iftttwall

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

As is often pointed out by prolockdown publications like the New York Times, Sweden has experienced covid-19 deaths at a rate above that of some of its neighbors that imposed relatively strict lockdowns, such as Denmark.

What is rarely mentioned, however, is that Sweden’s deaths per million are also similar to or lower than many countries that did impose harsh lockdowns. For example, as of October 18, the deaths per million in the United Kingdom were 643 in the UK for only 585 in Sweden. Meanwhile, Belgium’s death rate was 897 per million, and Italy’s rate was 606.

Moreover, while cases and deaths are increasing in the UK, Spain, Italy, and Belgium, deaths are apparently flatlining in Sweden. Sweden has reported fewer than ten deaths in the past week.

Clearly, this trend calls into question the official narrative, which is that any country without harsh lockdowns will experience far higher death rates than the countries that lock down.

That narrative having failed in the case of Sweden, prolockdown critics have attempted other explanations.

One is that population density is lower in Sweden, so therefore it will have lower deaths per million.

This claim leaves much to be desired. New research suggests the data is, at best, inconclusive on that matter. While density is like a factor of some kind, there’s no evidence it is a factor to the extent that would be necessary to explain why Sweden has performed better than the UK and Spain, for instance.

Another theory is that the Swedes have voluntarily practiced social distancing so studiously, that this explains away the apparent failure of the “forced lockdown or die” narrative.

As one reporter at Quartz claimed:

“Citizens seems to be taking their responsibility seriously. Residents point out that they are practicing social distancing, with the elderly isolated, and families mostly staying home, apart from kids in school.”

Or in an article at MedPageToday:

  “‘Swedes in general have changed their behavior to a great extent during the pandemic and the practice of social distancing as well as physical distancing in public places and at work has been widespread,’ said Maria Furberg, MD, PhD, an infectious diseases expert at Umea University Hospital in northeastern Sweden.”

But, again, the data doesn’t show this.

Using the Google Community Mobility Trends data, we find that the Sweden practiced social distancing far less than countries that had strict lockdowns in place.

For example, the amount of time spent at home surged 30 percent in the UK, Spain, and Italy during the harshest lockdown period. Yet during this same period, the Swedes’s amount of time spent at home never exceeded 15 percent.

Meanwhile, the decline in workplace visitors has tended to be relatively small compared to countries with stricter lockdowns and with higher death rates.

We find similar trends in recreation and retail:

And in the use of transit:

*  *  *

ZH: We are sure this will be dismissed as non-science, or hate-speak, or dangerous by the time it filters through social media establishment minds… but it should make many wonder just WTF we are doing in some US states.

Migration trends have hit a wall in 2020 as a result of the coronavirus pandemic – resulting in what will be even more pressure to the global economic outlook.

New visa issuances by the 37 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) were down 46% in the first half of 2020. The organization warned that continued restrictions on travel means that it could be “some time” before trends return back to normal.

Migration has a direct impact on the transport, domestic services and IT industries, Bloomberg notes. Migrants also make up 24% of medical doctors and 16% of nurses, the article says.

OECD Secretary General Angel Gurria said: “Migration will continue to play an important role for economic growth and innovation, as well as in responding to rapidly changing labor markets. We need to avoid rolling back on integration and reaffirm that migration is an integral part of our lives.”

Immigrants have also been disproportionately affected by job losses resulting from the pandemic. Immigrant unemployment has moved from 1% below native workers to now 2% above native workers in the U.S. In Canada, Norway and Sweden, similar trends are showing up.

The OECD concludes that migrants also have increased chance of health risks, since many work on the “front line”.

It also concludes that the progress many nations have made in welcoming migrants could wind up being undone as a result of the global economic slowdown. 

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

The United States and Poland closed a nuclear power deal potentially worth $18 billion as the Central European country seeks to reduce its reliance on coal and Russian natural gas.

While the deal is not yet final, there is a pretty good chance that Warsaw will pick the U.S. over its main competitors on the international nuclear energy scene, namely China and Russia.

“We are hopeful that the ultimate decisions that are made by Poland … over a period of time will result in them choosing U.S. technology,” Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette told reporters as quoted by Reuters.

Poland wants to build six nuclear reactors to supplement its gas imports. Currently, it imports a lot of gas from Russia, but given the less than friendly bilateral relations, it wants to cut these off, and soon, by 2022, Reuters notes. Instead, it would import pipeline gas by Norway and liquefied natural gas from, among others, the United States.

Yet Poland also relies heavily on coal-fired power plants, and this goes counter to the EU’s ambitions for a net-zero economy in 2050. The only way to reduce or even eliminate its coal use is to replace that cheap energy with another comparable generational capacity.

The agreement closed this week stipulates that over the next 18 months, the parties will develop a program for the construction of the reactors and how they will be financed. Per plans, the first reactors should come online in 2033.

The whole program could end up costing Warsaw some $40 billion, of which at least $18 billion would go towards acquiring U.S. nuclear technology, according to a U.S. government official.

Poland’s government plans to build between 6 and 9 GW of nuclear capacity by 2040, but it will also invest in renewable energy, planning between 8 and 11 GW in offshore wind power capacity.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has long vowed he’ll “do everything” to stop Nord Stream 2, last month indicating the US is building a coalition of countries to fight against it, given Washington sees it as a massive compromise to Russia, giving it leverage over Europe as well as Ukraine. 

