Month: July 2024

Open-border advocates love to tell you that “diversity is our strength.” Unfortunately, illegal immigrants flooding into the United States are diversifying the criminal threats Americans face on city streets, exposing them to a tactic widely used across Latin America but rarely seen here — until now. 

Latin Americans — and US followers of Phoenix, Arizona-based Active Self Protection‘s popular YouTube channel — are quite familiar with attacks carried out by two criminals riding a single moped or dirt bike — a modus operandi that facilitates both surprise and a quick getaway. Sometimes the criminals don’t even dismount. In other instances, one or both may get off the ride. Regardless, they frequently wield deadly weapons to compel their prey to part with valuables. 

That was the recent experience of two friends strolling in Brooklyn’s Greenpoint neighborhood after 11pm on a Thursday night. They say a man in a ski mask jumped off the back of a moped and pointed a gun at one of them, taking the 29-year-old man’s watch and the 32-year-old woman’s purse. The gunman then hopped back on the moped and the getaway driver sped the two criminals off into the night.  

“It was very quick, but it was obviously super rattling. I’ve lived in the area for over seven years now, and I’ve never felt unsafe,” the woman told the New York Post, asking that her name be kept out of print for fear of criminal retribution.

The female victim is certain the criminals were Venezuelan — based on her familiarity with their accents, thanks to her having grown up in that country. What she said next spoke volumes:

“It’s pretty insane for this to be happening here. My family left Venezuela because crime like that is very common there, and they just didn’t want us growing up in that kind of like, like lack of safety.”

NYPD told Fox News that, earlier this year, they arrested two armed Venezuelans on a moped — and believe just this one pair was connected to more than 100 robberies. 

Awash in hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, New York City is the top hotspot for moto-crime. “Mopeds as a means of flight from the seven major [crimes] is up over 400% since 2022,” an NYPD source told the Post, “and that’s when we believe we first started seeing the beginning of the wave of new arrivals.” 

Some victims have been targeted because of their foolish choice to wear outrageously pricey watches in public (compounding their foolish choices to spend their money that way in the first place). On June 26, a man in Greenwich Village had a gun pointed at his head before surrendering his $40,000 Rolex. On June 18, armed robbers stole another man’s $100,000 watch outside a Manhattan hotspot. They’ve also been known to yank gold chains off people’s necks. 

Don’t think you’re immune from a moto-attack if don’t flaunt your money. An iPhone, purse or wallet could be all the enticement the low-lifes need. In June, there was a spree of at least four moped-launched robberies in which the thieves yanked headphones off pedestrians’ heads. 

You’re not even safe once you’ve left the street. On June 21, two men with guns entered Williamsburg’s Birds of a Feather restaurant. “They basically held up the entire restaurant at gunpoint,” NYPD Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny told NBC New York. He believes the two perpetrators are newly-arrived migrants. 

New York City has seen a massive spike in armed robberies committed by moped raiders. The NYPD says they are #illegal #migrants.

The raiders enter cafes and restaurants and take wallets, watches and jewelry at gunpoint. Then they escape on mopeds. There’s nothing the police can… pic.twitter.com/vpBTPYU4Cy

— UinHurricane (@UinHurricane) July 11, 2024

Of course, you can’t commit a moto-crime without a moto, so they’re also stealing mopeds left and right — as was the case when a food delivery worker was stabbed in the chest and robbed in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn last month. In a May incident in Queens, thieves demanded that 15- and 19-year-old victims give up their moped. When they refused, both were slashed with a knife and yanked off the vehicle. 

Sometimes the criminals simply grab what they want and hit the gas, with no regard for their victims’ lives — as seen in this February attack on a woman in New York City: 

This is what these #NYC moped robberies look like: A victim dragged across the sidewalk and slamming into a pole as suspects on a scooter grab the purse off her shoulder and hit the gas. https://t.co/E3Rv6JNHcU pic.twitter.com/12FhU20feO

— Michael Ruiz (@mikerreports) February 5, 2024

It’s not clear in which country this happened, but here’s how one quick-thinking woman foiled an attempted purse-snatching (keep in mind this defensive tactic carries the risk of triggering punitive violence): 

Typical moped operator behavior here.

