Grassley Blasts MSM Over Hunter Biden Hypocrisy Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/10/2020 – 19:40
Chuck Grassley is one pissed off Senator.
After the Iowa Republican and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) produced a long-awaited Senate report which concluded that Hunter Biden’s financial dealings with Ukrainian, Chinese and Russian businesses created “criminal financial, counterintelligence and extortion concerns” concerning everything from sex-trafficking to bribery – the MSM panned it as a partisan attack on a presidential candidate’s son.
Now that Hunter has admitted he’s under investigation for tax fraud (and, as Politico and CNN have added, money laundering and accepting bribes), Grassley is having the last laugh.
In Thursday remarks on the Senate Floor, Grassley blasted the media after months of covering for the Bidens.
“For over a year, Senator Johnson and I investigated the Biden financial family dealings,” said Grassley, adding “We found that they engaged in potential criminal financial deals across the globe, including China, which created counterintelligence concerns.”
Grassley then turned his attention to the MSM, saying “Those same liberal outlets that disparaged our investigation now report that Hunter Biden’s financial deals in China raise counterintelligence concerns.”
He went on to say that the media should have been covering concerns raised by Republicans instead of covering them up.
“So you can understand why I think it’s very outrageous that the fourth estate would choose to ignore facts when they are uncovered by Republicans,” Grassley continued. “It shouldn’t take subpoenas and confirmation from Hunter Biden himself to get the rest of the press to pay attention.”
Watch:
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3m7eMD5 Tyler Durden
Shipping Container Shortages In China Crimp Exports To West Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/10/2020 – 19:20
No one predicted that the shipping container industry would be absolutely on fire this year, considering China’s strong economic rebound following the virus-induced downturn. Now a shortage of shipping containers in Asia are sending container spot rates to multi-year highs, has already started to crimp China exports.
Just how high can Asia-U.S. East Coast spot rates go? Well, the cost of chartering a 40-foot container from China to the US East Coast soared to nearly $5k this week, up 85% since June 1, according to Freightos data in Refinitiv Eikon.
Source: Freightos data in Refinitiv Eikon
A shortage of containers in China comes as exports in the country surged 21% in November from a year ago. Chinese factories are pumping out appliances, electronics, toys, clothes, and personal protective equipment to the world.
As explained by Reuters, a “severe shortage” of containers in the Asian country is starting to hit export flows:
But due to China’s lopsided trade balance – exporting three containers for every one imported recently – and delays in containers returning to China due to the pandemic overseas, a severe shortage is now starting to pinch export flows. Roughly 60% of global goods move by container, and according to United Nations trade data there are close to 180 million containers worldwide. -Reuters
Charles Xu, a mirror salesman, located in Yiwu’s export hub in Zhejiang province, which supplies major US retailers, told Reuters that “we ve so many orders but just cannot ship things. Boxes are piling up at our factory and we don’t have much space left. It’s just hard to book containers, and everyone is bidding for them with high price.”
China Container Industry Association said the average container turnaround has jumped to 100 days from 60 days because of virus-related capacity cuts in the US and Europe, which has greatly increased the shortage of containers in China. There have already been reports of some US importers not being able to receive shipments in November.
In September, we first noted that demand for ocean freight out of China was “leading to equipment shortages in Asia.”
“The surge in volumes is leading to equipment shortages in Asia. Some shippers are paying premiums on top of spiking rates to guarantee containers and space. The imbalance is also putting pressure on overwhelmed US ports and importers to process and return empty containers quickly.”
Spot container rates from China are soaring worldwide:
Source: Freightos data in Refinitiv Eikon
Even with Chinese container manufacturers boosting capacity to keep up with demand – their efforts are still falling short. Mainly because distorted trader flows have resulted in record build-up in containers elsewhere.
For instance, the Port of Los Angeles, the nation’s top port, imported 3.5 containers for every one it exported in October. There are currently 326,000 empty containers sitting at the port, according to shipping organization BIMCO.
