Category: zerohedge

Authored by Haley Zaremba via oilprice.com,

The future of the global energy sector is caught up in a messy and misleading ideological debate. Depending on which politically informed echo chamber one inevitably finds themself confined to on social media, they are either told that the energy transition is a dangerous myth that will end in economic disaster and permanent rolling blackouts, or that clean energy is going to save the world overnight – as soon as conservatives get out of the way. As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between. 

The energy transition is strictly necessary. But it’s going to be very, very hard. It’s damaging to deny that there will almost certainly be shocks, missteps, and setbacks as we undergo one of the most disruptive chapters in industrial history. In large part we’re relying on untested and in many cases as-yet unproven technologies to emerge in the nick of time. 

There’s a temptation to sugar-coat the scale of the imperative to make the energy transition more palatable and less daunting. But there’s no denying it – it’s a very uncomfortable, and even frightening, petition to be in. And there will be winners and losers as economic priorities shift – the energy transition is good for humanity as a whole, but it certainly isn’t good for everyone. Acknowledging these difficult truths is essential to properly planning for and managing humanity’s greatest cooperative project. 

“There’s a lot of lying to ourselves,” Jason Grumet, the head of the American Clean Power Association (ACP), was quoted by Harvard’s Salata Institute for Climate and Sustainability. “We don’t want to grapple with a very, very tough issue: How do we think about the extent to which some communities have been fundamentally antagonized and disadvantaged, which is absolutely true, and the fact that the world is going to boil if we don’t speed things up?”

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) highlights five major challenges standing between humanity and its ideal clean energy future: the uncertain pace of technological advancement and deployment, disagreement over how fast we can transition without creating major disruption, the balance of future and current energy security, the widening clean energy gap between rich and poor countries, supply chain obstacles for clean energy components.

The pace of transition is a major sticking point. Move too slow and we risk climate catastrophe. Move too fast and risk major systemic log jams, economic hardship, and energy shocks. By transitioning away from coal alone, as the G7 just agreed to do by 2035, one million workers around the world will lose their jobs. The United States alone is home to 1.7 million fossil fuel workers. Without adequate security nets from the government, as well as sufficient time to properly deploy them, the loss of such industries is a looming tragedy for entire communities. The same goes for entire nations who will need to find alternative economic sectors to support their GDP. 

In addition to these economic costs, there are considerable logistical barriers to pushing the energy transition through too quickly. Already, the clean energy sector is struggling with huge delays in permitting, major issues securing land rights, and woefully unprepared and aging power grids that have no hope of supporting total electrification in their current state. While clean energy projects charge ahead with funding from initiatives such as the Inflation Reduction Act, major bottlenecks face those projects just down the road. This supports the notion that doing things well takes time. Ironing out those kinks should not be an afterthought. 

The same goes for balancing current energy security with future climate security. The global energy crisis that emerged after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine revealed that the world preemptively underinvested in oil and gas, leading to critical energy shortages which plunged communities and countries around the world into energy poverty and even caused food insecurity due to fertilizer shortages among other interrelated shocks.

These vulnerabilities are far more pronounced in developing countries, which are falling far behind in the clean energy transition despite having contributed the least to climate change and standing to lose the most from it. One of the biggest challenges for global decarbonization is the financial support of such nations–but so far wealthy countries have broken their promises to finance the global south’s energy transition.

Finally, as to the last point of the IMF’s five key challenges, there are also major snags in terms of sourcing all the raw materials needed to make the huge amount of clean energy technology components – wind turbines, solar panels, electrical wiring, batteries, and so on – that the energy transition depends on. Already, the sector is marred by geopolitically volatile monopolies and environmentally destructive mining and extraction practices.  

Plus, just when we think we’ve got a plan in place for the transition, supply and demand shifts in unpredictable and unprecedented ways. The rapid growth of Artificial Intelligence and data centers, as well as the ever-expanding energy footprint of Bitcoin, have majorly increased global demand for energy. And that demand will continue to grow at a much more rapid pace than clean energy deployment could ever hope to. Making AI a friend of the energy transition instead of a foe will be absolutely essential to the energy transition going forward. 

