Month: July 2024

The last two years have seen a handful of regional Middle East countries reestablish official relations with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, after launching a decade-long proxy war against him. For example, in May 2023 he was welcomed to Saudi Arabia on an official visit for the first time since the war started, and given the red carpet treatment by the Saudi kingdom. And the UAE is among those which have reopened an embassy in Damascus after nearly 13 years of severed ties.

But the West, led by the US and UK, have still waged a maximum pressure campaign against the Syrian state after Assad emerged victorious in the war which sought to topple him. This has included greatly ratcheted sanctions, especially on energy imports, which has decimated the economy and unleashed runaway inflation. 

Washington has meanwhile under multiple administrations tried to lobby foreign allies to stay the course in isolating Damascus and keeping up the sanctions, despite an occasional Iranian oil tanker offloading to Syria’s Mediterranean ports.

But the tide appears to be turning as a number of European countries, many in the EU and NATO, are increasingly acknowledging that Assad is ‘here to stay’ and thus they must work with Syria instead of warring against it.

A fresh report in Israel’s YNet News says “Foreign ministers from Italy, Cyprus, Slovenia, Slovakia, Austria, the Czech Republic, Greece and Croatia have drafted a position paper calling for a change in the European Union’s approach to Syria, namely lifting sanctions and renewing diplomatic ties with the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.”

“Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani and his counterparts argue that the EU’s humanitarian aid policy has failed,” the report underscores.

According to some key lines of the document submitted to EU High Representative Josep Borrell:

“After 13 years of war and EU aid, 90% of Syria’s population lives below the poverty line, and seven out of ten residents need humanitarian assistance.”

“Humanitarian aid alone is not enough. The EU must lift some sanctions against President Assad’s regime and engage in diplomatic relations with him. Over the past two years, this issue has been overshadowed by the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, but we must return to it.”

Longtime critics of the West’s drive for regime change have pointed out the years-long contradiction in policy: the EU allowed arms and ammo to be shipped into Syria (into the hands of anti-Assad jihadist insurgents), all while hand-wringing about the humanitarian and migrant crisis that resulted.

But increasingly these same powers are admitting that sanctions have only served to starve and compound the suffering for the common populace, and have in no way actually weakened the government’s grip on the country.

8 EU countries call for renewed ties with Assad regime to stem Syrian refugee tide

“EU’s policy has failed.”

“We must create a reality where residents have the will and interest to stay in Syria and return to it.”

“The EU must lift some sanctions against President Assad’s…

— Joshua Landis (@joshua_landis) July 25, 2024

In the oil and gas rich northeast of Syria, a US military occupation has persisted, which former President Trump has admitted was all about ‘stealing the oil.’ But the Biden administration has consistently said it has no plans to pull troops. Perhaps a future Trump administration might finally get the US out of Syria?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

Georgia’s State Security Service (SSS) informed the public that they’re investigating a criminal group linked to the former government which plotted to assassinate the founder of the ruling Georgian Dream party. According to RT, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze claimed that these are the same forces that were behind the attempted assassinations of his Slovak counterpart Robert Fico and former US President Donald Trump, while Politico cited local media to report that the Georgian Legion is under suspicion.

It was explained in early May why “The Georgian State Security Service & The Georgian Legion Are On The Brink Of War”, namely because that pro-US armed group can play a crucial role in catalyzing a spree of urban terrorism ahead of, during, or right after fall’s parliamentary elections. The preceding analysis followed the failed attempt by rioters to storm the parliament over a week prior in protest of their country’s FARA-inspired foreign agents legislation, which readers can learn more about here.

In brief, although the ruling conservative-nationalist party aspires to join the EU and NATO, it doesn’t want to surrender the country’s sovereignty to the West in exchange and that’s why it’s been targeted for regime change over the past year and a half. The replacement of Georgian Dream with Western puppets would lead to “NGO”-propagated liberal–globalist values destroying their traditional society, hence the need for the foreign agents law, but there are also geopolitical consequences too.

The authorities warned last year that the prior attempt to overthrow them was aimed at opening up a second front against Russia, while there’s also the chance that a puppet regime would allow Georgia to be used by NATO to send more armed aid to Armenia in preparation of another war against Azerbaijan. Georgian Dream wants to stay out of all regional conflicts, so much so that it hasn’t even sanctioned Russia, which is yet another argument against their continued rule from the West’s perspective.

Speaking of Russia, its foreign intelligence service released a statement in early July warning that the West is preparing to exploit fall’s parliamentary elections as the pretext for another regime change attempt, and it’s possible that they shared information about this with their Georgian counterparts. That could explain why the local media cited by Politico said that some Georgian Legion members have been detained for questioning, while their leader claimed that 300 others have been added to the wanted list.

