Author: admin

Authored by Larry Johnson via Sic Semper Tyrannis blog,

You do not have to wait for the Horowitz report. I can give you a preview of what he should have found if he conducted an honest audit.

The following is not my opinion. It is based on the flood of information that has come out over the past two and a half-years surrounding the plot to destroy the Presidency of Donald Trump. When you read these facts it is easy to understand how dishonest and corrupt the FBI were in presenting a FISA application to spy on Carter Page. Helen Keller could see this is wrong.

Let me take you through this piece-by-piece (except where noted I am quoting from the first FISA application).

Let’s start with the FBI claim that Carter Page was an “agent of a foreign government.”

The target of this application is Carter Page, a U.S. person, and an agent of a foreign power, described in detail below. The status of the target was determined in or about October 2016 from information provided by the U.S. Department of State.

What information did State supply? Information provided by the notorious Christopher Steele. The Washington Examiner’s Daniel Chaitin reported on this in May 2019:

Steele met Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec on Oct. 11, 2016, 10 days before the first warrant application was submitted, and admitted he was encouraged by a client, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, to get his research out before the 2016 election on Nov. 8, signaling a possible political motivation. The meeting was described in notes taken by Kavalec that were obtained by conservative group Citizens United through open-records litigation. The notes show that Kavalec believed at least some of Steele’s allegations to be false.

Government officials told the Hill that Kavalec informed FBI Special Agent Stephen Laycock about the meeting in an email eight days before the FISA warrant application was filed. Laycock, then the FBI’s section chief for Eurasian counterintelligence, quickly forwarded what he learned to Peter Strzok, the special agent who was leading the Trump-Russia investigation.

There it is. Not an assumption. A fact. State passed a false report from Christopher Steele to the FBI and the FBI ran with it. A competent FBI Agent would have asked about the identity of the source of the information. Either the FBI failed to do this or it lied in the FISA application. The FBI had a responsibility to note that Steele was the sole source for the claim that Page was an “agent of a foreign power.”

The application reiterates its basis for this assertion:

This application targets Carter Page. The FBI believes Page has been the subject of targeted recruitment by the Russian Government to undermine and influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election in violation of U.S. criminal law.

This is based on the false report from Christopher Steele as well as “cooked” intelligence provided by CIA Director Brennan. Brennan was passing off a low level Russian bureaucrat as a high level source with direct access to Putin. That was a lie.

The application then tries to bolster the lie by attributing the FBI’s credulity by citing the U.S. intelligence community (an ironic oxymoron).

In addition, according to an October 7, 2016 Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security (Election Security Joint Statement), the USIC is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations. The Election Security Joint Statement states that the recent disclosures of e-mails on; among others, sites like WikiLeaks are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. According to the Election Security Joint Statement, these thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the U.S. election process; activity that is not new to Moscow – the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. The Election Security Joint Statement states that, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

This was a lie. The US Intelligence Community aka USIC had made no such formal determination. If they had there would have been a written document. There was no written document and no evidence that “all 17 intelligence agencies” had coordinated and approved such a document. The Intelligence Community Assessment would not be published until January 2017 and only the FBI, the CIA and the NSA signed off on that piece of fantasy.

After stating that Carter was a Trump foreign policy advisor the FBI insists in the application:

The FBI believes that the Russian Government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with Candidate #l’s campaign (i.e. Trump).

That belief was based on the bogus information passed to State Department by Christopher Steele. It was a lie. They had no evidence and, more importantly, obtained no validation as a result of spying authorized by this outrageous application.

The FBI continues with this charade by outlining Page’s previous cooperation in helping gather evidence that led to the indictment of two Russian intel officers in January 2015. Worth noting that Bill Priestrap, who was now running FBI’s Counter Intelligence operations from FBI Headquarters, was the supervising agent in that operation and knew all about the role Page played in helping get the Russians. But the FBI put this into the application merely to foster the perception that Carter had an in with the Russians.

