Virologists Say Genetic “Fingerprints” Prove COVID-19 Man-Made, ‘No Credible Natural Ancestor’

Virologists Say Genetic “Fingerprints” Prove COVID-19 Man-Made, ‘No Credible Natural Ancestor’

Two notable virologists claim to have found “unique fingerprints” on COVID-19 samples that only could have arisen from laboratory manipulation, according to an explosive 22-page paper obtained by the Daily Mail.

The paper’s authors, Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen (left) and British Professor Angus Dalgleish (right) via the Daily Mail

British professor Angus Dalgleish – best known for creating the world’s first ‘HIV vaccine’, and Norwegian virologist Dr. Birger Sørensen – chair of pharmaceutical company, Immunor, who has published 31 peer-reviewed papers and holds several patents, wrote that while analyzing virus samples last year, the pair discovered “unique fingerprints” in the form of “six inserts” created through gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

They also conclude that “SARS-Coronavirus-2 has “no credible natural ancestor” and that it is “beyond reasonable doubt” that the virus was created via “laboratory manipulation.”

DailyMail.com exclusively obtained the 22-page paper which is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. In it, researchers describe their months-long ‘forensic analysis’ into experiments done at the Wuhan lab between 2002 and 2019 (Daily Mail)

A ‘GenBank’ table included in the paper lists various coronavirus strains, with the dates they were collected and then when they were submitted to the gene bank, showing a delay of several years for some (Daily Mail)

Last year, Sørensen told Norwegian broadcaster NRK that COVID-19 has properties which have ‘never been detected in nature,’ and that the United States has ‘collaborated for many years on coronavirus research through “gain of function” studies with China.

One diagram of the coronavirus shows six ‘fingerprints’ identified by the two scientists, which they say show the virus must have been made in a lab (Daily Mail)
A second diagram showed how a row of four amino acids found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike have a positive charge that clings to human cells like a magnet, making the virus extremely infectious (Daily Mail)

The paper detailing their months-long “forensic analysis,” which looked back at experiments done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology between 2002 and 2019, is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery.

More via the Mail:

Digging through archives of journals and databases, Dalgleish and Sørensen pieced together how Chinese scientists, some working in concert with American universities, allegedly built the tools to create the coronavirus. 

Much of the work was centered around controversial ‘Gain of Function‘ research – temporarily outlawed in the US under the Obama administration.

Gain of Function involves tweaking naturally occurring viruses to make them more infectious, so that they can replicate in human cells in a lab, allowing the virus’s potential effect on humans to be studied and better understood. 

Dalgleish and Sørensen claim that scientists working on Gain of Function projects took a natural coronavirus ‘backbone’ found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new ‘spike’, turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible SARS-Cov-2.

One tell-tale sign of alleged manipulation the two men highlighted was a row of four amino acids they found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike.

In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Sørensen said the amino acids all have a positive charge, which cause the virus to tightly cling to the negatively charged parts of human cells like a magnet, and so become more infectious

But because, like magnets, the positively charged amino acids repel each other, it is rare to find even three in a row in naturally occurring organisms, while four in a row  is ‘extremely unlikely,’ the scientist said.

‘The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,’ Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.

Their new paper says these features of SARS-Cov-2 are ‘unique fingerprints’ which are ‘indicative of purposive manipulation‘, and that ‘the likelihood of it being the result of natural processes is very small.’

A natural virus pandemic would be expected to mutate gradually and become more infectious but less pathogenic which is what many expected with the COVID-19 pandemic but which does not appear to have happened,’ the scientists wrote.

The implication of our historical reconstruction, we posit now beyond reasonable doubt, of the purposively manipulated chimeric virus SARS-CoV-2 makes it imperative to reconsider what types of Gain of Function experiments it is morally acceptable to undertake.

The study concluded ‘SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor’ and that it is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that the virus was created through ‘laboratory manipulation’ (Daily Mail)

When Sørensen and Dalgleish floated their findings last year, it was ‘debunked’ with the thinnest of logic – however former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove pointed to the pair’s findings as an “important” development which could prove that the pandemic may have originated at the WIV.

