to Life Is Too Costly appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/c4fbkiL
via IFTTT

“Yankee Tax” Proposed By South Carolina Lawmaker

“Yankee Tax” Proposed By South Carolina Lawmaker

A South Carolina state Senator wants to hit new residents with a $500 “Yankee Tax” for moving to the Palmetto state.

The bill, proposed by Sen. Stephen Goldfinch (R), would require those moving to South Carolina from out-of-state to pay two one-time fees; $250 for vehicle registrations and $250 for a new driver’s license. Half of the new fee would go toward the state’s infrastructure – including roads, bridges and common community areas, according to Fox Business.

“I’m not trying to build a wall and this is not a fee against new residents, it’s a fee for people to catch up with the rest of us,” Goldfinch told Fox News Digital. “I think there’s a rational basis for requiring newcomers to catch up with the rest of us and contribute to the roads, bridges, schools and green spaces that we’ve [residents] always contributed to.”

His proposal comes after droves of people from the Northeast have moved to South Carolina in recent years. According to the U.S. Census, nearly half a million people moved to the Palmetto State in the past decade.

People flocked to the Southeast during the pandemic and stayed due to a host of reasons, including work flexibility, lower taxes and warmer weather.

Goldfinch points to South Carolina residents as inspiration for the bill. -Fox Business

“Our quality of life has been diminished by the almost 4 million people that have moved here in the last decade,” said Goldfinch. “And we anticipate another million people moving here in the next decade. Everybody is concerned about their quality of life.”

The new fees will be available for debate next week on the South Carolina Senate floor.

As Fox Business points out, South Carolina isn’t the only state trying to slap people with moving taxes – as California and New York have both proposed legislation to tax people leaving their state.

“If you can charge people to leave, I don’t see any reason why you can’t charge somebody to come in the door,” said Goldfinch.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 07:50

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/QfiEedY Tyler Durden

Europe’s Strong Rally Faces Test As War Rages On

Europe’s Strong Rally Faces Test As War Rages On

By Sagarika Jaisinghani, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

The strong stock gains that have marked the early months of 2023 are likely to fizzle out if Russia’s war in Ukraine escalates.

While the region’s equities have recovered from declines seen in the immediate aftermath of Russia’s invasion that began a year ago, they are now more vulnerable to shocks after this year’s almost 8% bounce. Any escalation in the crisis will not only stoke geopolitical uncertainty, but also amp up pressure on energy and food prices and weigh on corporate profits.

“It’s clear the market views the risks as lower compared to the beginning of the war, and while elements of the rally are understandable, the margin of safety in European stocks has now been eroded,” says Hargreaves Lansdown lead equity analyst Sophie Lund-Yates. “That means any unexpected escalations or volatility is likely to result in a sharp market reaction.”

Although the optimism this year has been driven by cooling inflation and better-than-expected earnings, the war isn’t far from investors’ minds. Fund managers in a Bank of America Corp. survey see worsening geopolitical concerns as the second-biggest threat to markets, after sticky inflation. Most don’t expect a peace treaty this year.

The polarization between stock winners and losers, coupled with a weaker euro, suggest not all risks have been priced out, says Barclays Plc strategist Emmanuel Cau. The difference between the best and worst-performing groups in the Stoxx 600 is stark: energy shares have soared 20% in the past year, while rate-sensitive real estate companies have slumped 29%.

Among the big risks from here on is a potential energy crunch. While a mild winter helped Europe avert a crisis this time around, stockpiles could dwindle again if the war drags on into the colder months. “The need to replace a historically cheap energy source will remain a challenge,” says Charlotte Ryland, co-head of investments at CCLA.

With the war forcing a shift in governments’ long-term investments, spending on renewables and defense firms may get a boost. UBS Global Wealth Management strategists see opportunities in areas including commodities, green tech, energy efficiency and cybersecurity.

Another sector likely to be disproportionately affected is food and drinks, where supplies of some items have been disrupted in the past year. Bloomberg Intelligence strategists Tim Craighead and Laurent Douillet say profitability of the food industry “faces a potentially long-term test” as restricted supplies of key Ukrainian sunflower, oil, corn and wheat add to a rise in prices.