The FBI then disingenuously introduces Christopher Steele (i.e., Confidential Human Source #1) as the source for evidence about Page’s supposedly nefarious activities:

According to open source information, in July 2016, Page traveled to Russia and delivered the commencement address at the New Economic School.7 In addition to giving this address, the FBI has learned that Page met with at least two Russian officials during this trip. First, according to information provided by an FBI confidential-human source (Source #1), reported that Page had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, who is the President of Rosneft [a Russian energy company] and a close associate to Russian President Putin. [Steele] reported that, during the meeting, Page and Sechin discussed future bilateral energy cooperation and the prospects for an associated move to lift Ukraine-related Western sanctions against Russia.

This was a lie designed to bamboozle the FISA court Judge. When you look at the footnote for Christopher Steele, we catch the FBI in another monster lie:

and the FBI is unaware of any derogatory information pertaining to Source #1.

The FBI fired Steele as a compensated human source within days of this FISA application. Getting fired for leaking information to the press without the approval of the FBI is “DEROGATORY INFORMATION. Why did the FBI lie on this critical detail? Let us hope Horowitz addresses this.

The footnote related to Steele also contains this disingenuous whopper:

Source #1, who now owns a foreign business/financial intelligence firm, was approached by an identified U.S. person, who indicated to Source #1 that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. person to conduct research regarding Candidate #l’s ties to Russia (the identified U.S. person and Source #1 have a long-standing business relationship). The identified U.S. person hired Source #1 to conduct this research. The identified U.S. person never advised Source #1 as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate #l’s ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.

The FBI knew that Glenn Simpson was working for Hillary Clinton. They failed to mention this. Instead, the FBI opted for the white lie of pretending that Steele, under Simpson’s guidance, was just doing opposition research. The FBI can pretend they were just incompetent, but we now know that they were fully aware of Simpson’s ties to the Clinton effort using the law firm as a cut-out.

The FBI continued feed out the lies of the Steele Dossier pretending they were verified facts:

Divyekin [who is assessed to be Igor Nikolayevich Divyekin] had met secretly with Page and that their agenda for the meeting included Divyekin raising a dossier or “kompromat”  that the Kremlin possessed on Candidate #2 [i.e., Clinton] and the possibility of it being released to Candidate #l’s campaign.

This is an unverified claim. Regular Americans know it simple as another damn lie.

Then the FBI turns its attention to creating the propaganda meme that Donald Trump had cut a deal with Putin to lift all sanctions and hurt Ukraine. This is breathtaking in light of what we now know about real Ukrainian efforts to hurt Trump:

July 2016 article in an identified news organization reported that Candidate #1’s campaign worked behind the scenes to make sure Political Party #1’s platform would not call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Political Party #l’s foreign policy leaders in Washington. The article stated that Candidate #l’s campaign sought “to make sure that [Political Party #1] would ot pledge to give Ukraine the weapons it has been asking for from the United States.” Further, an August 2016 article published by an identified news organization characterized Candidate #1 as sounding like a supporter of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in September (2015], adopted a “milder” tone regarding Russia’s annexation of Crimea. The August 2016 article further reported that Candidate #1 said Candidate #1 might recognize Crimea as Russian territory and lift punitive U.S. sanctions against Russia. The article opined that while the reason for Candidate #l’s shift was not clear, Candidate #l’s more conciliatory words, which contradict Political Party #1’s official platform, follow Candidate #l’s recent association with several people sympathetic to Russian influence in Ukraine, including foreign policy advisor Carter Page.

This was false information (i.e., A LIE) being fed to a pliant media by Clinton campaign officials and supporters. And the FBI buys it hook line and sinker. 