1. Smart thinking by the woman.

2. Luckily they were after her purse and not her.

Plan accordingly…#CityLife #crime #smart #moped #urban #purse #women pic.twitter.com/VU4uV0ULWW

— Mrgunsngear (@Mrgunsngear) July 7, 2024

…and here’s another failed robbery with an even more fulfilling ending: 

Via SchiffGold.com,

As student loan debt in America swells to a staggering $1.7 trillion, President Joe Biden’s new SAVE plan could actually cost $230 billion, a CBO report finds. This is not only a classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul — it will bring more inflation, make college more expensive and give the federal government unprecedented control over higher education.

The following article was originally published by the Mises Institute. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of Peter Schiff or SchiffGold.

The federal student debt loan amount is $1.7 trillion. This debt portfolio is an installment personal loan. Payments occur monthly. Active students have loan totals not due this year. We have no idea how much of the total will be repaid.

The Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan is President Joe Biden and Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona’s reply to the Supreme Court, who ruled the administration’s original sweeping forgiveness program was unconstitutional. The SAVE plan was announced in August 2023. The White House bulletin included a table of payment amounts, indexed by the number of dependents and size of loan.

It is the greatest gift for all income-dependent student-debt payoff plans. It is a Trojan horse for the state to control higher education.

The “original” student loan program from the sixties repaid loans plus interest in a straightforward installment-style plan. A $7,500 loan might take ten years to fulfill. Larger loans received longer terms.

The federal government’s interjection into debt financing came with the Income-Contingent Repayment plan, passed in the 1993 Student Loan Reform Act signed by then-president Bill Clinton. The Student Loan Reform Act set payments at 20 percent of discretionary income. After twenty-five years of eligible payments, the plan writes off any outstanding debt. This was the first signal that the plans anticipated partial payments on student loans.

The slide toward free university accelerated in 2007 with income-based repayment. Monthly payments were calculated on what a student could pay, not what was owed, resetting Income-Contingent Repayment plan payments from 20 percent of income to 10 percent or 15 percent of discretionary income depending on the date the borrower first started borrowing student loans.

In 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Both the lending and collecting of loans was consolidated within the Department of Education (DOEd). This act nationalized the student loan process, putting it in the hands of political appointees, managed by an unprepared, non-banking-experienced staff. In 2010, student loan debt was half the 2023 total.

Income-dependent payback plans describe the four remaining options for paying student loans. SAVE is a new income-dependent plan. There are four common elements to all income-dependent plans.

Published poverty wages:

Poverty wages are deducted from adjusted gross income to produce “discretionary income.” Early plans deducted 100 percent of poverty wages. In the Affordable Care Act of 2010, poverty wage deductions became 150 percent. Later, the DOEd increased the multiplier to 200 percent. SAVE uses 225 percent of poverty wages.

Payment percentage:

Discretionary income is assessed by a fixed percentage to create a payment due. The original plan from 1993 used 20 percent of discretionary income. This changed to 15 percent of discretionary income in 2007. President (“I have my phone and a pen”) Obama issued a presidential memorandum reducing it from 15 percent to 10 percent.

Length of loan and unpaid balances:

If there is an unbroken record of payments, unpaid balances at the end of a loan term are forgiven. The DOEd waved the surrender flag for taxpayers. All loans will not be paid back to the Treasury.

Special status:

Most recently, the DOEd forgave the administration recently using extralegal authority for 1.5 million debtors with $28 billion in debts that were expunged by a department ruling of “substantial misconduct” by colleges that closed early. $45.7 billion was zeroed out by reclassifying 662,000 public service workers. This type of skullduggery is easier in the SAVE plan.