We’re talking about an unprecedented upending of the global industry at a speed that the world has never seen. There’s just no way that every step will be smooth. “Every sector of the economy will have to switch to new technologies, consumers will have to change behaviors, new supply chains will have to be built, and all this has to happen in every major economy, in just a few decades, and at the cost of a whole generation’s savings,” BloombergNEF’s Michael Liebreich wrote in 2023. “What could be harder?”

Well, a business-as-usual scenario would be harder. In a trajectory where the world does not curb its greenhouse gas emissions, climatic conditions would soon become untenable for much of the world, leading to major food shortages and dangerous levels of political unrest, among other crises. Decarbonization is going to be brutal, but a failure to act has resulted in a ‘code red for humanity.’ Ultimately, we can make it easier for ourselves. We should start by being realistic about the challenges we face so we can plan together how to overcome them. 

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news

Republican lawmakers are moving to prevent the Biden administration resettling Palestinian refugees in the United States, asserting that it represents a “national security threat” since large numbers of them support Hamas.

Earlier this week, it was revealed that the White House is considering using the United States Refugee Admissions Program to hand Palestinians permanent residency and “resettlement benefits like housing assistance and a path to American citizenship.”

Although CBS News reported that the “eligible population is expected to be relatively small,” European natives were given similar assurances before the 2015 refugee crisis that ended up with millions of migrants flooding the continent.

In a letter to House Appropriators, Reps. Andy Ogles (R-TN), Tom Tiffany (R-WI), and Scott Perry (R-PA) have asked that a provision be included in the Fiscal Year 2025 spending bill that prevents expenditures “of any funds to issue a visa or grant parole to any alien holding a passport issued by the Palestinian Authority.”

“Whatever fanciful leftist notion to the contrary, the United States of America cannot be expected to absorb the rest of the world’s problems. It would make much more sense for states in the region to take in those in need. If the administration is indeed working in concert with our allies in the region to pave the way for peace, that should come with the expectation that those allies are working in good faith to “do their part,” states the letter.

35 Senate Republicans are also demanding more specifics on the resettlement program, asserting that it represents “a national security risk to the United States.”

“With more than a third of Gazans supporting the Hamas militants, we are not confident that your administration can adequately vet this high-risk population for terrorist ties and sympathies before admitting them into the United States,” said the Senators.

A leaked Israeli intelligence document revealed in late October last year revealed a plan to ‘expel’ 2.2 million Palestinian refugees and send them to Europe, Canada and the United States.

The document, produced by Israel’s Intelligence Ministry, stated that one of the goals of the war with Gaza was to encourage western countries to facilitate the “absorption and settlement” of Gazan refugees.

Back in March, Jared Kushner said it was “unfortunate” that Europe isn’t taking in more Palestinian refugees, suggesting that the “cleaning up” of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip should be accelerated.

Meanwhile, as we highlight in the video below, while Americans could be set to see yet another influx of migrants thanks to Israel’s destruction of Gaza, criticizing the Middle Eastern country could technically become illegal under the draconian Antisemitism Awareness Act.

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Amgen’s shares soared in premarket trading in New York following the drug maker’s announcement of “very encouraging” clinical trial results for its new injectable weight-loss drug, “MariTide.”

Amgen’s MariTide is poised to compete with Eli Lilly & Co’s Zepbound and Novo Nordisk A/S’ Wegovy, both blockbuster drugs in the weight-loss market.

Bloomberg Intelligence published a recent note that estimated the weight-loss drug market will exceed $80 billion in annual sales by 2030. 

On Thursday evening, Amgen CEO Robert Bradway told investors during an earning call, “We recognize the significant interest in obesity.” 

“We are confident in MariTide’s differentiated profile and believe it will address important unmet medical needs,” Bradway said. 

Amgen expects data from the ongoing Phase 2 study to be released later this year and plans a “comprehensive” Phase 3 trial next. 