Sørensen and Dalgleish aren’t the first scientists to find unusual features within COVID-19. Last June, the Daily Telegraph reported that there are two unique features to COVID-19:

First, the virus binds more strongly to human ACE2 enzymes than any other species, including bats.

Second, SARS-CoV-2 has a “furin cleavage site” missing in its closes bat-coronavirus relative, RaTG-13, which makes it significantly more infectious – a finding we reported in late February.

According to Israeli geneticist, Dr. Ronen Shemesh, the Furin site is the most unusual finding.

“I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Furin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2,” he said. “Such an insertion is very rare in evolution, the addition of such 4 Amino acids alone in the course of only 20 years is very unlikely.”

“There are many reasons to believe that the COVID-19 generating SARS-CoV-2 was generated in a lab. Most probably by methods of genetic engineering,” he said, adding “I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective.

Dr Shemesh, who has a PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and over 21 years of experience in the field of drug discovery and development, said it is even “more unlikely” that this insertion happened in exactly the right place of the cleavage site of the spike protein – which is where it would need to occur to make the virus more infectious. –Daily Telegraph

“What makes it even more suspicious is that fact that this insertion not only occurred on the right place and in the right time, but also turned the cleavage site from an Serine protease cleavage site to a FURIN cleavage site,” he added.

In January 2020, a team of Indian scientists wrote in a now-retracted paper that the coronavirus may have been genetically engineered to incorporate parts of the HIV genome, writing “This uncanny similarity of novel inserts in the 2019- nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature,” meaning – it was unlikely to have occurred naturally.

The next month, a team of researchers in Nankai University noted that COVID-19 has an ‘HIV-like mutation’ that  allows it to quickly enter the human body by binding with a receptor called ACE2 on a cell membrane.

Other highly contagious viruses, including HIV and Ebola, target an enzyme called furin, which works as a protein activator in the human body. Many proteins are inactive or dormant when they are produced and have to be “cut” at specific points to activate their various functions.

When looking at the genome sequence of the new coronavirus, Professor Ruan Jishou and his team at Nankai University in Tianjin found a section of mutated genes that did not exist in Sars, but were similar to those found in HIV and Ebola. –SCMP

According to the Nankai University study, the furin binding method is “100 to 1,000 times as efficient’ as SARS at entering cells.

This protein cleaving protein is highly promiscuous, it’s found in many human tissues and cell types and is involved in many OTHER virus types activation and infection mechanisms (it is involved in HIV, Herpes, Ebola and Dengue virus mechanisms),” said Dr. Shemesh. “If I was trying to engineer a virus strain with a higher affinity and infective potential to humans, I would do exactly that: I would add a Furin Cleavage site directly at the original less effective and more cell specific cleavage site.”

Meanwhile, Flinders University Professor Nikolai Petrovsky found last year either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention” within COVID-19 telling the Telegraph that COVID-19 is “exquisitely adapted to humans.”

Professor Nikolai Petrovsky

“We really don’t know where this virus came from – that’s the truth. The two possibilities is that it was a chance transmission of a virus…the other possibility is that it was an accidental release of the virus from a laboratory,” he said, adding “One of the possibilities is that an animal host was infected by two coronaviruses at the same time and COVID-19. The same process can happen in a petri-dish.”

“In other words COVID-19 could have been created from that recombination event in an animal host or it could have occurred in a cell-culture experiment. I’m certainly very much in favour of a scientific investigation. Its only objective should be to get to the bottom of how did this pandemic happen and how do we prevent a future pandemic.”

Keep in mind – reporting any of this last year was punishable by social media banishment, demonetiziation, and hit-piece articles from propagandists peddling CCP talking points.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 10:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3usmkER Tyler Durden

What’s Your Plan As Major US Cities Devolve Into Lawless Wastelands Dominated By Violent Criminals?

What’s Your Plan As Major US Cities Devolve Into Lawless Wastelands Dominated By Violent Criminals?

Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

Our cities are filled with extreme violence, and the blood of the innocent flows in our streets, and yet most Americans still seem to be in denial about what is happening.  This isn’t just a momentary spike in violent crime that we are witnessing.  The increase in violent crime that we experienced in 2020 was unprecedented, and things have been even worse in 2021. 