Although comparatively small in number, this pro-US armed group could play a similar role in Tbilisi later this year as the Azov Battalion did in Kiev a little more than a decade ago during “EuroMaidan”, which was explained in the earlier hyperlinked analysis about why they’re on the brink of war with the SSS. The most effective “Democratic Security” policy that Georgian Dream can promulgate right now is banning the Georgian Legion as a terrorist group if the ongoing investigation ties them to the assassination plot.

Allowing them to continue operating inside the country with impunity would constitute an enormous risk to Georgia’s national model of democracy considering the likelihood that they’ll catalyze a spree of urban terrorism ahead of, during, or right after the upcoming elections at the US’ regime change behest. Cracking down on this group ahead of the vote would greatly neutralize their ability to disrupt the democratic process and make associated Hybrid War threats much more manageable for the authorities.

Aware that the window of opportunity for destabilizing their country might soon close, the Georgian Legion might desperately try to carry out a high-profile assassination attempt in the near future, even if it isn’t against the ruling party’s founder but someone else like the Prime Minister and they use a patsy instead of their own members. Everyone should therefore keep a very close eye on Georgia since it’s still a major New Cold War battleground given its geostrategic significance in the broader region’s dynamics.

 

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

For the past six months I’ve been writing about the clear uptick in civil war rhetoric within the establishment media in the US, and we all know that the coming presidential election is the reason for it. The bottom line is that no matter who ends up in the White House in 2025 there will be mass violence, but most of this violence will be reserved for the possibility of Donald Trump’s return.

Set aside the recent attempted assassination (and how the Secret Service made it possible) for a moment and let’s consider the common leftist response to it – Around 30% of Democrats believe the attack was “staged” (virtually impossible given the circumstances and evidence). The rest are enraged that the shooter missed. No event has exposed the political left for what they truly are more than the near-murder of Donald Trump. We are dealing with bloodthirsty mental deficients that will do anything to win.

The “false left/right paradigm” is dead, at least when it comes to average American citizens. The political left is not just an innocent subset of the population being led astray by false leadership – They are a big part of the problem. They are willing participants in the destruction of the west. Globalists would get nowhere on economic centralization, the DEI agenda, the trans agenda, carbon taxation, anti-2A legislation, open borders, etc. without help from a large portion of leftists.

I have long cautioned that the political left is slowly but surely becoming a happy cannon fodder army in service to globalism. And sadly, leftists tend to engage in warfare while conservatives tend to engage in politics. Leftists use any means necessary and feel thoroughly justified. Conservatives color within the lines for fear of being accused of “fascism.” We don’t have to abandon our moral compass, but the sooner we realize that war is being waged on us the sooner we can defend ourselves against it.

As we have seen in Europe (in France the past month), any perceived shift towards conservative influence in government will undoubtedly result in riots and chicanery from socialists. The media has so infected the minds of progressives that they truly believe they are the “good guys” and that conservatives intend to “end democracy.” Thus, in their view all violence or sabotage against conservatives (and independents) is justified.

In the long run the left’s violence and hysteria is only inspiring conservatives to respond with aggression in kind. This is where the potential for civil conflict arises. Leftists argue that only they are virtuous enough to be allowed to dictate policy and law. Yet, their ideology also embraces moral relativism, so you can see where this thing is headed…

They will continue to press for the erosion of western heritage and principles and, eventually, regular people are going to fight back; they have no choice. Leftists and globalists expect resistance, to a point. I believe part of their strategy is a classic communist provocation; for patriots to react with violence thereby giving the establishment fuel for a demonization campaign (much like January 6th). It’s not going to go the way they think it will next time and the response will be far larger and more swift than they anticipate.

Meanwhile, if Trump enters office again the rioting America dealt with in 2020 will be a cakewalk compared to 2025.

Progressives claim they are “protecting democracy” but you will see very quickly that as soon as democracy doesn’t go their way they will abandon it in a heartbeat and seek to prevail using other methods.

This means a campaign of “monkey wrenching” followed by riots, looting and disruptions in major cities.

One rising trend that should have all business owners and preppers on alert is the use of social media apps to coordinate seemingly spontaneous riots. These events can be organized within hours, encouraging some of the worst people to congregate and strike a business block without ever meeting each other before. What I worry about is that these methods will expand beyond business districts and local government buildings.

Travel routes will come under threat, freight could be targeted and we may even see looters and rioters move into residential areas further away from the city center. Supply chain issues will surely arise. At the very least there will be concerns among freight drivers that they are taking a risk carrying truckloads of goods into places where they could be surrounded by an angry mob and hijacked (or worse).