One Chinese vendor with clients in the US said, “right now waiting for container is two to four weeks. I still don’t know if I will have a container or not.”
Shortages could persist well into the first quarter of 2021 as container manufacturers in China are booked through Feburary.
And what could this mean for US consumers? Well, this is what we said back in October:
“Inventories are historically low. There is rising concern that companies will not be able to import and deliver enough goods to meet consumer demand during the holiday season.”
Frederic Neumann, co-head of Asian Economics Research at HSBC, suspects this “unusually high demand for goods globally, which is likely to cool as we move into 2021 because of the (expected) service-led recovery, particularly in Western economies.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2KesG98 Tyler Durden
Schumer held a press conference alongside Democratic Congressmen-elect Ritchie Torres, Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman of New York, during which the group announced they have “come to the conclusion” that Biden can “forgive $50,000 of debt the first day he becomes president.”
“You don’t need Congress, all you need is the flick of a pen and President-elect Biden — then President Biden — can make this happen,” Schumer said.
Asked if Biden will have the executive authority to forgive the debt, the New York Senator said the president-elect is researching that and “I believe when he does his research, he will find that he does.”
Congress, Who Needs It?
I believe we have seen enough rogue executive actions of dubious legality.
Even if legal, this is a terrible idea. It mainly benefits middle-class whites and unfairly so.
We can’t give money to people at the bottom who have lost their jobs, possibly permanently, due to government decree. But hey, let’s forgive $50,000 in debt to the upwardly mobile.
Today Congress passed the “The Deflation Guarantee Act of 2005” currently known as the “Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005”.
Twenty years from now economists are going to be studying legislation from this Congress and signed by this administration and be wondering: “What the * were they thinking?”.
Anytime this administration passes a law with the “protection” in it, assume it will do just the opposite.
This was a bill written by loan sharks, and bought via payoffs (otherwise known as campaign contributions) to those voting for this bill. It has NOTHING to do with “Consumer Protection”.
I believe this will backfire in many ways, and not all of them are fully understood yet.
Disease vs Symptoms
I graduated from the University of Illinois in 1976 with a degree in Civil Engineering. The cost of tuition was $250 a semester when I entered college in 1971.
Some blame states for not contributing to education. Indeed, states would would not raise taxes to cover escalating costs because of voter backlash.
But that is blaming the disease on the symptom. The disease was then and still is high administration costs, public unions, outrageous coaching contracts, unbelievable pensions, and serious lack of competition.
Colleges possess such extraordinary pricing power in part because they bar or discourage new competitors and in part because lazy employers rely on a limited number of them to act as credential gate keepers. What federal policy ought to do is actively promote new types of educational institutions better fitted to employer needs and to promote measures by which families can fairly compare the value-added of different schools. Colleges and collegiate associations actively discourage all of the above.
In sum, it’s a mistake to enact a student debt jubilee without first rethinking and recasting the whole market for higher education. Otherwise, we’ll either end up right back where we started (with millions of new students crushed by huge debt loads) or somewhere we don’t want to go (with taxpayers committed to covering the cost of whatever colleges want to charge… a bit like they now do with healthcare providers).
Huge Moral Hazard
Debt discharge is a huge moral hazard that encourages more overpaying for useless degrees.
It will do nothing to address the cost of higher education.
We need more competition, more accredited schools, more alternatives, and less public union graft.
Forgiving debt fosters less competition and more graft.
Under Pressure
Biden is under pressure from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who believe Biden could not have won without them.
This claim is off by 180 degrees.
Election Message
The fact of the matter is rightful fear of Progressives could have cost Biden the election.
You can see this in the House and Senate races.
Trump lost but Biden had negative coattails. Why?
Fear of exactly this kind of liberal agenda.
Voters did not want Trump but they did not want liberal nonsense either.
Message Not Heard!
Trump did not get the message. Neither did Biden nor the Progressive wing of the Democratic party.