If you are not familiar with those numbers, here is a reminder

Police and public reported data details that from January through March of 2021, the homicide rate rose by 28% from the same period last year in 20 major cities across the country. Homicides had already previously risen by 30% in 2020.

Everyone should be able to agree that we are very rapidly going in the wrong direction.

But many on the left assured us that things would “return to normal” and the violence in the streets would subside once Joe Biden was in the White House.

Obviously, that hasn’t happened.  In fact, the violence in New York City over the weekend made headlines all over the nation

New York City is officially back: almost 30 people were shot in New York City this past weekend – and that number was only up until about 2PM on Sunday.

29 victims in total had been struck by gunfire by early evening Sunday, according to the New York Post, with one reported fatality.

“These kids are having running gun battles and innocents are getting shot,” one veteran NYPD officer told the Post.

Do you remember when New York City was one of the safest big cities in the United States?

Those days are now gone, and violent criminals are having a field day as the Big Apple slowly but surely descends into madness.

Of course New York City still has some catching up to do in order to get to Chicago’s level.  During the weekend before last, 48 people were shot, and five of those that were shot ended up dying…

Chicago police are planning to target 15 areas of the city this summer in the battle to combat violence and keep people safe.

The plan comes after a particularly violent weekend in which police say five people were killed and 48 people were shot, including two police officers and six juveniles.

Authorities in Chicago have promised that they will work very hard to implement their plan to fight violent crime, but things certainly didn’t get any better this past weekend.

In fact, they got even worse.

Over the weekend, 55 more people were shot, and 11 more people were killed.

What a nightmare.

But if you want to see a city that is quickly becoming even more violent than Chicago, just check out Minneapolis.  Violent crime in the city spiked dramatically in 2020, and the numbers have surged even higher in 2021…

The city has seen a 222 percent increase in carjackings this year compared with this point in 2020, averaging 1.27 incidents per day, according to police data. Homicides are up 108 percent from a year earlier, while shootings have risen 153 percent.

If you are running a city and carjackings, shootings and murders are all up by triple digit percentages, you are definitely not on the right track.

Minneapolis had been the epicenter for the “defund the police” movement, but now that violent crime has started to spiral out of control, the city has decided to bring in outside law enforcement help

Minneapolis police are bringing in outside help as they try to temper weekend violence that killed a least four people, including a college senior who was out celebrating graduation.

Mayor Jacob Frey, speaking a day after a mass shooting downtown, said the city has asked state and federal agencies for assistance, as Minneapolis police face a shortage of officers.

Is anyone surprised that Minneapolis is now facing a “shortage of officers”?

What did they think was going to happen when city officials endlessly demonized the police?

On the west coast, authorities are facing other sorts of problems.  The number of people that died from drug overdoses in San Francisco was twice as high as the number of people that died from COVID last year, and addicts continue to litter the streets with thousands upon thousands of used drug needles.  Street crime is completely out of control as addicts endlessly search for money for their next hits, but city politicians keep insisting that they can handle this crisis.

Crime is on the rise from coast to coast, but before I end this article I would like to discuss one more type of violence that we have seen in recent days that is especially chilling.

Israel’s conflict with Hamas sparked a huge wave of anti-Jewish attacks, and many of these incidents made international news

There were a series of street attacks that authorities are investigating as anti-Semitic attacks in the wake of Israel’s 11-day war with Hamas.

The list includes a Jewish man who was attacked by a pro-Palestinian activist in Times Square, a Jewish teenager was also put in a chokehold outside a Brooklyn synagogue over the weekend, and a rabbi was hounded with abuse in Hallandale Beach, Florida.

The incident in Hallandale Beach was particularly alarming.  After yelling “Jews should die”, an unidentified man later returned to that same location and dumped a bag of human feces right in front of a Jewish synagogue

A man yelled antisemitic remarks at a rabbi in front of a South Florida synagogue, before returning and dumping a bag of human feces in front of the building.

Cellphone video captured the unidentified man as he shouted ‘Jews should die’ at a rabbi outside the Chabad of South Broward on Friday.