If MariTide is approved, the pharmaceutical company expects patients to inject themselves with the medication once a month, or possibly even less frequently than current weight-loss drugs on the market. It discarded plans to develop an oral form of the weight-loss drug. 

Shares of Amgen jumped nearly 15% to $319 – near a record high – in premarket trading. 

If the premarket gains hold during the cash session, a 15% increase would mark the largest intra-day move since the 15.10% rise on July 20, 2005. If the gains exceed this level, it would become the largest single-day gain since October 30, 1987.

Meanwhile, Barclays Plc analyst Emily Field said it’s too early to judge the competitive threat between Eli Lilly and Novo. 

However, traders dumped Novo shares in Copenhagen, down 4% on Friday. 

“As of today, we see no cause for concern regarding the competitive dynamics versus the market leaders,” Field wrote in a note. “We really will need to see the data,” Field wrote in a note. 

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

There is a “widespread belief” among US officials that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s goal of “eradicating” Hamas in Gaza is unattainable, The New York Times reported on Thursday.

Throughout the past seven months, there have been multiple signs that the US doesn’t believe Israel could achieve its goals in Gaza, yet the Biden administration has continued to support the slaughter of Palestinians in the Strip.

In March, the US intelligence agencies released their annual “threat assessment,” and it said Israel will face “lingering armed resistance” for “years to come” and that the Israeli military would struggle to destroy Hamas’s underground infrastructure.

The Washington Post also reported in March that the US didn’t think Israel had clear or attainable goals as far back as October. “We never had a clear sense that the Israelis had a definable and achievable military objective,” a source familiar with an October 27 Biden administration meeting on the situation in Gaza told the Post.

“From the very beginning, there’s been a sense of us not knowing how the Israelis were going to do what they said they were going to do.”

The Times report focused on Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Israel and the difference in messaging from the administration and Netanyahu. Blinken said the US was still opposed to Israel invading Rafah without a clear plan for civilians, but Netanyahu’s message was that an invasion will happen no matter what.

Blinken also called on Hamas to accept Israel’s latest proposal for a hostage deal and temporary ceasefire, but Netanyahu signaled that he wasn’t interested. The Israeli leader vowed to invade Rafah “with or without” a deal with Hamas.

The Times report said US officials were “taken aback” by the timing of Netanyahu’s comment because they think Hamas would only accept a deal if they believed releasing hostages could lead to a permanent ceasefire, which has been the Palestinian group’s demand for months. Netanyahu also told Blinken that he wouldn’t agree to end military operations in Gaza for a hostage deal.

Despite the difference in public messaging, there’s no sign the Biden administration is putting any real pressure on Netanyahu to prevent an invasion of Rafah as US military aid continues to flow. So far, the US-backed Israeli slaughter has reportedly killed 34,596 people, including over 14,000 children, according to the latest numbers from Gaza’s Health Ministry.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shut down auditor BF Borgers, described by the Financial Times as “one of the most prolific auditors of US public companies,” over allegations of “massive fraud” that affected more than 1,500 SEC filings, the agency announced on Friday.

Borgers agreed to a $12 million civil penalty, while owner Benjamin Borgers agreed to pay $2 million to settle the SEC’s charges. The company has also agreed to permanent suspensions from practicing as accountants on SEC filings, effective immediately.

According to the SEC, a “significant” number of listed companies will have to switch accountants in the coming days due to the enforcement action.

Clients include Trump Media.

“Trump Media looks forward to working with new auditing partners in accordance with today’s SEC order,” a spokesperson for Trump’s media company told Reuters in an email.

Borgers has also acted for fintech and crypto companies, and many other small issuers, SEC filings show.

According to the SEC, Borgers did not properly prepare and maintain audit documentation, fabricated audit planning meetings, and in some cases simply passed off previous audits for the current audit period.

Of 369 BF Borgers clients whose filings from January 2021 through June 2023 incorporated BF Borgers’s audits and reviews, at least 75% incorporated audits that did not comply with the SEC’s rules.