SAVE uses 225 percent of poverty wages as a deduction to reduce the subjective discretionary income. This reduced discretionary income uses a 5 percent calculation to create a payment due. The smallest amount of discretionary income assesses at the smallest percentage as calculated by the White House.

The SAVE plan is not eligible for loans in default. However, a phone call to the DOEd and enrollment in the “Fresh Start” program makes previously ineligible loans available for SAVE. Student payments that are seventy-five days delinquent will automatically enroll in the SAVE program. This can start the delinquency clock on loans greater than 270 days, erasing the record from credit reports. SAVE will eventually bring all loan payments under one process and one department, directed by the president.

We cannot be certain of the ultimate costs. With appropriate disclaimers (for static budgeting with hyperdynamic plans), the Congressional Budget Office suggests that the cost of implementing SAVE could cost $230 billion. Based on a five-year-old study, just under half of all student debt is estimated to be on income-dependent plans. The current number is likely greater based on trends. These plans have variable monthly payments during the term and have a forgiveness option, making any predictions of a final cost speculative. These plans are continually in flux. Any estimate of cost is a guess, more so after covid.

SAVE has legal challenges from attorney generals from three states. This challenge is not creating headlines. Without an injunction or congressional action, the plan would be initiated in July 2024. In June, twenty-five courts in Kansas and Missouri blocked further enrollment in the SAVE plan.

The SAVE plan fits the long-term goal of increased federal control of public higher education. The president can manipulate the plan to modify payments for a population demographic such as “dreamers” or for a major employment segment such as green energy ambassadors.

The courts’ challenge to this plan must succeed. We need a pause for a better fix on the actual debt. Both political parties have mismanaged this program. There are responsible measures in Congress to bring forward to cap this vote-buying scheme and protect taxpayers.

Authored by Brayden Lindrea via CoinTelegraph.com,

The BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund has reached a $500 million market cap, making it the first tokenized treasury fund to reach this milestone.

Launched less than four months ago, BlackRock BUIDL, currently holds $502.8 million worth of tokenized Treasurys, according to Ethereum block explorer Etherscan.

The milestone was reached after real-world asset tokenization firm Ondo Finance bought more BUIDL, which it uses as a backing asset for its OUSG token.

Transactions made with BUIDL’s contract address over the last 8 hours. Source: Etherscan

BlackRock’s BUIDL surpassed the Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (BENJI) as the world’s largest tokenized treasury fund in late April — less than six weeks after it launched on March 15. BUIDL has held the top position ever since.

BUIDL’s price is pegged 1:1 with the U.S. dollar and pays daily accrued dividends directly to investors each month through its partnership with real-world asset tokenization platform Securitize.

Ondo’s OUSG is the largest holder of BUIDL at $173.7 million, while stablecoin issuer firm Mountain Protocol also holds BUIDL to back its permissionless yield-bearing stablecoin, USDM.

There is now $1.67 billion worth of tokenized treasury funds onchain, according to Dune Analytics data compiled by the parent firm of 21Shares.

Ethereum is the leading tokenization blockchain with more than a 75% share of treasury funds, followed by Stellar at 23.9%.

In January, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink voiced that capital markets could be made more efficient by blockchain tokenization, which Boston Consulting Group estimates will become a $16 trillion market by 2030.

U.S. Treasurys are only one piece of the pie — stocks, real estate and many other assets can be tokenized too.

The number of real-world asset transactions peaked in April 2024, however, the tally has fallen considerably since then, Dune Analytics data from Crypto Koryo shows.

Number of real-world asset transactions onchain since December 2023. Source: Dune Analytics

WisdomTree is another large asset management firm tokenizing RWAs, while Ondo Finance, Backed Finance, Matrixdock, Maple Finance and Swarm are among the blockchain-native firms operating in the space.