The man left and returned a short time later, carrying a bag that contained human feces, said Hallandale Beach Police Capt. RaShana Dabney-Donovan.

There is so much hatred for Jewish people out there right now, and the recent military conflict in the Middle East brought much of it to the surface.

In Brooklyn, a man named Ali Alaheri was arrested after he purposely set fire to a synagogue and a Jewish school…

A New York man was charged Saturday with setting fire to a synagogue and Jewish school in Brooklyn earlier in the week.

Ali Alaheri, 29, is accused of torching the Jewish center near Borough Park at around 4am on Wednesday.

The building suffered some damage before firefighters put the fire out.

I keep telling my readers that I have never seen more hate in America as I am seeing right now, and these are yet more examples that prove my point.

Sadly, the level of hatred is likely to go even higher as our society comes apart at the seams in the months and years ahead.

As our major cities devolve into lawless wastelands, what are you and your family going to do?

Do you plan to stick it out, hoping that things will eventually “return to normal”?

That will be the choice for a lot of people, and many of them will deeply regret going that route.

Others anticipate that they will just rely on their “survival skills” if things get crazy enough, but one new survey has found that most Americans are severely lacking in such skills

Are you ready for life as a “Mountain Man” (or woman)? Apparently, the average American thinks they are, even if most can’t even start a fire! A new study finds the average American thinks they can survive for 16 days alone in the wilderness.

The survey of 2,000 people reveals Americans feel quite at ease with the idea of surviving in the wild. However, only 17 percent feel “very confident” in their ability to start a fire with flint. Moreover, just 14 percent feel the same about their ability to identify edible plants or berries in nature.

The truth is that most people don’t have any sort of a detailed plan for what is ahead, because most people still believe that everything is going to work out just fine somehow.

Meanwhile, our cities are becoming more lawless by the day, and the last 12 months have clearly demonstrated that it doesn’t take much to push the restless populations of those cities over the edge and into violence.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 10:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3oZefq2 Tyler Durden

Inflation… Or Speculation?

Inflation… Or Speculation?

A funny thing happened on the way to a hyped-inflationary future…

In the great inflation debate (transitory or not), the rally in everything from copper to soybeans to lumber has been a point in favor of the reflation hawks. But, as Bloombergs Tom Orlik notes, movements in commodity prices this year have been mainly driven by risk appetite, not fundamental demand or shortages of supply.

In other words, a majority of the realized ‘inflation’ in commodity prices is really driven by speculation on that inflation.

As SocGen’s Albert Edwards recently pointed out (echoing Bloomberg’s John Authers’ recent note), there is a “reflexivity” to investors’ belief in rising inflation.

For when they pile into commodities as an investment vehicle to benefit from rising inflation, they create substantial upstream cost  pressures – as has been highlighted by PMI corporate surveys. Beyond the cascading effect of upstream commodity price pressures, headline CPIs are also quickly impacted as  food and energy prices rip higher.

In addition to this, the observation by investors that industrial commodity prices are rising only serves to reaffirm their belief about cyclical strength and rising inflation – most especially “Dr Copper”, which many investors see as extremely sensitive to economic conditions.

The circular, or as George Soros terms it, ‘reflexive’ nature of financial markets makes them extremely vulnerable to being whipsawed.  Yet because of the current extreme momentum it would take a very heavy weight of evidence to convince this market to reverse direction.

However, as the recent rapid decline of numerous industrial metals (and lumber) from their peak suggests, a rise in commodity prices driven primarily by speculation is also prone to a sudden reversal, so the inflationistas’ argument may not be as strong as it first appears, and the debate is far from over.

By way of contrast, Goldman Sachs disagrees, noting there is a long history of attributing paradigm shifts in prices to speculation.

China’s current crackdown on commodity speculation mirrors similar moves by the US in the mid-2000’s.

When commentators are unable to understand what is driving such a paradigm shift in prices, they attribute it to speculators – a common pattern throughout history which has never solved fundamental tightness.

Goldman goes on to argue that speculators reflect fundamentals and reduce volatility (we would beg to differ in the current craziness – see GME?), suggesting that data shows net-specs track fundamentals as the specs simply translate fundamental information into price discovery.