Economically sensitive sectors are also at risk of reversing an outperformance against so-called defensive peers if the war escalates. All in all, the outlook for European stocks is getting dimmer, with strategists in a Bloomberg poll expecting the Stoxx 600 to end the year below current levels on deteriorating economic momentum.

Citigroup strategist Beata Manthey expects geopolitical risks to keep a lid on European equity valuations as the boost from lower gas prices, a weaker dollar and China’s reopening is now priced in. “As for the rally, we wouldn’t be chasing it from here,” she says.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 07:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/XLmzZ0d Tyler Durden

Vanguard CEO Abandons ESG Investing Alliance: “Not In The Game Of Politics”

Vanguard CEO Abandons ESG Investing Alliance: “Not In The Game Of Politics”

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) has been a hotly debated topic over the last few years.

The seemingly unquestioned march towards corporate utopia has met with resistance among those who oppose the idea that government oligarchs should dictate the affairs of private business firms. The long-term effects of the ESG movement are largely ignored by the mainstream.

As Tom Czitron previously commented, ESG is largely justified on the basis that corporations and financial institutions should be socially responsible. They should work obsessively to address the perceived menaces of climate change, racism, sexism, and a host of subjects. Our benevolent political and economic elite define what is virtuous and what is not for a grateful public.

But, as of late, there are some naysayers that dare to stand up to the socialism-by-stealth promoters with Tim Buckley, chief executive at Vanguard, perhaps the biggest name yet to buck the ESG orthodoxy.

“Our research indicates that ESG investing does not have any advantage over broad-based investing,” Mr. Buckley said in a recent interview with the Financial Times.

Matching word to deed, his comments came after he had withdrawn his firm from the $59 trillion Net Zero Asset Managers initiative, an organization that is part of the $150 trillion United Nations-affiliated Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero.

“We don’t believe that we should dictate company strategy,” he said, in his first public comments about the decision.

It would be hubris to presume that we know the right strategy for the thousands of companies that Vanguard invests with. We just want to make sure that risks are being appropriately disclosed and that every company is playing by the rules.”

As The Wall Street Journal reports, Mr. Buckley effectively claims that ESG managers are playing the fool and taking their clients’ money with them.

Fewer than 1 in 7 active equity managers outperform the broad market in any five-year period. Over the past five years, not one relied exclusively on a net-zero investment methodology. 

Betting his clients’ money on politicians and regulators consistently doing the “right” thing would be irresponsible.

There is a receding chance the globe will be at net zero by 2050. No one should promise to base his entire investment strategy on such odds.

The Vanguard boss also warned investors not to expect superior returns from ploughing money into ESG funds and alternative assets – two of the fastest growing parts of the asset management industry – rather than the index-trackers championed by his firm.

“We cannot state that [environmental, social and governance] investing is better performance wise than broad index-based investing,” said Buckley.

“Our research indicates that ESG investing does not have any advantage over broad-based investing.”

The decision to withdraw from the coalition has sparked fury among environmental activists, with Al Gore calling Mr. Buckley’s decision “irresponsible and shortsighted.”

Buckley, however, said, as The FT reports, that Vanguard was “not in the game of politics”.

“Politicians and regulators have a central role to play in setting the ground rules to achieve a just transition to a lower carbon economy,” he said, when asked about the increasing politicisation of ESG investing.

As Terrence Keeley writes in an op-ed via WSJ, freeing the asset-management industry from a prevailing orthodoxy that promises wealth and environmental sanctity while delivering neither requires monumental fortitude.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 06:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/Me0Lsau Tyler Durden

UK Oil And Gas Industry Warns Windfall Tax Will Hurt Energy Security

UK Oil And Gas Industry Warns Windfall Tax Will Hurt Energy Security

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  • The new head of Offshore Energies UK has warned that the higher tax rates are already hitting offshore companies hard.

  • Last autumn, the UK raised the windfall tax for oil and gas operators to 35%, bringing the oil and gas sector’s total tax rate to 75%.

  • Companies are already slashing investment in the UK energy system, which could leave the UK increasingly dependent on imports.

The windfall tax on UK North Sea producers is hitting all companies operating on the UK Continental Shelf with firms already announcing lower investments and deferring drilling plans, the new head of trade body Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) has warned.