The White House on Thursday unveiled its most comprehensive round of sanctions on Israeli settlers and ‘extremists’ do date. The US Treasury described the targeted individuals and entities as those “who have weaponized them [West Bank outposts] as bases for violent actions to displace Palestinians.”

This new action marks the fifth batch of sanctions, and impacts three individuals and five entities. Notably it includes a settler group led by Benzi Gopstein, widely viewed as a close ally of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.

Interestingly it comes the same week that Biden has approved the resumption of 500-pound bomb shipments to Israel. These merely somewhat symbolic sanctions against a tiny handful of settlers appear more as a PR attempt at balancing pro-Israeli military policies for the sake of appeasing Progressive Democrats in the US.

Some of the new actions target the following according to Times of Israel:

These include the co-heads of the already-designated Tzav 9 group, Reut Ben Haim and Shlomo Sarid. Their far-right group has led attacks on humanitarian aid convoys en route to Gaza in Israel and the West Bank. Ben Haim becomes the first woman targeted using the executive order United States President Joe Biden signed in February after three years of urging Israel to crack down on settler violence.

Sanctions have also been imposed on four West Bank outposts deemed illegal by the United Nations and international humanitarian groups.

They have been listed as Meitarim Farm, which is led by the aforementioned and already-sanctioned Yinon Levi; HaMahoch Farm, Neria’s Farm, and Manne’s Farm. All of these are run by US-sanctioned leaders at this point.

However, at the higher level of the Israeli government, West Bank settlements have by and large been supported. Recent reporting in the Associated Press said, “The Israeli government has approved plans to build nearly 5,300 new homes in settlements in the occupied West Bank, a monitoring group said Thursday, the latest in a campaign to accelerate settlement expansion, aimed at cementing Israeli control over the territory and preventing the establishment of a future Palestinian state.”

The new homes are to be located in dozens of settlements across the West Bank, which regional monitors have called the biggest expansion and land grab by Israel in over three decades.

Settlers have spent years systematically cutting off Palestinian towns and enclaves from each other…

Since Oct.7 and the IDF Gaza operation, there has been an internecine conflict in various West Bank towns which has killed many dozens of Palestinians, but also has resulted in some casualties among Israeli troops and police.

Israeli officials have long argued then when a West Bank town or area descends into violent revolt, they lose the right to the land, and this often results in nearby Israeli military outposts turning a blind eye when unofficial settlements begin moving in.

Anything Zelensky had to say Thursday at the close of the NATO summit in Washington was overshadowed by President Biden’s verbal flub where he introduced the Ukrainian leader as “President Putin”.

But among the more interesting statements of Zelensky was the demand for his Western backers, especially the US, to lift all restrictions on arms used to attack inside Russian territory.

“If we want to win, if we want to prevail, if we want to save our country and to defend it, we need to lift all the limitations,” Zelensky said while standing alongside NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg in the summit’s closing session.

The Ukrainian president argued that this is crucial for “having Ukraine on the map” and not allowing Russia to “attack half of the planet.”

“That is a crazy question why we can’t answer and attack these… military bases from where these guided bombs from jets or missiles came, targeted us and killed our children,” Zelensky continued, clearly criticizing his own more powerful backers.

So far the White House has greenlighted using US-weapons against Russian territory from which its forces are attacking, thus confining strikes to not far inside Russia’s border.

President Biden at his evening press conference responded to Zelensky’s words, based on a reporter’s question, and showed an unwillingness to change policy (at least for now) based on Kiev’s demands. Referencing his national security and defense advisers, Biden said:

“If he had the capacity to strike Moscow, strike the Kremlin, would that make sense?” Biden said of Zelenskyy. He later added, “We’re making it on a day-to-day basis … how far they should go in” to Russian territory.

Thus he did acknowledge that this dangerous, escalatory policy which threatens to draw Washington directly into the fight could change at any moment.