According to SEC Enforcement Division Director Gurbir Grewal, “Ben Borgers and his audit firm, BF Borgers, were responsible for one of the largest wholesale failures by gatekeepers in our financial markets.”

Authored by Louis-Vincent Gave via Gavekal Research blog,

The rise in US treasury yields this year initially caused the usual casualties: the yen, won, euro, and British pound. From exchange rates, it seems that the US interest rate wrecking ball is now wreaking destruction among richly-valued technology stocks. Recent trading sessions have seen a vicious rotation in equity markets. It’s not every day that the Nasdaq falls by more than -2%, while the Russell 2000 gains 1%. In recent quarters, investors had become used to the opposite.

With rising US treasury yields causing pain in the currency markets and now among US growth stocks, investors will be wondering what the rise in yields will break next. Could rising yields break the back of the gold bull market? Or the unfolding emerging market boom? Or the nascent bull market in industrial metals and energy? What about economic growth in general?

The persistence of the idea that rising yields will eventually self-correct is testament to a fundamentally deflationary mindset. It is a mindset most investors share, since for the last 40 years, the world has been fundamentally deflationary. It reflects a belief that government bonds remain the ultimate risk free asset—even though long-dated US treasuries have lost half their value in the last four years.

This belief is based partly on governments’ ability to tax their populations in order to pay their past, present and future debts. But in a world where capital and individuals are ever more mobile, can we assume that a government’s ability to tax its citizens is limitless? Canada may now be putting this concept to the test. After it massively increased capital gains taxes, it seems likely its actual capital gains tax take will now be much lower than it would have been without the increase.

Canada is not alone. In France, over the last 50 years tax receipts have climbed from around a third of GDP to more than half. But even though it has taken a bigger slice of the economic cake in every cycle, the French government has not run a budget surplus since 1974. And with every downturn, budget deficits grow as a percentage of GDP. As a result, France’s debt has grown from around 20% of GDP to 112% today. France is now clearly on the downward sloping side of the Laffer curve.

Take the US commercial real estate meltdown as another example. Hardly a day goes by without news that an office building in New York, Los Angeles or San Francisco has sold for a fraction of the price it commanded five years ago. Interestingly, this seems to be happening mostly in “high-tax” states. Low-tax states such as Florida or Texas seem to have far fewer commercial real estate problems. Today, California, New York and other high-tax states may have reached the point where as taxes rise, citizens and businesses flee to lower-tax jurisdictions.

To cut a long story short, the recent blowout in US yields, the rollover in French tax receipts (and likely in Canadian tax receipts) in spite of higher tax rates, and the faceplant in US commercial real estate all raise questions about what happens when debt is already high relative to GDP (at 100% or more) and yet the growth of government spending still outpaces the growth of tax receipts year in, year out.

In such an environment, are government bonds still the default risk-free asset? Can investors trust that the government Leviathan will still be able to tap the economy for an ever-larger pound of flesh? Or, as we are seeing in the US today with the migration from high-tax to low-tax states, will people rebel and move? Or will they simply stop working as hard? Given the current direction of government policies, with the end of non-dom tax status in the UK and Canada’s increase in capital gains tax rates, it seems likely the coming years will provide an answer.

Three possible scenarios spring to mind.

1) Government spending continues to grow faster than tax receipts. Budget deficits continue to expand. And debt-to-GDP ratios continue to rise. In this scenario, it seems likely that more and more investors will look at the long term trajectory of public debt and conclude that the only way to square the circle is through ever-greater central bank debt monetization.

In such a world, government bonds will gradually lose their default risk-free asset status to risk assets like gold and equities.

2) Taxes increase, budget deficits come under control and debt-to-GDP ratios roll over.

In this scenario, government bonds reclaim their crown as the ultimate risk-free asset.

3) Governments shed assets (as Margaret Thatcher did in the UK in the 1980s) in order to get debt-to-GDP ratios under control.