Last autumn, the UK raised the windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas operators by 10 percentage points to 35% from January 1, 2023.

The UK also extended the so-called Energy Profits Levy to the end of March 2028, from December 31, 2025, as originally planned when the levy was 25%.

The total tax rate on the oil and gas sector has thus increased to a massive 75%, the highest of any UK sector, OEUK says.

The “super tax is hitting all offshore companies hard, large and small, not just those who make headlines,” OEUK’s new chief executive David Whitehouse told the Financial Times.

Operators in the UK are already looking to invest elsewhere which would leave the country increasingly reliant on fossil fuel imports, Whitehouse noted.

After the windfall tax was raised, Harbour Energy, the biggest oil and gas producer in the UK North Sea, backed out of the ongoing licensing round aimed at awarding more than 100 new licenses. Shell has said it would be re-evaluating each project comprising its $30.5 billion (£25 billion) planned investment in the UK energy system, and TotalEnergies has said it would slash its investment in the UK by 25%.

In its latest operational update, Harbour Energy said in January that its total UK capital expenditure was reduced compared to previous expectations with certain opportunities no longer being pursued following the changes to the Energy Profit Levy (EPL).

“While oil and gas prices have reverted to more normal levels we still face a tax rate of 75 per cent in the UK due to the recent tax changes, making investment in the country less competitive,” Harbour Energy’s CEO Linda Cook said.

“As a result, the EPL necessitated a review of our future activity levels in the UK and reinforced our ambition to grow and diversify internationally.” 

Commenting on calls for more taxes after Big Oil’s record profits for 2022, Mike Tholen, OEUK’s director of sustainability, said early this month, “That rate of UK tax is already so high it risks driving companies out of UK waters. All parties have acknowledged that we will need oil and gas for decades to come. So why risk damaging our own secure supplies from the North Sea?”

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 06:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gVy538E Tyler Durden

CIA Played Key Role In Nelson Mandela’s Arrest & Imprisonment, New Evidence Shows

CIA Played Key Role In Nelson Mandela’s Arrest & Imprisonment, New Evidence Shows

A newly unearthed interview along with declassified documents point to CIA involvement in the 1962 arrest of anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela by the US-friendly apartheid government. At that time, the height of the Cold War, Mandela was seen as part of the Communist opposition.

Time magazine in a new bombshell report asks the question, “Did the CIA Betray Nelson Mandela?” and comes to the conclusion that there was pivotal involvement of America’s most powerful spy agency. 

The details are coming to light based on the work of Richard Stengel, collaborator on Mandela’s autobiography, “Long Walk to Freedom“. Stengel revisited an unpublished 1993 audio interview he had captured with Mandela, wherein the famous anti-apartheid activist and eventual South African president told him he had learned that an American consul with CIA connections had briefed South African authorities on Mandela’s travel habits.

Via Reuters

This would help lead to Mandela’s arrest and imprisonment for 27 years as head of the outlawed African National Congress (ANC). Additionally now declassified CIA documents had labeled Mandela “probably communist” and confirmed that the agency had been closely tracking him anytime he went out of South Africa.

This was during the presidency of John F. Kennedy. According to Axios, “Taken together, Stengel says, the details add significantly to the evidence that the CIA was tracking Mandela and helped South African authorities arrest him as he was traveling from Durban to Johannesburg in 1962.”

And according to further details revealed in the Time report: 

  • A Johannesburg Star story in 1986 cited a “retired senior police officer” saying South African police had been tipped off to Mandela’s whereabouts by a U.S. diplomat in Durban who was “the CIA operative for that region.”

  • Four years later, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that a “retired [American] intelligence official” identified a “senior CIA operative” as giving South Africa every detail about Mandela’s whereabouts.

The details are also consistent with how the US government classified Mandela and his African National Congress throughout the 1980s and 1990s. 

Despite US officials and media now praising his civil rights legacy as a unifier, the reality is successive US administrations considered him a “terrorist” and actively opposed him and his racial equality movement. 

A 2013 NBC report pointed to the historical irony and hypocrisy of US officials as follows: “Until five years ago, however, the U.S. officially considered Mandela a terrorist. During the Cold War, both the State and Defense departments dubbed Mandela’s political party, the African National Congress, a terrorist group, and Mandela’s name remained on the U.S. terrorism watch list till 2008.” And more from the report: 

But in 1986, Reagan condemned Mandela’s group, the ANC, which was leading the black struggle against the apartheid regime, saying it engaged in “calculated terror … the mining of roads, the bombings of public places, designed to bring about further repression.”