Large scale crime in general is bad for the economy. As we’ve witnessed in cities like Chicago and San Francisco, unchecked crime forces companies to move out of a region and leave those places barren. They call it a “food desert” – A place where tens of thousands of people have no close access to groceries or retail goods. Looting and rioting are an accelerating catalyst for this scenario. Once stores are looted or burned, they may never try to rebuild.

What I am describing is a much larger number of incidents with a longer duration than 2020. I’m talking about prolonged civil unrest and I predict this will become the norm going into next year. Don’t count on the government to provide sufficient aid. Don’t count on FEMA rations or a national guard response that does anything other than exacerbate the problem. Don’t rely on outside help – You’ll regret it.

There are different levels of civil unrest. Sometimes it starts as a less malicious redress of grievances, but often it becomes a vehicle for random destruction. The best way to counter indiscriminate violence is with directed and focused self defense, along with the proper supplies to keep you going until things calm down.

Also, don’t think just because you live in the suburbs or a rural town that these threats don’t concern you. In Argentina during their economic collapse in 2001, gangs of looters stalked rural areas with impunity while cities ground to a standstill. Once the cities are hollowed out, where do you think the worst people will go next?

In the US we have similar circumstances to Argentina in which economic crisis has the ability to feed directly into preexisting divisions. Politically motivated bad actors could be inspired to sabotage normal services in the face of limited law enforcement opposition. There are people who will do anything to get their way.

Organize accordingly and keep your own supplies ready. There are plenty of people out there that think they are owed something. They think they are owed a political win, or social power, or maybe they just think they’re owed access to other people’s stuff.

Right now the US is a powderkeg waiting to go off and the coming election period will be the fuse.

* * *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

In 1983, one-in-five American adults (20%) were in a union. By 2023, only one-in-ten (10%) were in a union, a record low for the country. However, there are still some industries that see rates of union membership that are on the higher end of the spectrum.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao, shows the rate of union membership of those employed per industry in America.

Data for this graphic is sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for 2023.

Government Workers are Often in Unions

Two out of five local government employees are in a union, the highest rate across American industries, as classified by the BLS.

A significant portion of these employees are police officers, as protective services have some of the highest union rates (32%) by occupation.

*Excluding the internet. Figures rounded.

Meanwhile, the utilities sector (energy, water supply, sewage removal) has the highest union membership in the private sector (20%) though this works out to about 200,000 members.

About 16% of the transport and warehousing industry—one million strong—belongs to a union. Since 2022, workers at Amazon warehouses in particular have organized into the Amazon Labor Union to protest unsafe working conditions.

Across the top 10 sectors by union membership rate, union employees out-earn non-union employees in eight of them. The wage difference is most noticeable in film & sound jobs, where a union employee makes nearly $1,000 dollars more per week.

*Excluding the internet. Figures rounded. Wage data available here.

On the other end of the scale, professional jobs—accounting, legal, tech, and finance—have the lowest rates of union membership (1%). And in them, non-union members out-earn their union peers.

If you liked this article, check out Visualizing the American Workforce as 100 People for quick insight into the most common jobs people work at.

Authored by Brett Wilkins via Common Dreams,

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir endorsed former U.S. President Donald Trump—the 2024 Republican nominee—for the White House in an interview published Wednesday in which he accused the Biden administration of preventing Israel from winning its war in Gaza.

“I believe that with Trump, Israel will receive the backing to act against Iran,” Ben-Gvir, who heads the far-right Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party, told Bloomberg. “With Trump, it will be clearer that enemies must be defeated.”

“A cabinet minister is supposed to maintain neutrality,” the 48-year-old minister conceded, “but that’s impossible to do after [U.S. President Joe] Biden.”

“The U.S. has always stood behind Israel in terms of armaments and weapons, yet this time the sense was that we were being reckoned with—that we were trying to be prevented from winning. That happened on Biden’s watch and fed Hamas with lots of energy,” added Ben-Gvir, who was convicted in 2007 of incitement to racism after he advocated the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

While Biden, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and other administration officials have decried Israel’s often indiscriminate bombing of Gaza and high civilian casualties—at least 140,000 Palestinians killed, injured, or missing, according to local and international agencies—the U.S. has approved billions of dollars in new military aid and more than 100 arms sales to Israel since October.

During his White House tenure, Trump—who boasted that he “fought for Israel like no president ever before”—moved the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and brokered the Abraham Accords between Israel and Arab nations Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and the United Arab Emirates.