The risk is that as governments shed assets, the prices of all assets fall.

Of these three scenarios, which seems the most likely?

As US consumers shift from beef to chicken due to elevated supermarket prices, exacerbated by a rapid decline in US cattle herds, one of the world’s largest chicken producers has issued a dire warning that chicken prices could soon increase. 

Bloomberg reports that Pilgrim’s Pride Corp. and the industry as a whole have developed ‘hatchery issues’, which means a large number of eggs in incubators aren’t hatching. 

On Thursday, Pilgrim’s Chief Executive Officer Fabio Sandri told investors during an earnings call that the hatchery issues stem from a new breed of rooster (Frankenchickens?) that requires closer management, indicating this is the primary cause of the decline in fertility rates industrywide. 

“We don’t have the housing to separate the males by weight. We don’t have the labor to individually weigh all those males to make sure that they are at the optimal weight for reproduction,” Sandri said.

Pilgrim said because of hatchery issues, chicken production nationwide is projected to grow much less than the US Department of Agriculture’s 1.5% estimate. 

USDA data shows that the number of eggs hatched began dropping right after the Covid pandemic in late 2020, from 81.5% to now 76.5%. That compares with averages above 80% over the last decade. 

“The hurdle to expand production comes at a time when consumers are turning to poultry as they seek cheaper alternatives to beef,” Bloomberg noted. 

Retail prices of chicken boneless breast, measured by USDA, surged from about $3 a pound in early 2020 to $4.75 a pound in September 2022, primarily due to commercial farms culling large flocks due to the bird flu. Prices have since subsided to about $4.1 a pound but risk moving higher on lower production trends. 

Meanwhile, consumers have been shocked by skyrocketing beef prices as the nation’s herd size recently plunged to 73-year lows. 

And the UN’s global food index risks turning back up as stagflationary threats emerge in the US economy. 

Meat prices are becoming super expensive for working poor households. Bill Gates is getting his wish… 

After the disappointing Manufacturing survey data, the signals from the Services side are not great either – even as ‘hard’ data has improved.

• S&P Global’s Services PMI dropped to a five month low at 51.3 (better than the expected/flash at 50.9, but still falling).

• ISM Services PMI was worse, tumbling to 49.4 (from 51.4 and expected to rise to 52.0) – the weakest print (and first contraction) since Dec 2022

Source: Bloomberg

Under the hood was worse with Prices Paid rebounding strongly while New Orders and Employment both slowed…

Source: Bloomberg

Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said:

“Service sector growth slowed in April to point to a sluggish start to the second quarter for the US economy. Alongside a concomitant cooling in the rate of growth of manufacturing output, the weaker service sector performance means overall business activity grew in April at the slowest rate seen so far this year. At current levels, the PMI indicates that GDP is expanding at a modest annualized rate of approximately 1.5% so far in the second quarter.

“Demand has weakened, as signaled by the first fall in new orders for goods and services for six months, in part a reflection of both businesses and households adjusting to higher costs and the prospect of higher for longer interest rates.

Business optimism has likewise cooled, dropping to the lowest since November, and companies are taking a more cautious approach to staffing levels.”

So Prices Paid UP, Orders DOWN, Optimism COOLED

The government of Israel is now essentially in a full diplomatic war with the International Criminal Court (ICC) over the possible impending arrest warrants which could be issued anytime for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his top officials, including the defense chief. 

The back-and-forth rhetoric has grown so heated that the Hague-based ICC has issued a new Friday statement warning against ‘intimidation’ of the court. While not naming Israel or any specific officials or actions, the statement warns that legal action could be take against those “threatening to retaliate” or else trying to “impede or intimidate” its officials and the world court’s work.

The ICC prosecutor’s office said that any threats against the court or its personnel could “constitute an offence against the administration of justice under Art 70 of the Rome Statute.”

“The office insists that all attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence its officials cease immediately,” the statement posted to X continued. It said it rejects any scenario where the court’s “independence and impartiality are undermined.”