History shows that banning them typically leads to more price volatility.

And discouraging precautionary inventory building by consumers will leave China even more exposed to crowding out by US firms who are able to pass commodity inflation through to consumers, raising prices dollar for dollar with raw material costs.

However, as Albert Edwards ominously warns, when commodity prices do start to fall, expect a major reversal in inflation sentiment. And expect momentum to become as self-reinforcing and reflexive on the way down just as it was on the way up! Indeed, technical developments in the bond market suggest the wind may have already changed direction.

While so many investors are focused on President Biden’s super-loose (some would say crazily loose) fiscal stance in the US, they are missing the deflationary impulse heading down the tracks from China.

So despite the euphoric optimism about the strength of the global economic cycle and its inflationary implications, investors may be in for a major cyclical shock – relative to expectations.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 09:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3yP1bI8 Tyler Durden

Suffering A Sea-Change – China Is Taking Its Financial War With US Into FX

Suffering A Sea-Change – China Is Taking Its Financial War With US Into FX

Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

There is an established theoretical relationship between bonds and equities which provides a framework for the future performance of financial assets. It would be a mistake to ignore it, ahead of the forthcoming rise in global interest rates.

Price inflation is roaring, and so far, central banks are in denial. But it is increasingly difficult to see how monetary policy planners can extend the suppression of interest rates for much longer. There can only be one outcome: markets, that is to say prices determined by non-state actors, will force central banks to capitulate on interest rates in the summer.

Hardly noticed, China is deliberately putting the brakes on its economy, which will cause an inflationary dollar to collapse, unless the US defends it by putting up interest rates.

Deliberate?

Almost certainly, as part of its strategy, China is taking the financial war with the US into the foreign exchanges.

Bond yields will rise, with the US Treasury 10-year bond leaving a 2% yield far behind.

Equity markets will sense the danger, and it might turn out that the month of May marks a peak in financial asset values — following cryptocurrencies into substantial bear markets.

Introduction

There is an old stock market adage that you should sell in May and go away. It has already proved its worth in the case of cryptocurrencies, with Bitcoin more than halving at one point, and Ethereum losing 57% between 10—19 May. A sea-change in cryptocurrencies’ market sentiment has taken place.

As for equities, it could also turn out that 10 May, which so far has marked the S&P 500 Index’s high point, will mark the beginning of their decline. But it’s too soon to tell. However, we do know that following the unprecedented dilution of the major currencies’ purchasing power since March 2020 commodity prices have increased substantially, global logistics are fouled up and consumer prices are rapidly rising everywhere, a combination of events which is bound to lead to higher interest rates. But as is usually the case in times like these, central bankers and market bulls are wishing this reality away.

Only last week, the Federal Reserve Board told us that:

“The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. With inflation running persistently below this longer-run goal, the Committee will aim to achieve inflation moderately above 2 percent for some time so that inflation averages 2 percent over time and longer‑term inflation expectations remain well anchored at 2 percent. The Committee expects to maintain an accommodative stance of monetary policy until these outcomes are achieved.”

Two per cent, two per cent, two percent and two per cent. Clearly, the world’s most powerful monetary policy planners are wilfully blind to reality. In an interview with Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com this week, John Williams of Shadowstats.com, who calculates US CPI on an unadjusted basis, put current price inflation at over 11%. If his numbers are closer to reality, a huge interest rate shock is being stored up, likely to hit markets without much warning.

Central banks are always reluctant to raise interest rates and consequently are horribly wrong-footed. Not mentioned in the Fed’s statement quoted above is the $120bn monthly QE stimulus still inflating financial bubbles and which are feeding yet more inflation into the system. Furthermore, the Fed cannot stop inflating. Unless interest rate suppression and QE are abandoned the certain outcome will be hyperinflation. Arguably, the dollar is on that path already and its purchasing power is early in the process of collapsing.