The FBI then brings Michael Isikoff into the act, who also is passing along information obtained from Christopher Steele. This is nothing but chutzpah by the Bureau. Shameful:

About September 23, 2016, an identified news organization published an article (September 23rd News Article), which was written by the news organization’s Chief Investigative Correspondent, alleging that U.S. intelligence officials are investigating Page with respect to suspected efforts by the Russian Government to influence the U.S. Presidential election.· According to the September 23rd News Article, U.S. officials received intelligence reports that when Page was in Moscow in July 2016 to deliver the above-noted commencement address at the New Economic School, he met with two senior Russian officials. The September 23rd News Article stated that a “well-placed Western intelligence source” told the news organization that Page met with Igor Sechin, a longtime Putin associate and former Russian deputy minister who is now the executive chairman of Rosneft. At their alleged meeting, Sechin raised the issue of the lifting of sanctions with Page.

According to the September 23rd News Article, the Western intellig nce source also reported that U.S. intelligence agencies received reports that Page met with another top Putin aide – Igor Divyekm,, a former Russian security official who now serves as deputy chief for internal policy and is believed by U.S. officials to have responsibility for intelligence collected by Russian agencies about the U.S. election.

The FBI is pretending that this is another source to corroborate Steele. It is not. It is Christopher Steele talking to Isikoff.

The FBI at least made the pretense of giving Carter Page a chance to deny the allegations and he did in the strongest terms possible:

On or about September 25, 2016, Page sent a letter to the FBI Director. In this letter, Page made reference to the accusations in the September 23rd News Article and denied them. Page stated thatthe source of the accusations is nothing more than completely false media reports and that he did not meet this year with any sanctioned official in Russia. Page also stated that he would be willing to discuss any “final” questions the FBI may have.

The rest of the application is blacked out and presumably contains the FBI’s explanation of why they believed Carter Page was lying. But it was the FBI who was lying. If those blacked out portions are declassified then we will almost certainly see that the FBI was claiming it had multiple sources contradicting Page when in fact, it only had one–Christopher Steele, a retired British intelligence officer. 

I draw this conclusion based on the FBI’s stated conclusion in the application:

(U) As discussed above, the FBI believes that Page has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian Government . . .Based on the foregoing facts and circumstances the FBI submits that there is probable cause to believe that Page [and others whose names are blacked out, probably Michael Flynn] knowingly engage in clandestine intelligence activities (other than intelligence gathering activities) for or on behalf of such foreign power, or knowingly conspires with other persons to engage in such activities and, therefore, is an agent of a foreign power as defined by 50 U.S.C. § 1801(b)(2)(E).

The American people must wake up and understand how dishonest and stupid the FBI was in writing and submitting this baseless application to the FISA court. And we are not talking about low level flunkies who changed an email. Jim Comey signed off on these lies. Andrew McCabe signed off on this lies.

I will reiterate, if Inspector General Horowitz fails to highlight these clear and pervasive lies then it will be up to Attorney General Barr and Prosecutor John Durham to set things right.

As if the trade war – and soon to be currency war – between China and the U.S. needed another wrench thrown in its gears…

China sent cryptocurrencies tumbling on Friday after re-cracking-down on exchanges that are operating illegally against authorities’ ban.

Source: Bloomberg

On Nov. 22, authorities in Shenzhen have identified a total of 39 exchanges falling foul of China’s cryptocurrency trading ban, according to local news outlet Sanyan Finance. 

It remains unknown what consequences the exchanges will face, with Sanyan highlighting a desire to crack down on liquidity.

It appears that China’s blockade on non-government-sanctioned crypto trading, could be on its way to launching its own digital currency within the next 6 to 12 months, according to fund manager Edith Yeung, who recently appeared on CNBC. 

The Chinese government has been researching the idea over the last few years and has reportedly identified entities to use for a potential rollout, Yeung says. 

“It’s really been something (that’s) been in the works for the last few years,” she said on Wednesday during an interview. Yeung is a partner at blockchain-focused venture capital fund Proof of Capital. 