Axios reported Monday that the Israeli government is growing “increasingly concerned” over the possible action, while Walla news has written that Netanyahu is “under unusual stress” over what will be a largely symbolic, albeit still deeply embarrassing reputational black eye for his government at a moment he’s facing immense domestic pressure at home to bring back the hostages.

Israel has been warning that an ICC warrant could blow up a hostage deal being mediated by Egypt and Qatar. Additionally Netanyahu has been issuing personal appeals condemning the ICC case which focused on alleged human rights violations, war crimes, and alleged genocide on the part of IDF troops in Gaza.

This unusual ICC response follows on the heels of Netanyahu days ago saying he “expects the leaders of the free world to stand firmly against” any ICC arrest warrants for Israeli government officials.

“We expect them to use all the means at their disposal to stop this dangerous move,” Netanyahu said. It’s also been widely reported that he personally asked President Biden to pressure the ICC to halt its proceedings related to Israeli war crimes.

Statement of the #ICC Office of the Prosecutor pic.twitter.com/Cw331pMcDm

— Int’l Criminal Court (@IntlCrimCourt) May 3, 2024

Geopolitical analyst Lisa Daftari has noted that “If the ICC eventually charges anyone in Israel, the defendants will probably not see any hearings because it is up to the associated states to make arrests for the court.”

However, Daftari has pointed out that “The practical effect of such a measure would be to limit the travel options of any indicted person to countries that did not ratify the Rome Treaty.” Russia’s Putin currently faces this dilemma, and it will be a new day when Netanyahu faces the same restrictions. This is what the Israeli and US governments are currently lobbying against.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Now that Congress rammed through a huge weapons package for Ukraine, what will Ukraine do with the weapons and how long will they last?

Ukraine’s Real Bottleneck

Ukraine touts Russian casualties, no doubt exaggerated, while Russian published accounts of Russian losses are no doubt understated.

But what about Ukraine’s losses? Those are a military secret.

Despite a full understanding of how bad the situation is in Ukraine, we do know that it’s not a pretty setup. Please consider Ukraine’s Bottleneck.

The main reason why opinion in Washington has shifted over Ukraine is the assessment that the country will lose the war because it does not have enough troops on the ground.

We saw a story in Bild yesterday that would confirm this story line. Of all German newspapers, Bild has been the strongest supporter of Ukraine, so we don’t think we are dealing with a case of news selection bias. We know about shortages. This story goes further. Ukrainian commanders are saying that the bottleneck is no longer western weapons, but people who can use them.

We should not extrapolate that information. They may overstate their case to force a change in policy. For all we know, Russia may have the exact same problems, or worse.

Many young Ukrainian men have left the country to avoid the draft. President Volodymyr Zelensky has been hesitant to order a general draft of all Ukrainians. His government recently suspended consular services for Ukrainian males aged 18 to 60 years old, and reduced the age for the draft from 27 to 25 years. There is clearly more they can do. Only 15% of its male population is in active service.

But what made us listen up is the assertion about bottlenecks. It quoted one brigadier general as saying that he used to think that the lack of artillery shells was the biggest problem, but now it was the lack of human resources. The question is whether the general mobilization has been delayed for too long. The problem is not only the headline numbers. If you started a general mobilisation today, you would still not have the numbers of people trained to use the weapons.

Bild quoted Roderich Kiesewetter, a CDU defence expert and a former Bundeswehr general, as saying that the best-trained soldiers in Ukraine had been killed or injured, and those still active have been deployed without a break for two years. Exhaustion is becoming a factor in this war. He said Ukraine was lacking a predictable recruitment strategy. Another expert, from the Munich Security Conference, also believes that the right response is to start the draft immediately.

We are more sceptical. Young Ukrainians men who live abroad have means to resist a draft. EU countries cannot just deport them without recourse to legal processes. Nor will all EU countries want to do that. An army of draft dodgers who experienced the comfortable life abroad, and who are recruited against their will, are not going to win this war. Zelensky could lower the age of the draft to 18. But you would be training an essentially new army from scratch in the middle of a war.