The notion that maintaining the QE stimulus and interest rates at zero is to help the economy is poppycock. The Fed has two unwritten objectives that override the economy: to fund a free-spending government as cheaply as possible, and to keep the bubble in financial assets inflated. Therefore, it cannot afford to consider the horrors of raising interest rates and to reduce the monthly money-pumping, the objective of which is to keep blowing financial bubbles. In these circumstances, markets themselves, being the collective pricing of everything by non-government actors, will eventually force control over financial asset prices away from government agencies.

Non-government actors include both foreign and domestic investors, and they need to be considered separately because their motivations in important respects are different. According to the US Treasury’s TIC statistics, foreign ownership of dollar-denominated financial assets and bank deposits total $30 trillion and are one and a half times America’s GDP. The private sector element alone is $22 trillion. If the dollar’s trade weighted index is any guide, it may be just beginning to dawn on this class of investor that the dollar is losing purchasing power, not only measured against industrial commodities and raw materials, but against rival currencies as well. An over-owned dollar has been falling for over a year and will slide lower when foreign interests start to liquidate dollar financial assets in earnest — and that includes equities.

So far, other than commodities they may not see another currency which offers clear benefits over the dollar, but that will change with an inflation-driven outlook. It is also changing with China’s policy of restricting credit creation, a monetary policy starkly at odds with those of reflationist Western governments.

It was William Shakespeare who came up with the phrase “sea-change” as a substitute for the turn of the tide in The Tempest. The line that followed was “Into something rich and strange”. Bitcoin hodlers will identify with strange. But as for riches, their fortunes have changed substantially for the worse. In its reluctance to protect the dollar, the Fed’s rejection of the consequences of its ongoing monetary inflation is teeing up more conventional markets for a similar price outcome to that currently being suffered by cryptocurrencies.

The fallacy of money-printing to preserve wealth

The empirical precedent about to how to destroy a fiat currency by pursuing monetary policies to inflate asset values was given to us by John Law, the proto-Keynesian who, in 1720, tried to sustain his Mississippi bubble by printing money. Thanks to the dominance of the US dollar, the Fed is repeating Law’s policy on a global scale, seemingly oblivious to the consequences. In 1720, Law’s company survived, though the Mississippi venture’s share price collapsed from a high of 12,000 livres to about 3,000. What did not survive was the currency, the French livre which in about six months from the bubble top became completely worthless. It would seem the Fed and other central banks are now locked into a modern, global version of the John Law experience.

Those who have yet to understand why markets and the dollar are set to fall together should consider how things will develop from here. Without doubt, financial markets have become wildly over-valued, and their future is becoming binary but with both outcomes being negative. Let us assume the optimists are correct about a post-lockdown sustainable spending recovery. In that case, interest rates will “normalise”, bond yields will rise, and equity valuations will be undermined. Every bear market in a normal credit cycle evolves out of these conditions.

Alternatively, let us assume that the post-lockdown recovery is hampered by rising prices, the consequence of lack of production to satisfy spending inflated by monetary means, and the inability for this imbalance to be rectified by just-in-time manufacturing policies at the mercy of the greatest global logistic foul-up ever recorded. Add to that a shortage of bank credit to finance production, because banks have run out of balance sheet capacity.

Both outcomes will see financial values undermined, because in common they lead to higher price inflation and inevitably to higher interest rates. But the Fed and its confrères at the ECB, the BoJ and the BoE are all committed to keeping their bond and equity bubbles continually inflated. The first sign of an inflation crisis can result in only one response: inject yet more money into financial markets to keep them afloat and to compensate for a reluctant rise in interest rates. If the central banks fail to increase the pace of monetary inflation targeted at financial assets, bond yields and market interest rates will continue to rise, and the equity bubble will burst. With no option but to continue to support markets and their wealth effect, a rise in the natural rate of interest simply leads to an acceleration of monetary inflation. A vision of the 1929-32 Wall Street crash will haunt policymakers if they don’t act quickly enough to supply the extra currency.

For the fact of the matter is that using monetary inflation to rig markets requires accelerating debasement to keep the illusion going. But at best, the sacrifice of the currency only delays matters temporarily. This is what Richard Cantillon, the Irish-French banker contemporary with John Law worked out in 1719: the most certain way to profit from a bubble’s implosion was not to short it, but the unbacked currency, which he did in London and Amsterdam for specie-backed alternatives.