Trump has said that Israel should “get the job done” in Gaza, while criticizing the Israel Defense Forces for posting videos showing its obliteration of the embattled Palestinian enclave.

“I don’t know why they released wartime shots like that. I guess it makes them look tough. But to me, it doesn’t make them look tough,” Trump said in April. “They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

While Trump says he wants a deal with Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons, as president he unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—also known as the Iran nuclear deal—and oversaw a “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran featuring deadly economic sanctions.

On the advice of Iran hawks in his administration including then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Trump also ordered the January 2020 assassination of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qasem Soleimani in Iraq.

Ben-Gvir’s interview was published as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was set to address a joint meeting of U.S. Congress Wednesday in Washington, D.C. A growing number of Democratic lawmakers have called for not only a cease-fire in Gaza but also a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel, whose conduct in the war is on trial for genocide at the International Court of Justice.

“She’s running away from Israel. She refuses to go to -Bibi Netanyahu is in Washington. She refuses to do that. Even if you’re against Israel or you’re against the Jewish people show up and listen to the concept. But she’s totally against Jewish people”

– Trump on Kamala Harris pic.twitter.com/uUjjCXy3Fg

— Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) July 25, 2024

Dozens of Democratic lawmakers and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont skipped Netanyahu’s Wednesday’s speech. Vice President Kamala Harris, who is also the Senate president, did not preside over Wednesday’s session. Harris, who is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee in the wake of Biden’s withdrawal from the race on Sunday, said she will meet privately with Netanyahu on Thursday.

Echoing calls from groups including CodePink and the Council on American Islamic Relations, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said this week that the prime minister should be arrested for war crimes and genocide.

Karim Khan, the International Criminal Court prosecutor, has applied for arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and three Hamas leaders for alleged war crimes including extermination committed on and after October 7.

Authored by Brian Maher via DailyReckoning.com,

Why does government lie so repeatedly — and so atrociously?

Why does it fear truth as the vampire fears garlic?

The answer, we hazard, reduces to its desperate quest for prestige.

Government equals authority. And an authority is an authority.

Its word must be the final word. Its word must be the ultimate word.

A supreme authority cannot withstand rivals — else its authority falls into question.

It cannot endure mockery, ridicule or derision.

And if its undeniable incompetence is exposed, its back goes up… and its dukes go up.

Consider for example Monday’s congressional testimony of a certain Kimberly Cheatle…

The Greatest Sin Against Government

Ms. Cheatle directed the United States Secret Service when an aspiring assassin made a mockery of the lady’s organization.

How can a murderous fellow scale a low rooftop with a rifle — some 140 yards from a former and potentially future United States president — and let eight projectiles loose — before being scotched?

Here he was… placing his thumbs in his ears… wiggling his fingers… and putting out his tongue at Ms. Cheatle and the organization she bosses.

And in the private opinion of Ms. Cheatle, that is the highest sin. It is not act itself.

Is greater professional incompetence scarcely conceivable? We do not believe it is.

“It’s an Ongoing Investigation”

Yet the lady donned her armor, barricaded herself within fortress walls and deflected all questions concerning her agency’s abominations.

She could not answer this question or that question because it is an “ongoing investigation.”

“Was July 13 a Saturday, madam?”

“It’s an ongoing investigation.”

“What time did the attempted assassination take place? What was the local temperature?”

“It’s an ongoing investigation.”

“What color blazer was the former president Trump sporting?”

“It’s an ongoing investigation.”

“In which hemisphere of Earth did the incident occur?”

“It’s an ongoing investigation.”

“What color is the sky?”

“It’s an ongoing investigation.”

Governing Means Never Saying You’re Sorry

Could the lady openly and candidly concede her organization’s botchwork? What government functionary ever does?

Imagine her arguing, for example, that her sniper may have failed to shoot first because his scope was trained not on the rooftop — but on the fetching young lady in the third row with the cropped top and the shortest shorts.

Imagine her arguing that the 5’4” female agent lacked the height to cover adequately her 6’3” protectee.

Furthermore, that the identical female agent was admitted to the United States Secret Service on a sliding scale — that she did not satisfy the physical standards required of men.

Imagine her conceding that her personnel were snoozing on the job.

Have you imagined these potentialities? Then you have imagined impossibilities.

Ms. Cheatle would never concede any of them even if true.

That is because she fears for her (former) agency’s prestige.

The Bigger the Organization, the Bigger the Lies

“Why are you stating the obvious?” comes your retort.

“Every organization, from the smallest business concern to the largest business concern, from any local government to the federal government, fears for its prestige.

“No organization wants to be publicly embarrassed.”