Biden is off to a bad start by listening to the Progressive wing that damn near cost him the election.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3ndDfIw Tyler Durden
Schumer held a press conference alongside Democratic Congressmen-elect Ritchie Torres, Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman of New York, during which the group announced they have “come to the conclusion” that Biden can “forgive $50,000 of debt the first day he becomes president.”
“You don’t need Congress, all you need is the flick of a pen and President-elect Biden — then President Biden — can make this happen,” Schumer said.
Asked if Biden will have the executive authority to forgive the debt, the New York Senator said the president-elect is researching that and “I believe when he does his research, he will find that he does.”
Congress, Who Needs It?
I believe we have seen enough rogue executive actions of dubious legality.
Even if legal, this is a terrible idea. It mainly benefits middle-class whites and unfairly so.
We can’t give money to people at the bottom who have lost their jobs, possibly permanently, due to government decree. But hey, let’s forgive $50,000 in debt to the upwardly mobile.
Today Congress passed the “The Deflation Guarantee Act of 2005” currently known as the “Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005”.
Twenty years from now economists are going to be studying legislation from this Congress and signed by this administration and be wondering: “What the * were they thinking?”.
Anytime this administration passes a law with the “protection” in it, assume it will do just the opposite.
This was a bill written by loan sharks, and bought via payoffs (otherwise known as campaign contributions) to those voting for this bill. It has NOTHING to do with “Consumer Protection”.
I believe this will backfire in many ways, and not all of them are fully understood yet.
Disease vs Symptoms
I graduated from the University of Illinois in 1976 with a degree in Civil Engineering. The cost of tuition was $250 a semester when I entered college in 1971.
Some blame states for not contributing to education. Indeed, states would would not raise taxes to cover escalating costs because of voter backlash.
But that is blaming the disease on the symptom. The disease was then and still is high administration costs, public unions, outrageous coaching contracts, unbelievable pensions, and serious lack of competition.
Colleges possess such extraordinary pricing power in part because they bar or discourage new competitors and in part because lazy employers rely on a limited number of them to act as credential gate keepers. What federal policy ought to do is actively promote new types of educational institutions better fitted to employer needs and to promote measures by which families can fairly compare the value-added of different schools. Colleges and collegiate associations actively discourage all of the above.
In sum, it’s a mistake to enact a student debt jubilee without first rethinking and recasting the whole market for higher education. Otherwise, we’ll either end up right back where we started (with millions of new students crushed by huge debt loads) or somewhere we don’t want to go (with taxpayers committed to covering the cost of whatever colleges want to charge… a bit like they now do with healthcare providers).
Huge Moral Hazard
Debt discharge is a huge moral hazard that encourages more overpaying for useless degrees.
It will do nothing to address the cost of higher education.
We need more competition, more accredited schools, more alternatives, and less public union graft.
Forgiving debt fosters less competition and more graft.
Under Pressure
Biden is under pressure from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who believe Biden could not have won without them.
This claim is off by 180 degrees.
Election Message
The fact of the matter is rightful fear of Progressives could have cost Biden the election.
You can see this in the House and Senate races.
Trump lost but Biden had negative coattails. Why?
Fear of exactly this kind of liberal agenda.
Voters did not want Trump but they did not want liberal nonsense either.
Message Not Heard!
Trump did not get the message. Neither did Biden nor the Progressive wing of the Democratic party.
Biden is off to a bad start by listening to the Progressive wing that damn near cost him the election.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3ndDfIw Tyler Durden
After Duke’s 2-2 Start, Coach Krzyzewski Says Its Time To End The Season Due To COVID Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/10/2020 – 18:40
At a time when the country is literally days away from getting a vaccine and most sports – including the NBA, NHL, NFL and MLB have forged ahead with their seasons and/or have plans to forge ahead close to normal in 2021 – Duke university Coach Mike Krzyzewski appears to be throwing in the towel on his season.
And if one were a UNC fan, it could almost look like the Duke coach was blaming Covid for what appears to be a lackluster start for his Duke team.