Today, there are no specie-backed alternative currencies, the backing for all of them being the US dollar, which faces the same fate as Law’s livre. Another important lesson from the fallacy of money-printing to preserve wealth by inflating financial assets is that it does not take an incremental and accelerating loss of purchasing power through a policy of continual debasement to undermine the currency on a formulaic basis as monetarists would suppose. Instead of initially being driven by rising prices for goods and services the collapse of currencies is linked initially to that of financial assets, less so than to the prices of goods. Instead of an evolutionary process it has the potential to be much more sudden, tied into an overwhelming stock market collapse.

While events run concurrently, it is after a financial crisis that the principal users of a collapsed currency, its domestic actors for their daily purchases, suffer the full effects. Not only do they see prices of essentials rising, which they might mistakenly attribute to the preceding financial crisis, but interest rates rise as well. Mainstream economists will tell everyone that higher interest rates are reducing demand, and without more stimulus businesses will fail in even greater numbers. Inflation, by which they mean increasing prices, will only be temporary due to falling demand and they urge the authorities to maintain and even increase the rate of money creation to boost the economy and stop it from entering a slump.

What economists, investors and the ordinary person fail to understand until too late in the process is that the problem is of a collapse in the purchasing power of an unbacked state currency, which requires a completely different solution. That oft-quoted phrase about fiat money reflecting faith and credit in the government means something after all.

After the foreign holders have sold out, it is the actual users of a currency, who pay for their consumption with it, that are last to realise the currency is set to collapse entirely, and that they should get rid of it for anything they can buy. This eventual outcome is certain, so long as the central bank continues with its inflationary policies.

It is at this endpoint that the economy experiences a crack-up boom. When and if they can afford it, people even buy equities and property, simply to get out of fiat currency. But both these classes of asset will have fallen substantially measured in a rapidly depreciating currency before this condition has arrived.

Interest rates are already rising

In our analysis we have identified higher interest rates as the trigger that will burst the financial asset bubble. While Western central banks continue to suppress very short-term interest rates, insofar as they reflect the cost of borrowing they are already rising as the chart of the US Treasury 10-year bond in Figure 1 shows.

The initial rise in yield from 0.48% in March 2020 has not yet curbed enthusiasm for equity markets. This is normal cyclical behaviour, because bond yields usually rise during the last leg of an equity bull market. And the current and likely final leg for rising US equities — and most others — commenced only days after the lowest yield seen on 9 March 2020.

Investment psychology for equities turns positive at these times. A moderate rise in bond yields is taken to be evidence of improving economic prospects, and not a danger signal. A backward-looking investment establishment does not yet fear inflation, which it naively takes to be rising prices. Public participation increases, in the sure knowledge that the market is going up. This is reflected in borrowing to leverage bullish returns, the current position of which is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 is an alarming reflection of investors’ bullish mentality, but very few participants are paying attention to it. Furthermore, the Fed’s monthly QE injection of $120bn into financial markets gives everyone enormous confidence it will continue.

It is the unwinding of this madness of crowds that always feeds into a subsequent bear market. The cause is in plain sight. A second rise in bond yields, driven by rising prices for goods being so assiduously ignored by the investing establishment and public alike, is in the making. And it is almost always the second rise in bond yields that triggers cyclical bear markets. But the US stock market does not operate in a global vacuum: out of their $30 trillion total in dollars, foreigners have $10.7 trillion invested in US stocks.[ii] Bearing in mind the messages from Figures 1 and 2, they are also deeply affected by the message from Figure 3 below, of the dollar’s trade weighted index.

Since late-March 2020, when the dollar’s TWI turned south, gains of 90% on the S&P 500 have been offset by a 12.6% decline in the TWI. And in the light of President Biden’s high-spending policies, the chart suggests foreign investors will be faced with an important break lower in the TWI, and that the cyclical rise in bond yields that inevitably follows will lead to a double loss for them on holdings of US equities. Unless they move quickly, foreign-owned financial interests could simply evaporate into losses.