You are of course correct.

Yet the larger the organization, the larger its scope. Thus the greater number of lies — and scale of lies — it must tell to cling to its prestige.

Imagine you are the proprietor of a local business concern.

You quake in fear of the competition. And you are hot to scotch it.

Imagine the lengths to which you proceed… the fibs you tell… to defend and expand your localized little empire.

What misdemeanor — indeed, what felony — wouldn’t you execute if it advantaged you?

Yet your enterprise maintains a very constricted reach. It represents a nearly absolute insignificance to the world beyond.

Who cares if you claim to be the most superior plumber in Springfield when you manifestly are not?

A Local Government Can Manage Its Lies

Next imagine that you are not a business concern. You are instead a local government concern.

You are its mayor.

You must tell your lies to glitter before your captives, your residents.

The business may be difficult at times — yet it is manageable.

You must lie about the efficiency of the Motor Vehicle Department or the Highway Department, for example.

You must lie about the bribes you have accepted. You may therefore maintain your prestige.

Yet the scope of your lies is contained with your narrow borders.

A nation — a normal nation — must likewise tell its lies to hold up its prestige.

It may be difficult at times. Yet if the nation is reasonably sized and has little ambition, it is, again, possible.

In highest contrast stands the government of the United States…

The Burden of Maintaining Global Prestige

This is an empire that exerts dominion over each individual, over each local municipality, over each state municipality within these shores — from oceans Atlantic and Pacific, from the border with Mexico to the border with Canada.

Imagine the impossibility of managing such a vast space.

The United States government manages the job very poorly.

Yet by its nature it must maintain its prestige among the American people. It must therefore inform you that it performs the job very well.

It will stare you in the eyes… and lie to you… even if it knows that you know it is lying to you.

Yet the United States is the world’s reigning kingpin, its dominant power.

Its wingspan therefore covers the entirety of planet Earth. Does a single sparrow fall outside its awareness?

Imagine — then — the lies it must tell to maintain its prestige among all the nations of Earth…

Lies of Commission and Omission

Who detonated the Nord Stream pipeline transmitting natural gas from the Russian Federation to the German republic?

The answers reduce to the United States itself, one of its European allies or the nation of Ukraine.

Do you believe the United States government is unaware of the answer?

Yet imagine the catastrophic damage to its reputation if it revealed the answer.

It would concede that the United States itself executed the largest act of environmental sabotage in all of history — and heavily wrecked the economy of its central NATO ally — or that another NATO ally did the deed.

Or that the nation it stands impassionedly behind, Ukraine, did the deed.

It must therefore shrug its shoulders in befuddlement or inform you that Russia blew holes in its own pipeline.

It is a lie of omission or a lie of commission.

We’re the Good Guys Here

Imagine if the United States government conceded that Russia’s unprovoked aggression was very much provoked?

And that it was the saboteur of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine that would have ceased the bloodletting one month after it commenced.

Public support for the Ukrainian cause — in the United States and abroad — would collapse in a heap.

United States government prestige would absorb a fatal blow.

It must therefore babble lies.

It must tell you that Mr. Putin’s aggression was not provoked. It must inform you that he will be at the English Channel within no time if he is not heaved out of Ukraine.

It must inform you that it is battling on behalf of democracy.

From the Middle East to East Asia, from South America to Africa, the identical dynamic obtains.

If the Antarctic continent were sufficiently populated, it would extend there too.

Empire of Lies

Our co-founders Bill Bonner and Addison Wiggin once labeled the United States an empire of debt.

It is an empire of debt, yes. It is certainly an empire in debt.

Yet in the more fundamental sense it is an empire of lies.

The emperor in charge of it is presently being exposed — he is well and truly nude before a gaping world.

Yet this emperor will never concede his nudity…

Authored by Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner via Wirepoints.org,

One of the most damaging impacts of Illinois’ people loss to other states is the destruction of Illinois’ tax base. When people leave in a given year, they take their incomes (adjusted gross incomes, or AGI) with them, and that means the state’s tax base suffers. 

A smaller tax base, everything else equal, means less tax revenues for safety, education, road repair and every other core government service – or, as is typically the case in Illinois, more debts and more tax hikes.

Unfortunately, Illinois’ out-migration problem is much bigger than just a one year loss: the state has lost people and AGI every single year since at least 2000, the first year of Wirepoints’ out-migration analysis. The AGI losses pile up on top of each other year after year, slashing Illinois’ tax revenue growth and destroying Illinois’ overall prosperity. 