But we digress and we’ll give Krzyzewski the benefit of the doubt. He said publicly this week it is time for the sport to “step back and asses the wisdom of playing games” after Duke dropped a game to Illinois, according to Bloomberg.
CBS noted it was Duke’s “worst start to a regular season since 1999-2000, when that Mike Krzyzewski-coached club shook the funk to finish 29-5 overall.” They also commented: “This team has a long ways to replicating that trajectory. Duke struggled mightily to knock down shots from the perimeter against the Illini, and again it struggled to create offense in the halfcourt.”
Krzyzewski, who is the winningest college basketball coach in history, said Tuesday: “I don’t think it feels right to anybody. I mean, everyone is concerned.” He says the decision to start the season before a vaccine wasn’t “well planned” and suggested the season be paused.
“You know, in our country today, you have 2,000 deaths a day. You know, you have 200,000 cases, a million and a half last week. To me, it’s already pretty bad,” he commented, apparently oblivious to the fact that healthy 20-something athletes have about the same, or less, chance of dying from Covid as they do from the flu.
Again, we’re sure Krzyzewski is suggesting this out of concern for the American public and not because he is unhappy with Duke’s start to the season. But come on Coach K, just admit that headlines like this aren’t helping…
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3m7HFzh Tyler Durden
Real Vision managing editor Ed Harrison joins Tommy Thornton, founder of Hedge Fund Telemetry, to discuss the market exuberance around this week’s IPOs, DeMark indicators, and his forward outlook. Thornton elaborates on why the speculative bubble surrounding the IPOs for DoorDash and Airbnb is worrisome and too volatile to either long or short at this point. He also dives into DeMark indicators, sharing what they are and how he analyzes markets and crafts investing strategies around their use. Thornton then talks about what his outlook in light of a true reopening is for oil, financials, cyclicals, and tech. Harrison and Thornton end on discussing the DXY and currency markets. In the intro, Real Vision’s Haley Draznin explores the jobless claims spike after the Thanksgiving week and the higher than expected valuations of Airbnb and Doordash going public.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3oBk37u Tyler Durden
[Editor’s note: Marat K, one of our team members who grew up during the collapse of the Soviet Union, tells the story of his own experiences during that period.]
When I was a kid growing up in the Soviet Union, it was essentially forbidden to make a better life for yourself.
You couldn’t just decide to go back to school, start a business, or switch careers to a thriving new industry.
And it didn’t matter how hard you worked– you were most likely NEVER going to be promoted. All the top jobs in the Soviet Union were reserved for party loyalists.
The government removed EVERY possible economic incentive to achieve more… which is why service was pitiful, technology was lagging, and the Soviet economy was consistently in the dumps.
Now, on occasion, the government would decide that they wanted to populate certain rural areas of Russia, such as remote parts of Siberia.
Quite often families were simply ordered to pick up and move, as was famously the case under Stalin.
But by the 1970s, the government would provide a small financial incentive for families– if you moved to Siberia, you could earn a slightly higher salary.
This became literally the ONLY way that anyone could (legally) make more money in the Soviet Union.
And that’s how my parents and I ended up moving to a cold, little town in western Siberia in 1985.
The plan was to stay there for a few years, save money, and then move back to a nicer, bigger city in Russia with a better climate.
The fact that our new Siberian town didn’t have a single restaurant, cinema, or even an ice-cream place, made the ‘saving money’ part really easy.
My parents followed through on their plan. And by the early 1990s they had saved enough money to buy a decent house, plus a car, and still have some savings left over.
But then, the unimaginable happened– the Soviet Union collapsed.
And the economy crashed.
Inflation, then hyperinflation, followed, as the government started printing money like crazy in an effort to continue making interest payments on its debt.
Prices skyrocketed.
At some point, stores stopped displaying price signs. Why bother, if they were doubling every other week or so?
Salaries and pensions did not keep up with inflation; almost everyone became more poor with each passing day.