Finnish president @alexstubb says that Ukraine’s path towards @NATO membership is irreversible. He also emphasized just how important continued support for Ukraine is. pic.twitter.com/mOPfPgV5rU

— TVP World (@TVPWorld_com) July 10, 2024

Among the other aspects to the NATO summit which suggests further escalation with Russia is that Ukraine was offered an “irreversible” path toward membership. According to what is spelled out in the annual summit’s final communique:

It said Ukraine had made “concrete progress” on “required democratic, economic, and security reforms” in recent months – but that a formal membership invitation would only be extended when “conditions are met”.

“As Ukraine continues this vital work, we will continue to support it on its irreversible path to full Euro-Atlantic integration, including Nato membership,” the statement added.

Russia responded to this, with former Russian president and top national security adviser Dmitry Medvedev saying that this means either Ukraine must go or NATO must go altogether.

The Washington Summit Declaration of July 10 mentions “the irreversible path of Ukraine” to NATO. For Russia, 2 possible ways of how this path ends are acceptable: either Ukraine disappears, or NATO does. Still better, both.

— Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) July 11, 2024

He said Thursday: “The conclusion is obvious. We have to do everything to make sure that the ‘irreversible path of Ukraine’ towards NATO ends with either the disappearance of Ukraine, or the disappearance of NATO. Better, both.” 

Medvedev’s fiery words suggest the Kremlin sees this increasingly as a growing and direct conflict with the whole of the Western military alliance, and not just with Ukraine forces.

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Some state that “bears are like a ‘broken clock,’ they are right twice a day.” While it may seem true during a rising bull market, the reality is that both “bulls” and “bears” are owned by the “broken clock syndrome.”

The statement exposes the ignorance or bias of those making such a claim. If you invert the logic, such things become more evident.

“If ‘bears’ are right twice a day, then ‘bulls’ must be wrong twice a day.”

In the investing game, the timing of being “wrong” is critical to your long-term goals. As discussed in “The Best Way To Invest,”

“There is a massive difference between AVERAGE and ACTUAL returns on invested capital. Thus, in any given year, the impact of losses destroys the annualized ‘compounding’ effect of money.”

Throughout history, bull market cycles are only one-half of the “full market cycle.” That is because, during every “bull market cycle,” the markets and economy build up excesses that are then “reversed” during the following “bear market.” In other words, as Sir Issac Newton once stated:

“What goes up, must come down.” 

Bulls Are Wrong At The Worst Time

During rising bull markets, the bears become an easy target for ridicule. While the bears have logical arguments for why the markets should reverse, markets can often remain “illogical longer than you can remain solvent,” to quote John M. Keynes. Such is an important point because, as Howard Marks once quipped:

“Being early is the same as being wrong.”

The problem for perennially bearish people is that while they may eventually be deemed correct, they were so early to the call that they became the “boy who cried wolf.”

Robert Kiyosaki, who has long called for a market crash, is a good case study.

“But the real tragedy here is that one day he will be right. One day a crash will come and Kiyosaki will take a victory lap for all to see.

Will his prior incorrect calls matter? Not at all. You can try to point out his flawed track record, but it won’t make a difference. Most people aren’t going to see your reply. But what they will see is his tweet. They will feel the pain from the crash after it happens and then they will think, ‘Kiyosaki knew it all along.’”

Oh he got it wrong eight times before? Who cares? He is right now, isn’t he?” – NIck Mugulli

Nick is correct. No one will remember the “bears” wrong calls when the crash eventually comes. However, Nick is also incorrect because the same applies to the “bulls.”

For example, few remember Jim Cramer’s Top 10 Picks in March 2000 or the bullish media analysts who said “buy” through the entire 2008 crisis? But they remember the eventual “buy” recommendations that were eventually right. Unfortunately, few investors had capital left at that point.

We give Nick a pass because he is young and has not lived through an actual bear market. As anyone who has will tell you, it is not an adventure they care to repeat.