When she was asked how long it might be before the launch becomes reality, she responded “Quite soon. So I definitely think within the next 6 to 12 months.”

And China has recently embraced blockchain, with state media reporting that President Xi Jinping said the country should look to “take a lead” in the technology. 

Wendy Liu, head of China strategy for UBS, also said that there was greater willingness to work with blockchain and 5G in China because they will help facilitate and manage the world’s biggest country by population. 

Liu commented: “Due to its own needs, (China) is going to push in that direction and you see this willingness to back these technologies more so than anywhere else.”

Meanwhile, tensions between China and the U.S. continue to hit new fever pitches, as the trade war standoff between the two countries continues. Yeung says that even thought the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency, the wider use of the Yuan could “challenge the U.S.”

She commented: “I think the Chinese government is being really smart about driving the adoption of RMB. Can you imagine, especially for the One Belt One Road initiative, they (start) to lend all in virtual RMB? Many of these countries will want to work with China to start adopting virtual RMB.”

She cited Facebook’s foray into its own virtual currency as the catalyst for China’s quick move to adopt the idea. “I think what (has) been done on the Libra side of things, instead of driving adoption for Libra, it is actually driving the whole world, central banks to really need to get into the game for digital currency,” she said.

“I really think that the United States needs to hurry up to have a strong thinking and policy, at least a direction for virtual USD,” she concluded. 

You can watch Yeung’s interview here:

One week ago, we showed in one chart why the global economic recovery that so many expect is just a few months away, won’t happen: as the chart below shows, China’s credit intensity since 1994 has exploded. This means that before the Global Financial Crisis, China needed on average one unit of credit to create one unit of GDP. Since 2008, 2½ units of credit are required to create one unit of GDP. In other words, that China needs much more credit than 10 years ago to have the exact same amount of GDP. Injecting more credit in the economy is not the miracle solution it used to be, and the disadvantages of credit push tend to surpass the advantages.

This explosion in China’s credit intensity in the past decade has directly fueled China’s debt engine, the same debt engine that single-handedly pulled the world out of a global depression in 2008/2009. Alas, this will not happen again: China’s public and household debts are at their highest historical levels, respectively at 51% of GDP and 53% of GDP, and the private sector debt service ratio is becoming a burden for many companies, reaching on average 19.7% This records an increase from 13% before the crisis. Overall, China’s debt to GDP is fast approaching an unprecedented 320%!

Which brings us to Saxo’s dour conclusion for all those who believe that the global economy is about to enjoy another period of sustainable growth (and has confused the Fed’s QE for economic resilience and fundamentals):

Contrary to previous periods of slowdown, notably in 2008-2010, 2012-2014 and in 2016, China is unlikely to save the global economy once again.

So what does it all mean? Well, even as domestic demands for liquidity are growing, foreign capital keeps flowing in and the real economy continues to slow down, which all make the country seemingly approaching a zero rates monetary condition.

While those words succinctly summarize what we said last week, they originate in an English language op-ed published today in China’s nationalist tabloid, Global Times, which for once, is surprisingly accurate, and while mostly avoiding the propaganda that Chinese media is so well known for, explains well why China may indeed be the next country to see zero rates (as a reminder, Chinese real rates are already negative due to soaring pork prices).

And while we doubt that the PBOC will be able to cut enough to bring about ZIRP, or NIRP, any time soon especially due to the ongoing hyperinflation in pork prices, if and when those do stabilize the Chinese central bank may well follow in the footsteps of every other developed central bank. In doing so, it will only infuriate Trump who has been kicking and screaming at Jerome Powell, demanding that the Fed do just that.