Most people, including my parents, were caught completely unprepared.
The general level of financial literacy at the time was pitiful; most Russians didn’t know the first thing about money, finance, or economics, so no one knew how to react to the hyperinflation that was unfolding in front of our very eyes.
It was as if everyone was frozen in disbelief, including my parents.
By 1990, before the crisis, my parents had saved 50,000 rubles. At the time, that would have been enough to buy a house and a car.
After a few years of crisis, my parents still had the same 50,000 rubles. But by then, all they could afford to buy with it was a pair of winter boots for my mother.
Their entire nest egg has been completely inflated away in a few short years.
But not everyone has lost during that time.
Those who successfully navigated the financial Wild West of the 1990s in Russia turned this crisis into the opportunity of their lifetimes.
For example, I remember seeing ads in a newspaper offering to exchange a flat in Moscow for a poor-quality Soviet car.
It was an unbelievable trade when you think about it; the guy with the apartment was probably panicking and trying to leave the country, so he thought it would be a good idea to trade his apartment for a car.
But ten years later, the car was a worthless pile of scrap. Meanwhile the owner of the flat still held a valuable asset that had appreciated significantly in value and kept up with inflation.
And naturally the savviest people were able to buy extremely high quality assets on the cheap– like real estate and businesses, including shares of newly-privatized oil companies.
Investing in Gazprom in the early 1990s was like buying bitcoin in 2010.
Later these people became known as Russian oligarchs.
Now, I’m not writing this to suggest that the same financial catastrophe will take place in the US or Europe.
After all, the ruble didn’t enjoy the status of being the world’s reserve currency in the early 90s. And the economy of the late Soviet Union was already in terrible shape.
Still, this very recent history should serve as a reminder: idiotic economic policies almost always have consequences.
When a government goes out of its way to destroy economic incentives, through higher taxes or abusive regulations, bad things usually happen.
When a government accumulates a mountain of debt that is impossible to pay, bad things usually happen.
When a central bank conjures trillions of dollars out of thin air, bad things usually happen.
And I can tell you from personal experience that when a society actively embraces a Communist ideology, bad things usually happen.
And all of these issues in North America and Europe certainly could create consequences for the dollar and euro some day.
This isn’t a dire prediction, it’s just common sense… something that most politicians seem to be lacking these days.
It’s important to think about risks and consequences and prepare for them in advance; I watched my parents lose their entire nest egg and become victims of other people’s stupidity, because they were unprepared.
But today we have access to so much more information and education. We can learn about how gold and silver have maintained their value against inflation for thousands of years.
We can learn about other assets, whether productive land, cryptocurrency, or profitable business ventures, that can do well, even in times of crisis.
And we can make a Plan B… just in case the unthinkable happens. Because if 2020 has taught us anything, it’s that absolutely anything is possible.
‘Imprisoned, Tortured, Harassed, Blackmailed And Stalked’: AP Investigation Uncovers Rampant Sexual Misconduct Within FBI Tyler Durden
Thu, 12/10/2020 – 18:00
Nearly three years ago we reported that the FBI was a hotbed of sexual misconduct, after Inspector General Michael Horowitz uncovered sexual harassment, inappropriate romantic relationships between bosses and subordinates, and outright demands for sex in exchange for promotions.
It seems nothing has changed.
According to an investigation by the Associated Press, the FBI has been subject to at least six sexual misconduct allegations involving senior officials over the past five years, “including two new claims brought this week by women who say they were sexually assaulted by ranking agents.”
An assistant FBI director retired after he was accused of drunkenly groping a female subordinate in a stairwell. Another senior FBI official left after he was found to have sexually harassed eight employees. Yet another high-ranking FBI agent retired after he was accused of blackmailing a young employee into sexual encounters.
…
The AP review of court records, Office of Inspector General reports and interviews with federal law enforcement officials identified at least six allegations against senior officials, including an assistant director and special agents in charge of entire field offices, that ranged from unwanted touching and sexual advances to coercion.