“From the US point of view, Nord Stream 2 endangers Europe because it makes it dependent on Russian gas and endangers Ukraine – which in my opinion worries many Germans,” Pompeo said weeks ago.

On Tuesday the State Department expanded US sanctions targeting companies working on the Russia to Germany gas pipeline. While sanctions already target the specific European companies and their executives directly at work on the project, they’ve now been extended to include sanctions even on firms upgrading, servicing, or installing equipment on the ships laying the pipeline.

Here’s the relevant section on the State Department’s updated NS2 sanctions webpage:

“Such activities subject to sanctions pursuant to PEESA (the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act of 2019) or other authorities may include, but are not limited to, providing services or facilities for upgrades or installation of equipment for those vessels, or funding for upgrades or installation of equipment for those vessels.”

There remain some exceptions, however, out of environmental concerns. The State Department says the sanctions “will not apply to persons providing provisions to a relevant vessel if such provisions are intended for the safety and care of the crew aboard the vessel, the protection of human life aboard the vessel, or the maintenance of the vessel to avoid any environmental or other significant damage.”

Likely this would be the loophole any such company put on notice over the new sanctions will use to evade punishment, given any repair or upgrade to a ship could be argued necessary over future “safety” and “environmental” concerns.

Though Washington in a sense has won particular “battles” on the NS2 front, Russia and Germany have indicated the US will not win the “war” given that by all appearances the pipeline will be pursued to completion.

One major victory for US sanctions was that Swiss pipelay company Allseas had abandoned its central roll in the project in December 2019 under threat of US punitive action. Russian gas giant Gazprom then outfitted its own ships to lay the last 100 miles of the pipeline.

Just days ago, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas reaffirmed that the pipeline will indeed be completed. He said at this point project completion is essentially not if but when. He emphasized in comments the only question that remains is precisely “when this will happen”.

He underscored in an indirect shot at the Trump administration: “We make decisions about our energy policy and energy supply here – in Europe.”

Submitted by SouthFront,

The Azerbaijani Armed Forces have been developing their advance on Armenian positions in the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region. On October 19, they captured 13 more villages in the Jabrayil district. The capturing of Soltanli, Amirvarli, Mashanli, Hasanli, Alikeykhanli, Gumlag, Hajili, Goyarchinveysalli, Niyazgullar, Kechal Mammadli, Shahvalli, Haji Ismayilli and Isagli was personally announced by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. Early on October 20, Azerbaijani forces also reached the town of Tumas and engaged Armenian units deployed there. Pro-Azerbaijani sources insist that the town already fell into the hands of Baku.

The country’s defense ministry claims that in the recent clashes Azerbaijani forces destroyed a number of enemy troops, at least 2 T-72 tanks, 2 BM-21 “Grad” MLRS, 1 D-30, 1 D-20 gun-howitzers, and 11 auto vehicles.

On October 19, pro-Armenian sources for the first time provided video evidence that they had shot down at least one of the Bayraktar TB2 combat drones operated by the Azerbaijani military and Turkish specialists.  Meanwhile, the Armenian Defense Ministry claimed that 5 unmanned aerial vehicles were shot down during the evening of that day only.

According to the Armenian side, the total number of Azerbaijani casualties in the war reached 6,259. 195 UAVs, 16 helicopters, 22 military planes, 566 armoured vehicles and 4 multiple rocket launchers of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan were allegedly destroyed. Yerevan claims that the Armenian forces have repelled two powerful attacks in the northern part of Karabakh, while intense fighting has been ongoing in the south. Nonetheless, Armenian military officials avoid confirming the recent Azerbaijani advances and insist that the recent developments are just a part of modern maneuver warfare. By these claims, the political leadership of Armenia tries to hide that the Azerbaijani advance along the Iranian border faced little resistance.

The Azerbaijani progress was mostly complicated by a limited number of mobile Armenian units, which were avoiding a direct confrontation and focusing on ambushes and mine warfare. According to reports, the Armenian side is now reinforcing its positions in the area of the Akari River seeking to prevent the further Azerbaijani advance towards the Armenian state border and the Lachin corridor.

On the other hand, the goal of the Azerbaijani-Turkish bloc is to overcome this resistance and to develop the current momentum to reach the Lachin mountain pass thus threatening to cut off the shortest route between Armenia and the Republic of Artsakh. In the event of success, this would predetermine the Azerbaijani victory in the war. Military hostilities are ongoing amid another round of international diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the situation and return the sides to the negotiating table.President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan declared that they are ready to meet in Moscow. The Azerbaijani leader even said that his country is ready to halt the operation if Armenia demonstrates a constructive approach. Nonetheless, the ‘constructive approach of Armenia’ in the view of Azerbaijan is the full and public surrender of Karabakh. Such an agreement will mark the collapse of the current political leadership of Armenia and is unlikely to be accepted.Therefore, the war will likely continue until the military victory of one of the sides and that side would likely be Azerbaijan.

Baku has already achieved an impressive breakthrough on the frontline if one compares the current situation with local military escalations in the previous years. As to Armenia, it will not likely be able to turn the tide of the conflict if it continues limiting its response to indirect support of forces of the Republic of Artsakh instead of a direct military action to repel the Azerbaijani-Turkish bloc. Clashes of the previous weeks already demonstrated that Baku has an upper hand in the current format of the military standoff in Karabakh. Therefore, if Yerevan really wants to change something, it should change the rules of the game even if this would create additional risks for Armenia itself.