What we find most remarkable about the op-ed is how simply, matter-of-factly and correctly, the author explains away why zero rates are coming:

Mounting debts and the financing problems in the real economy will promote China to a zero rate condition

…

Structurally, China’s non-financial corporate debt ratio is too high, and interest rates are too high. Considering that the repayment burden of existing debt has squeezed out the effective demand for new credit, and China is likely to become the next zero interest rate country

Amusingly, the anonymous op-ed writer has managed to state in two sentences what takes financial pundits hours, days and weeks to explain on CNBC:

Another phenomenon comes with low rates monetary condition is that prices go up with risk asset. The US stock prices have climbed to a new high.

That said, what we found most surprising about the Global Times oped is its conclusion: instead of some jingoist bullshit about how China’s negative rates would be the greatest, and most negative in the entire world, the publication takes a very measured tone, and warns that such a monetary stance may very well spell doom for China, to wit:

Zero or negative rates monetary conditions don’t mean that debt issues and the asset bubble problem will be resolved automatically, but the opposite. Growing bubbles in the global financial market in the long run will be a reminder of financial risks.

In a slowing global economy, zero or even negative interest monetary conditions are a new trend that gives new risks and challenges to China and the international financial market. Awareness and responsiveness need to be revamped.

Of course, by the time China is approaching ZIRP, the trade war between the US and China will be at such a heated, if not outright “kinetic” level, that few will notice or care what Beijing’s monetary policy is.

We strongly urge all US policymakers to read the following Global Times article, which is nothing short of a trial balloon warning what China is contemplating next in a desperate move to stimulate its economy, no matter the cost.

China needs to prepare for zero interest rates

The US Federal Reserve’s (Fed) continuous interest rates cuts have triggered a race of interest rates cuts among central banks around the world, increasing excessive global liquidity even further. In this case, more countries are faced with monetary conditions of zero or negative rates. Recently, former US Fed chairman Alan Greenspan noted that “negative rates” are spreading around the world. Some financial institutions even believe the world will enter a low rates condition that hasn’t occurred in 1,000 years.

Under the condition of low or zero rates, the world’s debts level keeps rising, and the bond yields continue dropping. Another phenomenon comes with low rates monetary condition is that prices go up with risk asset. The US stock prices have climbed to a new high.

For China, the demands for liquidity are growing, foreign capital keeps flowing in and the real economy continues to slow down, which all make the country seemingly approaching a zero rates monetary condition. It asks policymakers and market players to be prepared. Mounting debts and the financing problems in the real economy will promote China to a zero rate condition. In the first half of 2019, China’s overall debts accounted for 306 percent of the GDP, up 2 percentage points from the 304 percent in the first quarter, according to a report from the Institute of International Finance (IIF). The number was just around 200 percent in 2009 and 130 percent in 1999.

According to data from the National Institution for Finance and Development, China’s enterprise sector’s debts account for 155.7 percent of the nominal GDP, up 2.2 percentage points from the end of last year. It’s far beyond the government sector’s leverage ratio of 38.5 percent and the resident sector’s leverage ratio of 55.3 percent. In the enterprise sector, private companies embattled with financing problems account for 30 percent.

Structurally, China’s non-financial corporate debt ratio is too high, and interest rates are too high. Considering that the repayment burden of existing debt has squeezed out the effective demand for new credit, and China is likely to become the next zero interest rate country, according to Zhu Haibin, Chief China Economist at J.P. Morgan.

The low rates or zero rates condition will in turn reduce the effect of current monetary policy tools. In the overall picture of global interest cuts, the low inflation level causes monetary policy to face challenges. In China, the problem is severe. Currently, China is facing the superposition structural consumption of inflation and production deflation, which is squeezing the space for monetary policy adjustments. Both targeted and “flood-like” stimulus can’t overturn the economic slowdown. New monetary tools and new aims are urgently needed in the zero rates monetary condition.

In the real economy, the zero rates monetary condition will highlight structural problems. The drop of interest rates doesn’t necessarily lead to investment increases. The stratification in liquidity and credit will remain under overproduction conditions and bring new problems to small and medium-sized enterprises. The enterprise sector needs to more urgently prepare for upgrades and maintain competitiveness. The zero rates monetary condition also asks for promotion in supply side reforms, and to resolve problems in the monetary transmission mechanism.