So then, we ask, what is the strategy? That is also a question for the western countries that support Ukraine, who don’t have any strategy whatsoever. 

No US Strategy, No US Goals

No strategy and no goals are two things I have been writing about for months.

The US has no goals or strategy, except perhaps perpetual war.

Ukraine’s Goal

Zelensky has a ridiculous goal, 100% of all territory lost including Crimea.

And Ukraine will badger the US and Europe forever to achieve them. So how much are we willing to pay?

Biden is unwilling to say. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson is unwilling to say, and he cast the deciding vote for a massive $61 billion weapons delivery to Ukraine.

The total to date is $175 billion. But where does that money really go?

What Is in the Ukraine Aid Package

The Center for Strategic and International Studies explains What Is in the Ukraine Aid Package

Q4: Where will this money be spent?

A4: The notion of “aid to Ukraine” is a misnomer. Despite images of “pallets of cash” being sent to Ukraine, about 72 percent of this money overall and 86 percent of the military aid will be spent in the United States. The reason for this high percentage is that weapons going to Ukraine are produced in U.S. factories, payments to U.S. service members are mostly spent in the United States, and even some piece of the humanitarian aid is spent in the United States. The major element of funding going to Ukraine is the economic support to the Ukrainian government, which the World Bank handles.

Is it any wonder why Johnson was pushed so hard by military intelligence to vote for the deal? Here’s another interesting Q&A.

Q7: How long will the $61 billion last?

A7: Until funding started to dry up, the United States had been spending about $5.4 billion per month as a result of the war. At that spending rate, $61 billion would last for nearly a full year. Indeed, the original intention was that the funding would last through fiscal year 2024 and run out in September or October. However, half the fiscal year has passed, and the money may last until about January 2025 as a result. Because most of the appropriations are multiyear, the administration can use the money into FY 2025.

That suits the political calendar. The administration will not want to send another aid request to Congress in the fall when the presidential election campaign is in full swing. If the Biden administration wins reelection, it will send a request to Congress either during the lame duck session or, if Democrats do well, after the new Congress takes office. If the Biden administration loses, it may send a request anyway to make a political statement, not expecting Congress to take action. The Republicans would want to wait until the new president took office.

How Does This End?

I can tell you how this will end, and I have already several times: A negotiated settlement in which Ukraine loses territory in return for being allowed to join NATO, perhaps with some restrictions.

No one will be happy, especially those who would prefer perpetual war. But it won’t be perpetual war because Ukraine will eventually run out of men.

Zelensky may be willing to kill them all, but can he stay in power long enough to do that?

Mike Johnson Goes Full Neocon

On April 18, I commented Mike Johnson Goes Full Neocon, Nikki Haley May as Well Be House Speaker

“I really do believe the intel and in the briefings that we’ve gotten,” Johnson said. “I believe Xi [Jinping] and Vladimir Putin and Iran really are an axis of evil,” warning that Russia could march west across Europe if not stopped now. “To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys.”

That is a false dichotomy.

One does not have to make a choice between sending bullets or men to Ukraine. One could easily do neither or both.

Sending bullets does not preclude further stupidity such as sending troops.

No Skin in the Game

Since the critical shortage is really manpower, not weapons, I have a suggestion: Mike Johnson and everyone who voted for this package should be forced to serve in Ukraine.

Skin in the game should be a prerequisite for all of these war fundings.

Lindsey Graham Tells Ukraine to Force More Young Men Into War With Russia

On March 19, I commented Lindsey Graham Tells Ukraine to Force More Young Men Into War With Russia

I’ve Changed My Mind on Aid to Ukraine

I now support aid to Ukraine if Senator Graham and all the Senators who support aid personally lead the charge.

I suggest we put Graham on horseback with a sword and a Ukrainian flag to lead the other Senators into battle.

What is the Best Way to Help Israel and Ukraine?

On April 16, I asked What is the Best Way to Help Israel and Ukraine?

See if you agree with my answer.