There’s long been speculation that the CIA played a key role in Mandela’s capture and imprisonment, but more and more details are still being proven, also as three-decade old intelligence files come up for periodic declassifications. He was South Africa’s first black head of state starting in 1994, and died in 2013 at the age of 95.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 05:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/t3DHSN6 Tyler Durden

Waco Offers New Insights From ATF Agents


BOOK1

Waco: David Koresh, the Branch Davidians, and a Legacy of Rage, by Jeff Guinn, Simon & Schuster, 400 pages, $29.99

Jeff Guinn is a good popular historian. That is not intended as faint praise: He takes interesting topics of real cultural importance—Jonestown, Bonnie and Clyde, Charles Manson—and writes credible and well-researched accounts of them. His new, very readable book on the Waco affair of 1993 is no exception.

As we mark the siege’s 30th anniversary, Waco: David Koresh, the Branch Davidians, and a Legacy of Rage is an essential addition to any collection of books addressing that incident, and it is particularly good on the workings of federal law enforcement. That still leaves room to debate whether Guinn situates the whole affair properly in the context of the time.

The basic story is well known, although virtually every word in any summary would be contested by at least some commentators. In February 1993, agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) launched a massive raid on the “compound” of an apocalyptic-minded sect called the Branch Davidians, who were based at the Mount Carmel Center near Waco, Texas. The Davidians resisted the assault and effectively drove off the federal agents, who were promptly replaced by the FBI. A siege lasted until April 19, when the FBI stormed the Davidian residence. A fire broke out in the building. It is heavily disputed whether those flames arose from a Davidian desire for mass suicide or from the unintentional effects of the gas canisters used by the federal agents.

In all, 82 Davidians, mainly women and children, died during the whole encounter, as did four ATF agents. Depending on one’s perspective, this was an appalling case of mass cult suicide, a hideous massacre of a peaceful minority religious sect, or a screaming example of bureaucratic incompetence and miscommunication on an epic scale.

Adding to the long-familiar account, Guinn offers some significant new material, especially from ATF personnel involved in the disastrous first assault on Mount Carmel. That ATF side of the story constitutes about a third of the finished book. This is important because most accounts pass rapidly over the initial ATF fiasco before focusing on a day-by-day narrative of the lengthy FBI involvement.

Guinn gives the reader an excellent sense of what it must have felt like being in the ATF ranks during this operation, and we observe the evolving mess in something like real time. We witness the decision making process, with all its flaws. We come to understand that the ATF had a vital political agenda in generating dramatic media coverage of a heroic assault on a cult/terrorist/gunrunning/drug making fortress of evil (feel free to choose your rationale). Basically, the agency was facing yet another attempt to close it down and merge it with some other federal office, and it had to justify its existence. Footage of shackled cultists and seized weaponry would serve that purpose well.

Two basic questions emerge at this stage of the incident. The first involves the necessity for a military assault. The Mount Carmel “cultists” had excellent relations with local Texas law enforcement, and the group almost certainly would have been open to a straightforward warrant search for the rumored drugs, illicitly adapted guns, or other contraband, none of which actually existed. (“Nothing like that here, officer! Care for some ice cream?”) Horrified Davidians made desperate phone calls to the local sheriff’s office during the ATF onslaught, seeking urgent assistance against what arguably was an illegal federal use of armed force.

It is equally baffling why the ATF agents proceeded with the attack when they knew that the Davidians were forewarned. If nothing else, Guinn’s Waco supplies a valuable contribution to the burgeoning literature on military and paramilitary blunders.

Guinn does not say much about the cultural context of the era, but that would have been helpful. The 1980s and early ’90s were marked by a number of raging social and moral panics in the United States, variously involving drug syndicates and evil cults. In 1993, for example, we were at the height of the panic over Satanic ritual abuse, so any invocation of words like cult and compound automatically carried a very rich freight for the average news consumer.