None appears to have been disciplined, but another sexual misconduct allegation identified in the AP review of a rank-and-file agent resulted in him losing his security clearance. –AP
“They’re sweeping it under the rug,” said one former FBI analyst with who is suing the agency after claiming that a supervisory special agent ‘licked her face and groped her‘ at a colleague’s 2017 farewell party, and has since been diagnosed with post-traumatic distress disorder. Meanwhile, others have accused FBI agents of far worse:
In one of the new lawsuits filed Wednesday, a former FBI employee identified only as “Jane Doe” alleged a special agent in charge in 2016 retired without discipline and opened a law firm even after he “imprisoned, tortured, harassed, blackmailed, stalked and manipulated” her into having several “non-consensual sexual encounters,” including one in which he forced himself on her in a car. The AP is withholding the name and location of the accused special agent to protect the woman’s identity.
“As the premier law enforcement organization that the FBI holds itself out to be, it’s very disheartening when they allow people they know are criminals to retire and pursue careers in law enforcement-related fields,” said the former employee, identified only as Becky.
AP notes that their investigation doesn’t include the ‘growing number of high-level FBI supervisors who have failed to report romantic relationships with subordinates in recent years.’
The last time an inspector general conducted an extensive probe of sexual misconduct within the FBI flagged 343 ‘offenses’ between 2009 – 2012, including three instances of “videotaping undressed women without consent.”
Meanwhile, a 17th woman has joined a federal lawsuit alleging systemic sexual harassment at the FBI’s Quantico, VA training academy – in which male FBI instructors are said to have made “sexually charged” comments about women who need to “take their birth control to control their moods.” Female trainees were also invited to their homes and openly disparaged, according to the filing.
As the 2020 election dust settles, one thing is clear: Republicans have a youth problem.
Sixty percent of voters under 30 supported President-elect Joe Biden, who will become the oldest U.S. president in history. However, Biden’s election is only the tip of an iceberg: In today’s America, 70% of people my age are open to voting for a socialist presidential candidate. According to a recent survey, more than one-third of Millennials (35%) support the gradual elimination of capitalism in favor of a more collectivist system.
Biden may not be a socialist (although his platform is the most liberal in presidential history), but the Republican pitch is clearly falling on deaf ears. Free-marketeers are losing the war of words.
In the 1940s, a plurality of Americans (34%) associated socialism with “government ownership or control.” By 2018, that percentage was halved. Today, the most common association with socialism is “equality.”
But socialism’s popularity cannot solely be attributed to the successes of Democratic messaging, or the biases of mainstream media coverage for that matter. In truth, Americans my age have become desensitized to the dangers of Big Government in practice. It has been more than 30 years since the Berlin Wall fell. It has been over a century since the Bolsheviks upended Russia’s political order—a precursor for communism’s spread to the likes of China, North Korea, and Vietnam.
I see it in my own life. My parents survived communism in former Yugoslavia and the civil war that followed, fleeing their homeland to live the American Dream. Along the way, they shared anecdotes about Josip Broz Tito’s communist regime—from Marxist teachings at school to the persecution of political dissenters on Goli Otok.
But those experiences are not my own. Even for a Millennial steadfastly opposed to collectivism, it is easier to comprehend the economic ramifications of a 50-cent-per-gallon gas tax than the risks of speaking out against Tito. I understand and even sympathize with Millennials who forget that individual liberty is never guaranteed.
In truth, very little. However, a greater openness to socialism should terrify the tens of millions of Americans who still support capitalism, including Republicans in the political trenches.
So what’s next? Perhaps there is light at the end of the tunnel—because of the coronavirus. American Millennials may never experience Soviet aggression or Venezuelan collectivism, but we are touched by the heavy hand of government in the COVID-19 era.