In the finance sector and capital market, the zero rates monetary condition is also challenging for the banking industry and shadow banking. On one hand, dropping interests will narrow the profit space for banks, pressing their performance. On the other hand, enterprises which take loans as main financing means still face structural credit risks that banks can’t identify. It asks banks to build up management and capital capacity to deal with tougher competition. Zero rates will make more investors turn to direct financing, which causes new challenges in evaluation, pricing, investment modeling and investment portfolio balance. It also requires strengthening investment market building, and providing a level playing field.

Zero or negative rates monetary conditions don’t mean that debt issues and the asset bubble problem will be resolved automatically, but the opposite. Growing bubbles in the global financial market in the long run will be a reminder of financial risks.

In a slowing global economy, zero or even negative interest monetary conditions are a new trend that gives new risks and challenges to China and the international financial market. Awareness and responsiveness need to be revamped.

The article was compiled based on a report by Beijing-based private strategic think tank Anbound. bizopinion@globaltimes.com.cn

 

Submitted by South Front,

The Russian Armed Forces continue preparations for future conflicts involving large quantities of unmanned aerial and ground vehicles, as well as with other robotized platforms.

On November 10, the Russian Defense Ministry’s Zvezda TV channel revealed the military autonomous robotic complex “Kungas”, which is currently undergoing tests in the 12th Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry. The institute was created in the early 1950s for testing military equipment resistance to various damaging factors, including those arising from a nuclear explosion. The experimental base allows for the simulation of a super powerful shock wave and strong electromagnetic fields.

The “Kungas” includes 5 unmanned ground vehicles: a “man-portable” robot, a “light” robot, a “transportable” robot, a Nerekhta combat robot, and a robotic version of the BTR-MDM Shell armoured personnel carrier.

The Russian military did not provide extensive details on the project. However, data from open sources and released videos allows us to get a general look at the “Kungas” complex of robots. Included robots are as follows:

• A “man-portable” reconnaissance UGV with a manipulator. Its weight is 12 kg.

• A “light” UGV. It can carry an engineering manipulator or a combat module. The combat module may include one of the following: an anti-tank missile package of up to 4 missiles, a PKTM 7.62 mm machine gun, a grenade launcher, or a flamethrower system (i.e. Rocket-propelled Infantry Flamethrower). It’s weight is 200 kg.

• A “transportable” fire support and reconnaissance combat UGV. The combat module includes a 300-round Kord 12.7 mm heavy machine gun and a 90-round AG-30 automatic grenade launcher. Its weight is 2t. There are various configurations of this AGV.

• The combat robot Nerekhta. The combat module, in various options, is equipped with a 300-round Kord 12.7 mm machine-gun or a Kalashnikov 7.62 mm tank machine-gun. Additionally the module can be equipped with the 90-round automatic grenade launcher AG-30M. In addition to these weapons, the combat robot can carry 500 kg of ammunition and equipment. Nerekhta comes in various configurations, including reconnaissance, medical, transport, electronic warfare and other variants.

• A robotic version of the BTR-MDM Shell armoured personnel carrier. There are various configurations. The robot is armed with a Kord 12.7 mm machine gun or a PKTM 7.62 mm machine gun, and a 300-round automatic grenade launcher AG-30. Its main purpose is that of a transport module and fire support vehicle. The weight of the robot is 17t.

According to the report by Zvezda TV, all of these combat robots can be controlled remotely from a single command post. This means that they are controlled by a unified control system within a single intelligent network. In this case, the concept is that any combat robot, or a group of combat robots, can be controlled remotely from a single control center. The composition and number of controlled robots can differ depending on the situation and the task. Experts suggest that robots of the “Kungas” complex have the potential, after further development and improvement, to perform tasks autonomously, without direct control by an operator. In this case, the operator’s main task will be to oversee the autonomous task performance by Kungas robots and intervene in critical situations only.