The problem with being “bullish all the time” is that when you are eventually wrong, it comes at the worst possible cost: the destruction of investment capital. However, being “bearish all the time” also has a price, such as failing to grow investment capital to reach financial goals. While some investors left the market to avoid a 50% crash in 2008, they never returned for the subsequent 500% return. What was worse?

While the “bulls” seem to have their way during rising markets, the always-bullish media overlooks a problem. Over the past 120 years, the market has indeed risen. However, 85% of that time was spent making up previous losses, and only 15% making new highs.

The importance of this point should not be overlooked. Most investors’ “time horizon” only covers one market cycle. Suppose you are starting at or near all-time highs. In that case, there is a relatively significant possibility you may wind up spending a significant chunk of your time horizon “getting back to even.”

The “rt Of Being A Contrarian

The biggest problem for investors, and the “broken clock syndrome,” is the emotional biases by being either “bullish” or “bearish.” Effectively, when individuals pick a side, they become oblivious to the risks. One of the most significant factors is “confirmation bias,” where individuals seek confirmation and ignore non-confirming data.

As investors, we should avoid such a view and be neither bullish nor bearish. We should be open to all the data, weigh incoming data accordingly, and assess the risk inherent in our portfolios. That risk assessment should be an open analysis of our current positioning relative to the market environment. Being underweight equities in a rising bull market can be as harmful as being overweight in a bear market.

As a portfolio manager, I invest money in a way that creates short-term returns but reduces the possibility of catastrophic losses that wipe out years of growth.

We believe you should not be “bullish” or “bearish.” While being “right” during the first half of the cycle is essential, it is far more critical not to be “wrong” during the second half.

Howard Marks once stated that being a “contrarian” is tough, lonely, and generally right. To wit:

“Resisting – and thereby achieving success as a contrarian – isn’t easy. Things combine to make it difficult; including natural herd tendencies and the pain imposed by being out of step, particularly when momentum invariably makes pro-cyclical actions look correct for a while. (That’s why it’s essential to remember that ‘being too far ahead of your time is indistinguishable from being wrong.’)

Given the uncertain nature of the future, and thus the difficulty of being confident your position is the right one – especially as price moves against you – it’s challenging to be a lonely contrarian.”

The problem with being a contrarian is determining where you are during a market cycle. The collective wisdom of market participants is generally “right” during the middle of a market advance but “wrong” at market peaks and troughs.

As an individual, you can avoid the “broken clock“ syndrome.

• Avoid the “herd mentality” of paying increasingly higher prices without sound reasoning.

• Do your research and avoid “confirmation bias.” 

• Dev”lop a sound long-term investment strategy that includes “risk management” protocols.

• Diversify your portfolio allocation model to include “safer assets.”

• Control your “greed” and resist the temptation to “get rich quick” in speculative investments.

• Resist getting caught up in “what could have been” or “anchoring” to a past value. Such leads to emotional mistakes. 

• Realize that price inflation does not last forever. The larger the deviation from the mean, the greater the eventual reversion. Invest accordingly. 

Being a contrarian does not mean always going against the grain regardless of market dynamics. However, it does mean that when “everyone agrees,” it is often better to look at what “the crowd” may be overlooking.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky while attending the annual NATO summit in Washington as a special guest has admitted that from Kiev’s point of view, it can never get enough weapons from the West.

He said Tuesday night at a side event to the NATO forum that Ukraine has not yet received enough weapons to defeat Russia. And that’s when he made an astounding admission: not only have Western arms deliveries not been enough to “change the situation on the battlefield” – but the reality remains that…

“It’s not enough. It’s never enough,” according to Zelensky’s remarks.

And while he welcomed Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s earlier announcement that US F-16s are en route to Ukraine and will be airborne soon this summer, the Ukrainian leader also admitted, “Even if we will have 50, it’s nothing.”

He then offered a specific figure he had in mind for US advanced jet fighters: “We need — they have 300. We need… because we are defending, we need 128,” he told an audience at the Reagan Foundation.