In Florida, Miami Mayor Dan Gelber has encouraged law enforcement to issue citations to people not wearing a face mask outside. In California, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has shut down indoor and outdoor dining, and New York City may soon follow. In Oregon, Gov. Kate Brown threatened state residents with $1,250 fines and 30 days imprisonment for hosting Thanksgiving gatherings of seven people or more.
This is not to say that the COVID-19 pandemic should go unaddressed, but American freedoms face unprecedented attack—not from a public health crisis, but from public officials going to extreme lengths in its name. Conceding undue power to government is a slippery slope to tyranny and oppression.
Personal experience remains the best antidote to socialism. Those who live through the perils of Big Government are more likely to reject its advances. There is a reason why 55% of Florida’s Cuban-Americans voted for President Trump, and not a Democratic Party that has expressed support for the Castro regime.
The political fallout of COVID-19 remains to be seen. Perhaps, Millennials will embrace governmental excess in response to a novel virus. Perhaps, we will begin to question that encroachment into our daily lives.
Only time will tell. But, if we are lucky, America will be less socialist upon leaving a pandemic than entering one.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3a1rUYi Tyler Durden
After an unprecedentedly short period from inception to trial to results, Pfizer/BioNTech’s mRNA COVID vaccine has just been approved (after an all-day meeting) by the Food and Drug Administration Advisers for emergency use in the US.
This was the question to be voted on…
Notably there was a lot of argument about removing the 16 years or older segment of the question.
These were the voters:
And the final vote count was as follows: 17 Yes, 4 No, 1 Abstain
The FDA itself will not take this outside adviser group’s into account to decide on emergency use.
This follows approvals by UK and Canada, but several populations were excluded from the trials – meaning the vaccine isn’t known to be safe for all Americans just yet…
“There are currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine in subpopulations such as children less than 16 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals, and immunocompromised individuals,” a recent FDA review concluded.
So what happens next is all Americans are propagandized (we’re all in this together, be a patriot) or coerced (no travel or work without a vaccine) into taking the vaccine.
As NIAID director Anthony Fauci tells Axios, “once 75%–80% of people get vaccinated against the coronavirus, there should be strong enough herd immunity that we can return to normal activities.”
Of course, politics is likely to rear its ugly head as decision are made, state by state, on the logistics and ‘equitable’ distribution of the vaccines beyond the simple cohorts of most-at-risk and healthcare workers. As Phillip Giraldi noted:
There is a strong consensus that the first recipients of the vaccine must be health care workers, a group that has suffered disproportionately from the disease and which constitutes the first line of defense against its spread.
After that, however, there is little clarity.
Suggestions that elderly people, particularly in nursing homes, should be inoculated, have been countered by those who believe that a limited supply of vaccine should go primarily to people who would be able to go back to work.
And then there are the politicians in each jurisdiction, who oddly believe that their work is vital. They and their families will be lining up.
In short, who gets vaccinated will likely depend on the deals and arrangements that have been worked out, often at the state and local level in the United States, and at national government level in most other places.
Logically, the vaccine should go first to those who are most at risk for contracting the disease and dying from it, but logic likely will not prevail.
Generally speaking, it is expected that after health care workers and perhaps the vulnerable elderly, front line police and emergency services should be next in line due to their frequent contact with the possibly infected public, followed by workers in places like slaughterhouses where work conditions have created infection hot spots.
Next in line would logically be workers in shops or businesses where there is regular contact with the public, but as such employees are generally low wage they will likely be pushed to the back of the bus.
Inevitably, the claims that there is a racial angle to the disease will certainly surface in places like the New York Times, leading to demands to vaccinate minorities first.
This will surely be resisted. Given the political realities of the pandemic and the socio-economic engineering that will no doubt take place, the real excitement will likely begin when the vaccine actually begins to become available, probably just before Christmas!
In the meantime, as Dr. Fauci pronounced, “you can’t give [masks and social distancing] up completely until you get such a level of herd immunity that the virus has no place to go.”
Don’t hold your breath, America.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3m4IGI3 Tyler Durden