The Kungas robotic system is a breakthrough development for the Russian Armed Forces. From the data revealed, it becomes clear that a platoon of combat robots has already been created within the Ground Forces. The unit is shaped in a manner which allows it to perform tasks on its own or interactively with other units of the armed forces or form flexible situational groups of different composition with the inclusion of other robotic systems.

Robots of the Kungas system can provide fire, reconnaissance and other types of support to more expensive systems, such as the Uran-9 tracked unmanned combat ground vehicle, which was tested in Syria in 2018 and entered service in January 2019. The Uran-9 is designed to deliver combined combat, reconnaissance and counter-terrorism units with remote reconnaissance and fire support. It weighs 10t and is armed with a 30 mm Shipunov 2A72 automatic cannon, 4 ready-to-launch 9M120-1 Ataka anti-tank guided missiles, 6 ready-to-launch Shmel-M reactive flamethrowers and a 7.62 mm Kalashnikov PKT/PKTM coaxial machine gun. Additionally, it can carry 4 Igla surface-to-air missiles. The combat robot is operated by a single service member and can be remotely controlled up to a maximum distance of 3,000 m. The road speed of the Uran-9 is 35km/h and the cross-country speed is 25km/h. The Uran-9 is equipped with a laser warning and target detection system, as well as identification and tracking equipment. The fitted day and night vision allows for detection of targets at a maximum distance of 6 km during the day and 3 km at night.

Therefore, the Russian military is aiming to gain capabilities allowing it to form offensive or defensive orders consisting of various robotic systems. For example, one can imagine an upcoming tactical unit consisting of several Uran 9 combat robots and various Kungas robots providing them with the needed support. The additional support will be provided by unmanned aerial vehicles and conventional units. The Russian Su-57 fighter jet and the Okhotnik stealth heavy unmanned combat aerial vehicle were developed in a manner to maximize their level of interaction by allowing them to operate as a team in the event of conflict.

It’s expected that the Russian military will continue to improve its robotic systems in this direction in order to increase the level of robotization and decrease the involvement of operators in tactical decision making during performance of tasks. The goal of this effort is to create a flexible and effective mix of robotized and non-robotized platforms -capable of performing various tasks on the battlefield.

Amazon knows the US consumer is quickly deteriorating, and western markets will likely stagnate in the early 2020s. A recent investor call revealed the e-commerce giant’s forecast revenue and profit for this holiday season would be below expectations, setting up a pathway for depressed consumer activity in the quarters ahead.

To get ahead of waning consumer demand in the US, Amazon is rushing to re-establish itself back in China after it closed its Chinese marketplace in July, sources told Reuters.

Amazon is expected to open a store on the Chinese e-commerce platform Pinduoduo on Monday. The company is expected to increase its efforts to sell goods to Chinese consumers via its global platform.

Reuters notes that Alibaba and JD.com have dominated the e-commerce marketplaces in China. It was only four years ago that Pinduoduo was able to get a slice of the action in lower-tier cities.

The source told Reuters that Amazon’s Pinduoduo store would carry goods from abroad.

Amazon is making a push back into China as the government modifies its economy from an export-driven model to a consumption-driven economy. The move will likely transform China into one of the largest consumer markets in the world, in the next several years.

China recently outpaced the US as having the world’s largest middle-class population. Every US consumer goods company knows that the US dominated the 20th century, but now it’s China that is dominating the 21st century.

China will be the greatest consumption story of the 2020s and will likely outpace the US as a global superpower by 2030. Amazon can read the tea leaves, and they want action in China.

 

Authored by Johnny Wood, senior writer at WEF

The planet’s population is growing rapidly – both in number and, in many places, size. Rising obesity levels place a heavy burden on healthcare provisions, leaving some countries facing an increasingly hefty bill, according to a new report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Obese people use healthcare services more frequently than most and require more specialty care visits, in-patient treatment admissions and surgery procedures. Providing medical services to tackle this problem can be a drain on healthcare budgets.