Sadly this will not be the wake-up call for the West that it should be, which has only had a one-track approach to the proxy war with Russia, which can be summarized as: more, more and more weapons.

What about using the tens of thousands of diplomat personnel employed by the US Foreign Service to try to forge peace in Eastern Europe? 

Meanwhile, the reality is that very few Western officials and diplomats are urging ceasefire negotiations and peaceful settlement as soon as possible…

Wow, two former British ambassadors and one American ambassador to Moscow here. The problem is both sides in the conflict are against ceasefire which will be just another Minsk – an opportunity to regroup and prepare for another war. Talks will likely happen sooner rather than… https://t.co/IbZ2VLTDVZ

— Leonid Ragozin (@leonidragozin) July 10, 2024

Below is the full letter, Seize peace in Ukraine before it’s too late, as published in the Financial Times, authored by a number of former diplomats, statesmen, and prominent pundits.

* * *

Russia’s latest military gains in the Donetsk region reinforce the case for a negotiated settlement of the war in Ukraine. The US and its allies support Ukraine’s key war aim, which is a return to the 2014 frontiers, i.e., Russia’s expulsion from Crimea and Donbas. But all informed analysts agree that short of a serious escalation of war, the likeliest outcome will be continued stalemate on the ground, with a not insignificant chance of a Russian victory.

This conclusion points to the desirability, even urgency, of a negotiated peace, not least for the sake of Ukraine itself. Reluctance by the official west to accept a negotiated peace rests on the belief that anything short of a complete Ukrainian victory would allow Putin to “get away with it”.

But this ignores by far the most important outcome of the war so far: that Ukraine has fought for its independence, and won it — as Finland did in 1939-40. Some territorial concessions would seem a small price to pay for the reality, rather than semblance, of independence.

If a peace based on roughly the present division of forces in Ukraine is inevitable, it is immoral not to try for it now.

Washington should start talks with Moscow on a new security pact which would safeguard the legitimate security interests of both Ukraine and Russia. The announcement of these talks should be immediately followed by a time-limited ceasefire in Ukraine. The ceasefire would enable Russian and Ukrainian leaders to negotiate in a realistic, constructive manner.

We urge the world’s leaders to initiate or support such an initiative. The longer the war continues the more territory Ukraine is likely to lose, and the more the pressure for escalation up to a nuclear level is likely to grow. The sooner peace is negotiated the more lives will be saved, the sooner the reconstruction of Ukraine will start and the more quickly the world can be pulled back from the very dangerous brink at which it currently stands. 

Lord Skidelsky

Professor Emeritus in political economy University of Warwick

Sir Anthony Brenton

British Ambassador to Russia (2004-2008)

Thomas Fazi

Journalist, author, columnist for UnHerd

Anatol Lieven

Senior Fellow, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statesmanship

Jack Matlock

US Ambassador to the USSR (1987-1991)

Ian Proud

British Embassy in Moscow (2014-2019)

Richard Sakwa

Professor Emeritus of Russian and European Politics, University of Kent

Christopher Granville

British Embassy, Moscow (1991-1995)

UMich consumer sentiment slumped in preliminary July data with Current Conditions at their lowest since Dec 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

 

UMich Director Joanne Hsu warned: “Although sentiment is more than 30% above the trough from June 2022, it remains stubbornly subdued.“

“Nearly half of consumers still object to the impact of high prices, even as they expect inflation to continue moderating in the years ahead.

With the upcoming election, consumers perceived substantial uncertainty in the trajectory of the economy, though there is little evidence that the first presidential debate altered their economic views.”

On the positive side, year-ahead inflation expectations fell for the second consecutive month, reaching 2.9%. In comparison, these expectations ranged between 2.3 to 3.0% in the two years prior to the pandemic. Long-run inflation expectations came in at 2.9%, down from 3.0% last month and remaining remarkably stable over the last three years.

Source: Bloomberg

However, these expectations remain somewhat elevated relative to the 2.2-2.6% range seen in the two years pre-pandemic.