In all, the cumulative impact of out-migration for the last 23 years means the state budget lost out on about $3.6 billion in income tax revenue in 2022 alone. (Said another way, had Illinois not lost all those people over the last 23 years, the state would have had $3.6 billion more in income tax revenues in 2022 alone.)

The revenue losses for 2022 are even bigger when you take into account all the other revenues foregone – sales taxes, gas taxes, fees, etc. – due to the loss of taxpayers.

Thanks to the state’s failed spending and pension policies, Illinoisans are paying the price.

A breakdown of the numbers

The latest 2021-2022 migration data from the IRS shows Illinois reported $9.8 billion in lost adjusted gross income as a result of losing a net 87,000 residents to other states. Read our full report here.

That $9.8 billion in AGI, after taking into account exemptions of $1.6 billion*, could have become $400 million in income taxes for the state (calculated at 4.95%). That in itself is a significant amount of lost income tax revenues.

But the cumulative impact of the AGI losses are much more dramatic. Let’s build out how state’s 2022’s income tax revenues were impacted by the cumulative AGI losses since 2000.

In 2000, Illinois suffered a net loss of $2 billion in AGI as a result of outmigration, meaning the state lost out on being able to tax $2 billion that year.

The next year, 2001, Illinois lost another $2.3 billion in AGI due to outmigration. Pile on top of that the $2 billion in AGI lost in 2000 and, overall, the state lost out on being able to tax a cumulative $4.3 billion in AGI in 2001.

In 2003, Illinois lost another $2 billion in AGI, putting the cumulative AGI losses for that year at $6.3 billion. 

You get the picture. When Illinois loses a taxpayer, his income isn’t just lost for tax that year. It’s lost for every subsequent year, as well. 

So when you carry the above exercise all the way through to 2022, it totals nearly $88 billion in AGI that the state couldn’t tax in 2022 because of all the cumulative losses. Subtract exemptions*, and it results in about $74 billion in net income. Multiply that by Illinois’ 4.95% flat tax and you get $3.6 billion in income tax revenues the state could have had in 2022 alone if Illinois had not bled residents for 23 years.

The same tax-revenue-loss calculations can be done for all prior years.

In all, Illinois has lost – counting every single year’s cumulative loss – $700 billion in AGI, that it could have taxed over the entire 2000-202 period. It’s one of the big reasons Illinois is in such a fiscal mess and why it has the worst credit rating of any state in the country.

The positive impact of in-migration

The opposite of what’s happened to Illinois is true for the nation’s big winner of people and their incomes: Florida. 

Gains in people and income pile on top of each other each year, building an ever-growing tax base. In 2022 alone, the state’s tax base was some $272 billion higher compared to 2000 because of the state’s 23 straight years of net in-migration.

And while the state of Florida doesn’t directly take advantage of that income because it doesn’t have an income tax, it’s understandable why the government is swimming in cash when you take into account all the other tax revenues – sales, gas, fees, etc. – that the state’s growing number of taxpayers pay.

In all, Florida has gained– counting every single year’s cumulative gain – $2.14 trillion in AGI, that it could have taxed over the entire 2000-2022 period.

Reversing the flow

More than anything, Illinois’ lost revenues represent the fundamental crisis this state faces because of chronic out-migration. 

Illinois is stuck in a vicious downward spiral it can’t hope to escape from without fundamentally changing how it governs.

Authored by Richard Trzupek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A group of recent rulings by the Supreme Court have led some to speculate that SCOTUS has opened the path to anarchy within the justice system, particularly in those cases that involve environmental regulation. I don’t believe that chaos is imminent—far from it—and will endeavor to make the case that SCOTUS has been reasonable within a Constitutional context.

For simplicity’s sake, we’ll stick to the two most important decisions: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Loper Bright) and Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Corner Post).

Loper Bright did away with the “Chevron Doctrine” that directed the judiciary to defer to public sector experts when confronted with difficult and/or seemingly ambiguous technicalities involving statutes and regulations. Corner Post moved the bar on the six-year statute of limitations that applies when a plaintiff asserts that a particular statute or regulation causes the plaintiff to suffer undue financial (or other) harm. The court held that the six-year window does not open when the statute or regulation is enacted or promulgated, but when the plaintiff first feels the effect of the onerous action.

Taken together, one could—and many have—made the argument that Loper Bright opens the door for private sector plaintiffs to effectively push forward frivolous and downright harmful legal actions by employing legions of impressive, but entirely prejudiced, experts. The potential mass of such lawsuits could cripple the judicial system by clogging its otherwise efficient pipes. Corner Post then exacerbates the problem by allowing those in the private sector determined to do so within a far wider window of opportunity within which to dispute legislation and regulation.