No less important, for a television audience thoroughly immersed in images of Jonestown and poisoned Kool-Aid, the language of cults offered a powerful hint of potential mass suicide. Those expectations proved useful in the aftermath of the catastrophic fire. The Justice Department plunged wholeheartedly into generating and defending the suicide interpretation, to the exclusion of any other view.

Guinn himself presents several possible readings of the final outcome, but he clearly leans toward some form of the suicide theory, which I personally find untenable. Reasonably, he stays away from the florid range of conspiracy literature surrounding the disaster, but he might have paid more attention to William Gazecki’s 1997 documentary Waco: The Rules of Engagement. It makes a convincing case that rash FBI actions caused the fire, however unintentionally.

That film is also very good on the FBI besiegers’ macho and militaristic attitudes and their unconcealed desire to get revenge for the insults that the Davidians had inflicted on fellow federal agents. If something like the Waco siege happened today, we would be much more likely to hear it framed in terms of police brutality and racial oppression, and indeed of Black Lives Mattering. Many of the Davidian “cultists” who perished were black. The group tried to present this element of the story to the wider world by prominently flying a banner proclaiming “Rodney King, We Understand!” At the time, that racial angle attracted virtually no notice in news coverage.

The press’s role is critical to understanding the Waco story, and Guinn really could have said more here. Television and print media alike enthusiastically pushed those images of ruthless cult fanaticism, which offered a cultural framing that supported the government’s grimmest and most diabolical interpretations of the episode. Notably absent from such accounts were any criticisms of the federal agencies. While such media analysis does not fit Guinn’s narrative purposes, they really are vital to understanding the politics of the story as it developed.

In the immediate aftermath of the first shootout, Time offered a double image of Davidian leader David Koresh (“whose heavily armed sect gunned down federal agents”) alongside Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Al Qaeda–linked leader of the first World Trade Center attack, which had occurred only two days before. Time averred that both men showed what went wrong “when believers embrace the dark side of faith.” These themes were reinforced two weeks later, when an anti-abortion activist murdered a doctor who performed abortions in Pensacola, Florida.

In its various forms, it seemed, religious fanaticism was rampant in the United States. Still more potent visuals followed the final April fire. Time‘s shocking cover was frankly propagandistic. It featured a laughing Koresh superimposed on the burning compound and included a biblical subhead: “His name was Death, and Hell followed with him.” People, another mass-circulation magazine, reported from “Inside the Waco Cult,” with its “Evil Messiah,” a pedophile who led his fanatical disciples to tragedy. Cartoons depicted Koresh alongside Abdel-Rahman and (inevitably) with a ghostly Jim Jones, who offers Koresh a Kool-Aid. The uncritical acceptance of the mass suicide story made it all but impossible for critics of federal actions to make their case without being denounced as conspiracy nuts.

Guinn ends his book with a consideration of Waco’s contributions to driving the militia movement that became such a potent national force in the mid-1990s. He is undoubtedly correct on his basic point about the “legacy of rage,” but I would disagree with him about the genealogy of this phenomenon. As Guinn notes, Timothy McVeigh was appalled at news of the Waco fire, and two years later, to the day, he perpetrated the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. That linkage seems clear enough, but another view is possible.

Throughout the 1980s, multiple neo-Nazi and other far-right groups had been active in the United States, and McVeigh had contacts with several, including a group based at Oklahoma’s Elohim City. Another former resident of Elohim City was Richard Wayne Snell, who murdered a police officer and was executed on the very day of the Oklahoma bombing. Meanwhile, any suggested links between the Oklahoma City bombers and the rising militia movement are extremely slim, to the point of scarcely visible. But from a media perspective, the simple Waco/Oklahoma City/militia connection makes for a more dramatic narrative.

Anyone interested in the violent fringes of American religious history should read Guinn’s Waco. But they should be ready to range further for a fuller account.

The post <i>Waco</i> Offers New Insights From ATF Agents appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/jSPN1b0
via IFTTT

Watch: UK Queen Slams Censorship Of Literature As “Imposing Limits On Imagination”

Watch: UK Queen Slams Censorship Of Literature As “Imposing Limits On Imagination”

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

Camilla, the Queen consort of the United Kingdom, and wife of King Charles, has surprised some by urging authors and writers to resist censorship, amid an enhanced effort to edit and rewrite classic works of literature to remove anything deemed ‘offensive’.