Buying Conditions plunged across the board with home-buying attitudes crashing to record lows…

Source: Bloomberg

Democrats saw the biggest drop in sentiment…

Source: Bloomberg

…but, but , but Bidenomics?

Authored by Garbiella Fine via RealClearPolitics.com,

The 2024 presidential campaign is now enmeshed in skepticism about Joe Biden’s mental acuity. Some 51 million Americans watched the president go one-on-one with Donald Trump in the June 27 presidential debate, which immediately ignited questions about the president’s age and the possibility of an open Democratic convention.

The oldest president in U.S. history, Biden will turn 82 shortly after Election Day, meaning if he wins the 2024 election, he would be 86 at the end of his second term. Today’s RealClearPolitics polling average shows that 78-year-old President Donald Trump has the lead in the national head-to-head contest by 3.4 percentage points. When RealClearPolitics White House correspondent Philip Wegmann asked Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre last Wednesday about Biden’s debate slip-ups and whether she’s noticed any slowdowns in the president, she responded, “He is as sharp as ever.” It seems that a significant majority of voters don’t believe this is true.

In a CBS News/YouGov poll published last Monday, voters were asked whether Biden should drop out of the race and allow another Democrat to vie for the title of the party’s nominee. Most voters (64%) believe it is time for a new Democratic candidate. Of the 1,130 registered voters surveyed, only 20% of respondents under 30 believed Biden exclusively had the appropriate cognitive health to serve as president. (The younger a voter was, the more likely they were to believe neither candidate had adequate mental fitness. 37% of voters under 30 felt that neither candidate had appropriate cognition, as did 35% of voters aged 30-44 and 28% of 45-64 year-olds.) The age group least concerned with the cognition of the 2024 major party candidates are voters 65 and up, of whom only 19% believed neither candidate had appropriate cognitive health.

While only 36% of voters believe Biden should continue to run, the older a respondent was, the more likely they were to believe that Biden should remain in the race.

Sixty-eight percent of voters under 30, 66% of voters aged 30-44, 64% of voters aged 45-64, and 58% of voters 65 and older believed it was time for a new nominee.

Look at the rest of the voter age categories, and confidence in Biden’s mental acuity drops.

The age category with the least confidence in Biden’s mental acuity alone was 45-64 year-olds (16%). Voters 65 and older were the most confident in Biden, with 26% responding that only the current president was fit to serve. Voters under 30 and aged 30-44 felt about the same, with 20% of the younger demographic and 19% of the older demographic believing exclusively in Biden’s mental fitness.

An older CBS News/YouGov poll of 2,159 U.S. adults conducted between Feb. 28 and March 1 shows that the 65 and older demographic most confident in Biden’s mental fitness seems not to have been affected by Biden’s debate performance. When asked the same question about the candidates’ mental and cognitive health, 25% were confident in Biden alone. Every other age group that answered “only Joe Biden” has declined. Adults under 30 had the most significant loss of confidence, declining 13%, and voters in the 30-44 and 45-64 age ranges declined 7%.

While all voters are troubled by the president’s apparent cognitive abilities, the oldest voting demographic is the least concerned.

Despite the slight boost from the oldest voters, most agree it’s time to give a new candidate the chance to beat Trump.

[ZH: The market odds of Biden getting the nomination are back at post-debate lows and Kamala Harris is now even…]

Explanations the White House has provided for Biden’s poor performance range from a bad cold and jet lag to Trump’s behavior, or just “a bad night.” Last Friday, Biden sat with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in an interview the Biden campaign likely hoped would restore some confidence in the president’s ability to engage in straightforward, unscripted conversation. It did little to alter the conversation. While Biden seemed more alert than he did during the debate, only 8.5 million viewers saw the interview, nowhere near the number that viewed the debate.

[ZH: And last night’s gaffe-fest presser did nothing to help improve confidence in Biden’s cognition.]