While I understand the arguments, I can’t agree with them in substance, or especially in tone. Loper Bright and Corner Post are not earth-shaking decisions that would score far over a “four” on the Richter Scale of American politics. They are rather gentle tremors that reflect a healthy, but not shocking, adjustment of the public versus private sector balance. My reasoning, based on 40 years of representing the private sector in interactions with the public sector, chiefly in matters involving environmental regulation:

1. The number of companies and trade groups who have both the motivation and the resources to flood the system is as near zero as one could imagine. Industry is going to go to court only if they perceive that doing so will: (1) ultimately be substantially profitable, (2) the likelihood of winning is great, and (3) doing so would not generate a significant amount of bad PR. I don’t believe there are many federal regulations or policies that will meet all three criteria.
2. Rules and policies that have resulted in large capital expenditures are unlikely to be targets for further action. That capital is sunk and, in most every instance, the operational and maintenance costs to run controls, run monitoring systems, manage records, etc. is negligible in the scheme of things.
3. For most industries, it is the local permitting authority (state agency, district, county, or municipality) that has the biggest impact—by far—on the nature of the relationship between the regulators and the regulatory community. They are the day-to-day enforcement arm. They process the permit applications and set permit conditions. The Environmental Protection Agency’s primary role in the system is oversight, not operations.
4. Finally, I continue to believe that the net effect of Loper Bright, Corner Post, et al., will be much more about negotiation than adjudication. I often work with environmental attorneys on enforcement actions directed against a particular industrial facility. There have been many times where I convinced both counsel and his client that the permitting authority had made substantial scientific errors in developing their allegations, but the attorney declined to use this knowledge. The Chevron Doctrine was like a storm cloud hanging over those decisions. With the sun once again shining equally on all sides, I believe that industry will be more emboldened to take on questionable permitting and enforcement actions going forward. Knowing that their experts no longer possess the gift of infallibility, permitting authorities may also be a bit more moved to stay longer at the bargaining before heading for court.

In my view, Loper Bright, Corner Post, et al. have restored a bit more badly needed balance between public and private interests in America, and have done so in a manner consistent with the language and intent of our Constitution.

These decisions do not represent a massive, dangerous sell-out to the private sector, nor are they an angry rebuke of the public sector and some of its policies. They rather represent what appears to be the Roberts court’s continuing effort to steer judicial accountability back toward the middle.

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

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

In March 2020, all the major Democratic primary candidates abruptly, mysteriously, and in near unison withdrew from the presidential race, ceding the nomination to Joe Biden.

Yet Biden had lost the first three races in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada—and only won his first victory in South Carolina.

Suddenly, on the eve of the Super Tuesday mega-primaries, the candidacies of front-runner Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and others simply evaporated.

The fear of a front-runner Sanders’ socialist victory and nomination—and thus an enviable landslide loss to incumbent Donald Trump in the general election—had prompted the donor class and shadowy political insiders to act.

And they did so by choosing a perceived moderate, old Joe Biden from Scranton.

That required the coerced departures of all his far-left rivals, who had hitherto performed much better than Biden in the primaries.

Now front-runner Biden still displayed obvious symptoms of serious cognitive decline that had only seemed to mount through the 2020 campaign.

And his dementia continued to accelerate during his first three years as president.

Biden had deceitfully promised to conduct a healing campaign and a unifying presidency. But once in the White House, his extreme agendas proved the most divisive and far-left in nearly a century.

Rumors of that prior March 2020 Faustian bargain emerged.

The Bidens got to serve as useful moderate veneers. So, they enjoyed the ceremonial functions of the presidency while outsourcing the real operations to former Obama officials, consultants, and advisors.

Indeed, Obama did not, as most ex-presidents do, exit Washington upon leaving the White House. Instead, he bought a mansion and stayed close by.

Democrats demonized anyone critical of Biden’s obvious mental decline. Their smearing crested during Biden’s now-aborted 2024 reelection bid, even as Biden could no longer display even a veneer of mental and physical engagement.

Polls revealed an impending Trump landslide victory in November—and a massive Democratic loss of Congress.

So suddenly on a Sunday, July 21—just days left before state ballots were formalized with the names of the parties’ official nominees, and on the eve of the Democratic convention—party bosses, mega-donors, and Obama puppeteers went into action for yet a third time.

They reportedly threatened candidate Biden with a complete loss of any further campaign funding and raised the specter of invoking the 25th Amendment to end his presidency—should he not suddenly withdraw from the race and endorse Vice President Kamala Harris as his surrogate on the ticket.

In one moment, the choices of nearly 15 million Biden primary voters were vitiated.