Speaking at Clarence House in London last week, Camilla said “thank you, on behalf of book lovers and book clubs everywhere, for sharing your talents with us and for everything you do to promote literacy and a love of literature.”

Camilla has launched a new charity, The Queen’s Reading Room, aimed at promoting “the appreciation of literature among adults and children”.

Addressing authors directly, she added “Please keep doing so and please remain true to your calling, unimpeded by those who may wish to curb the freedom of your expression or impose limits on your imagination. Enough said!”

Camilla continued, “let there be no squeaking like mice about your achievements, but only roaring like a pride of lions.”

Watch:

As we have highlighted, this all stems from an ongoing move to have ‘sensitivity readers’ highlight and purge anything that is deemed ‘offensive’ from classic literature.

Both Roald Dahl and Ian Flemming’s estates appear to have okayed this.

Digital Versions of Roald Dahl’s Books Already Updated to Include “Sensitivity” Changes

Report: James Bond Books Being Rewritten To Remove ‘Racist And Sexist’ Remarks

Imagine taking everything non-woke out of James Bond. What will be left over?

In the most ironic of twists, George Orwell’s 1984 has also been touted as a candidate to be rewritten:

*  *  *

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 05:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/KAFGQ5T Tyler Durden

Tesla’s Germany Plant Is Producing 4,000 Cars Per Week, Three Weeks Ahead Of Schedule

Tesla’s Germany Plant Is Producing 4,000 Cars Per Week, Three Weeks Ahead Of Schedule

If Tesla’s new plant in Germany is any indication, not only is demand not a problem, but the company is moving along efficiently and firing on all cylinders. 

The company’s new plant in Brandenburg has reportedly “reached an output of 4,000 cars per week”, according to Bloomberg this week. The milestone is three weeks ahead of planned schedule for the new production facility, according to a production plan Bloomberg reviewed. 

Volume from the new plant amounts to about a third of Tesla’s Model Y production in Shanghai. The company’s Model Y was the last new model to be released, in 2020. The Cybertruck is next, and deliveries might not begin until late 2023 or early 2024. 

We will also continue to look for more details as to whether or not Germany will be involved in producing Tesla’s new subcompact car, which we wrote about just hours ago. We noted that a corporate video released by Tesla for the opening of its new engineering headquarters in California might have leaked design drawings of its upcoming new electric compact car. 

The original idea for an affordable Tesla was announced by Elon Musk back in 2020:

“Tesla will make a compelling $25,000 electric vehicle that is also fully autonomous,” Elon Musk said at the time. 

After an ugly start to the 2023 campaign, Tesla shares have now more than doubled off their lows this year. The company has seen price cuts spur demand in large markets like China, as well. We wrote in the beginning of February that the company’s China segment shipped 66,051 vehicles in January.

That figure was up 18% from December, while China’s new energy passenger vehicles, in total, were down 45% month over month from December to January. The company is now reportedly planning to increase output at its Shanghai plant – bringing its run rate back toward where it was in September 2022 – in order to continue meeting the demand from price cuts on its best selling models. 

We’ll continue to keep an eye on Germany as it spools up as well. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/28/2023 – 04:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/4vhnsJ7 Tyler Durden

Brickbat: Walk This Way


A screenshot of dash camera footage in which a sheriff's deputy approaches a bewildered pedestrian in the middle of the night.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) is looking into an incident in which a Paulding County sheriff’s deputy threw a man to the ground. Officials said Deputy Michael McMaster was investigating a report of someone breaking into cars. He saw Tyler Canaris walking nearby and thought he matched the description of the suspect. Dashcam video showed that McMaster immediately told Canaris to take his hands out of his pockets even though his hands weren’t in his pockets. Canaris, who said he was walking to work, asked what he had done wrong. McMaster responded by telling him to take off his backpack “before you go on the ground.” Canaris pleads his innocence but does not appear to resist. Still, McMaster lifted him up and slammed him to the road. Canaris was not charged with breaking into cars but was charged with obstruction. The incident happened in March 2022, but the sheriff’s office did not ask the GBI to investigate until the video was released recently.

The post Brickbat: Walk This Way appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/6GflbtO
via IFTTT