Almost one-in-four people in OECD countries are obese, the study shows, rising to almost 60% of the population when overweight people are included. Despite initiatives to combat this phenomenon, the number of people leading unhealthy lifestyles is on the rise and obesity rates are growing.

On average, treating obesity-related issues accounts for 8.4% of total healthcare spending in OECD countries.

The US is set to spend more per person treating obesity than any other OECD country. Over the next 30 years, this is expected to reach an annual outlay of almost $655 per person – 14% of the country’s total annual healthcare expenditure.

Across the border, neighbouring Canada is expected to spend less than half that per capita figure.

Germany sits between the two North American countries, with projected spending of more than $400 per person. Five of the top 10 list are European countries, with Italy and Spain coming in fourth and fifth. 

Obesity accounts for more than two-thirds of all treatment costs for diabetes, almost a quarter of treatment for cardiovascular conditions and 9% of cancer cases, according to the report. As well as lowering life expectancy, it hinders school performance, decreases worker productivity and lowers gross domestic product (GDP).

Profound impact

Poor diet, lack of exercise and an inactive lifestyle all contribute to putting on excessive weight, which has far-reaching consequences beyond the cost of healthcare.

The OECD report estimates that reducing the calorie intake of energy-dense foods by a fifth could have a profound impact. Each year, this could prevent more than a million cases of noncommunicable diseases like heart conditions, save more than $13 billion in healthcare spending and increase worker numbers by almost 1.5 million.

In the last 30 days, we’ve noted that China’s credit growth rapidly decelerated to the weakest pace since at least 2017 as a continued collapse in shadow banking, weak corporate demand for credit and seasonal effects all signaled that a massive rebound in China’s economy, nevertheless the global economy, in early 2020 is questionable. 

Though investors around the world have bought stocks in preparation for a massive 2016-style rebound in the global economy. We’ve discussed that because of China’s credit impulse has rolled over, the probabilities of a massive rebound in China’s economy or even the rest of the world remains low — though it’s possible the global economy could stabilize, it’s just the idea that a huge rebound is unlikely.  

Fathom Consulting’s China Momentum Indicator 2.0 (CMI 2.0) provides a more in-depth view of China’s economic activity than official Chinese GDP statistics. 

CMI 2.0 is based on ten alternative indicators for economic activity; some of those indicators include railway freight, electricity consumption, and the issuance of bank loans.

Fathom has stated that in CMI 2.0, the calculation of the index avoids measuring construction activity, and instead focuses on shadow measures of economic activity. The consulting group says this allows the index to be “less prone to manipulation than the headline GDP figures.”

“In 2014, when China’s traditional growth model was running out of steam and vulnerabilities were rising, authorities toyed with credit tightening and an enforced rebalancing. But at the end of 2015, when growth slowed too sharply, they quickly threw in the towel, resorting to the old growth model of credit-fuelled growth. With growth once again slowing, and past precedent suggesting credit has neared its limit, China finds itself at a crossroad,” Fathom recently said. 

China is undoubtedly at “crossroads,” as Fathom suggests, because of its inability to stoke economic growth via credit, this means China isn’t going to bail out the world again like it did in 2008 and 2015/16. 

Global stocks are expecting China CMI 2.0 to soar in the coming months, but if that doesn’t happen, global stocks are likely to see a significant correction in the months ahead.

And with China’s economic activity decelerating, China’s CSI 300 Index could retest around the 3,000 level. 

Commodities remain depressed because China’s economic activity continues to decelerate. 

Without China – which has created 60% of all new global debt over the past decade – there can be no global recovery.

In other words, enjoy the current growth delusion while it lasts… some time into Q2 2020 when the Fed’s NOT QE will fade to nothing.