No delegates were consulted. No other alternative Democrat candidates were even considered.

Biden was dethroned; Harris was coronated – without much public input or even knowledge of how or why.

Democrat grandees stopped smearing Biden’s conservative critics, who had worried over his dementia. Instead, they now trumped opposition criticism of Biden’s decline.

Yet Biden most certainly did not resign his presidency. Instead, he promised to serve out his remaining six months in office.

So Democrat insiders not only removed their leading candidate, who for the prior six months had won all the 2024 primaries and almost all the delegates, but insisted that Biden keep Democrats and himself in power—but only if he agreed to quit the race.

In sum, at the 11th hour of a two-year reelection effort, a cabal arbitrarily decided that Joe Biden might well lose the Democrats the White House and the Congress.

So, they reversed course, now claiming his dementia was so acute as to destroy their November prospects. But mysteriously, his decline was not severe enough to imperil the American people, whom Biden must continue to lead until January 20, 2025.

Furthermore, the bosses’ replacement choice, Vice President Kamala Harris, had entered no primary. She never won a single delegate. Harris also never captured a single delegate in her first and only presidential run back in 2020. She then dropped out of the race even before the first Iowa and New Hampshire balloting.

We have now witnessed three left-wing veritable coups.

1. In 2020, covert actors decided to ossify the Democratic primary races.  Next, they conferred the nomination on a clearly cognitively challenged Joe Biden.  He was now tasked with serving as a useful moderate vessel for a virtual, even more radical, Obama third term.

2. The same operators next assumed virtual control of Biden’s presidential agenda, given his accelerating cognitive decline. When that charade could no longer be sustained, for a third time, they circumvented the normal transparent democratic process.

3. So, they removed the once useful but now a liability Biden—while insisting that he was still fit enough to keep the left in power—until the anticipated Harris victory in November.

And all of this was the shadow work of those who sanctimoniously lectured America that “democracy dies in darkness.”

KC Fed survey joined yesterday’s Regional Fed surveys in the doldrums (as did today’s plunge in durable goods orders) but of course, all eyes were sternly focused on Q2 GDP’s beat.

That ‘good news’ sparked a hawkish shift lower in rate-cut expectations…

Source: Bloomberg

The Nasdaq lagged..again.. with Small Caps ripping higher. The S&P ended red again with The Dow clinging to gains…

Nasdaq has underperformed Russell 2000 for 11 of the last 12 days, erasing YTD outperformance for the big-tech index

Source: Bloomberg

This is the biggest relative underperformance of the Nasdaq vs Russell 2000 since the peak of the dotcom boom…

Source: Bloomberg

Small Caps were helped by a massive (almost 5%) short-squeeze today…

Source: Bloomberg

Mag7 stocks ended lower but bounced back off the initial puke…

Source: Bloomberg

The S&P 500 found support almost perfectly at its 50DMA (5433), bounced, then fell back below it again…

Nasdaq also bounced off its 100DMA yesterday, and faded back towards it today…

Goldman Sachs trading desk noted that they saw the first buy-skew in a few days with our floor tilting +3% net to buy. Volumes tracking +25% vs the trailing 20days and ETFs capturing 30% of the overall tape.

• LOs buying Fins + Cons Discretionary vs selling Tech and Hcare though much less risk-off than yday. Yesterday’s sell off was mostly asset managers and today we are back to a true blend. 

• HFs buying Tech, Discretionary, and Hcare vs selling Fins + Industrials. Interesting to note liquidity continues to be poor, tracking -30% vs the trailing 20 days.

Equity risk is back up at its highest since April, but bond vol remains muted… for now…

“It does seem that an unwinding has begun of popular trades that brought valuations to stupid levels,” Louis-Vincent Gave, chief executive officer of Gavekal Research, wrote in a note to clients.

Mixed day for bonds with the short-end underperforming (2Y +1bps, 30Y -5bps) reversing some of the recent very aggressive steepening of the curve…

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar chopped around like a penny stock today…

Source: Bloomberg

Gold was hit again, finding support at $2350…

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin slipped lower, finding support at around $64,000…

Source: Bloomberg

But ETH dramatically lagged BTC, erasing most of the post-May ‘buy the ETF rumor’ gains…

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices bounced back to unchanged on the week…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, there’s more room to run. SPX: over the last ~100 years, median year has a SPX peak to trough drawdown of 13%. Believe it or not only been 4% which a typical drawdown taking us to 4900…

NDX: median drawdown is 16% or around another 9% from here based on last 40 calendar years – would put you at the ~1700 level…

But hey, we bounced today, so everything is awesome, right?