The dollar’s TWI is very heavily weighted in favour of the euro, so the outlook for the latter is also important. In the Eurozone, consumer demand is now surging at the fastest pace since before the great financial crisis, without enough production to supply it. Consequently, the prospects for price inflation are at least as dangerous as for the dollar. The difference is the ECB still maintains a negative deposit rate, so bond yields and interest rates have a lower base from which to rise. It is that prospect which is sure to make an over-owned dollar vulnerable to a relatively under-owned euro. A similar situation pertains for the Japanese yen.

But perhaps the most important currency rate will be that of China’s yuan. Last September, China began a progressive clampdown on excess credit which continues today. The few western analysts who are aware of it attribute this policy to cyclical factors, an attempt to prevent China’s economy overheating after earlier stimulus. They are also aware that tighter money in China will be reflected in a stronger yuan, potentially destabilising foreign exchange rates.

Furthermore, it also makes sense for China to attract investment flows currently overexposed to the dollar, by sending a clear signal that the yuan is the stronger currency. It would be China’s response to America’s attempted destruction of the Hong Kong—Shanghai Connect route for inward investment by deliberately destabilising Hong Kong. And it would also strip US capital markets of foreign funds, forcing an early increase in dollar interest rates in the US’s authorities attempt to prevent a dollar collapse.

The conclusion can only be that the sea-change about to hit capital markets will be both widely unexpected and sudden. Its degree of financial violence will reflect the accumulated difference between increasing government manipulation of markets along with the illusions created, and economic and monetary reality. Interest rates will not stop rising at a few per cent. Taking John Williams’s estimate of 11% price inflation as a starting point, markets will drive interest rates towards related levels. Swathes of indebted businesses will be threatened with failure before then, which is bound to be reflected in equity market valuations. The longstanding myth that the equity class offers protection against inflation will be debunked.

The property/equity relationship

Another class of asset that is commonly believed to offer protection against a collapsing currency is property. At a personal level, both productive agricultural land and residential property are commonly cited. But owning them requires additional resources to ensure their continued possession through an inflationary crisis. And the resources required will in turn depend on the characteristics and duration of the disruption to economic activity.

During a normal credit cycle, in the early stages of increasing price inflation equities prove more sensitive to the threat of rising interest rates than residential property. Individual investors tend to more immediately see that declining share prices offer little or no protection against an inflation threat, because the increases in interest rates sparked by it are deemed to be bad for the business outlook, but not enough to undermine the values of non-financial assets. There are some exceptions, such as mining shares, but otherwise generally this statement holds true.

Consequently, people turn to non-financial assets for protection against inflation, and the most prominent of these is property: principally residential and farmland. Furthermore, there are usually encouraging benefits such as the absence of capital gains taxes owner-occupiers of residential property. And first-time buyers are often subsidised by governments.

Residential property has already been booming on the back of very low interest rates and a widespread desire to move out of major conurbations, triggered by pandemic lockdowns. In many jurisdictions, home working for at least part of the working week is seen to be the future, increasing time spent in and therefore the relative importance of one’s home. For the middle classes, unspent funds have been accumulating. And behind it all has been enthusiastic mortgage lending fuelled by the Fed’s interest rate suppression and QE targeted at agency debt.

Prospects for residential property markets normally change when mortgage rates are forced significantly higher, in line with rising interest rates. The erosion of a currency’s purchasing power, which feeds into rising consumer prices, pushes interest rates higher than the majority of mortgagees can afford to pay. Those who have fixed interest mortgages obtain some relief, but new buyers are deterred. Furthermore, inflation sets in train a destructive transfer of wealth from the productive economy, impoverishing its economic actors for the benefit of the state. Inevitably, production suffers, and unemployment rises. Many homeowners with mortgages are driven into negative equity, and they can no longer afford their mortgage payments. Repossession rates rise.

This cycle is different in that the rush into residential property has occurred before the inflation threat has materialised sufficiently to undermine both financial and non-financial asset values. It is therefore probable that the rise in interest rates and borrowing costs we can expect in the next few months will undermine residential property prices at the same time as the ending of the equity bull market.

But so long as homeowners maintain their mortgage payments, they can probably see the inflationary crisis through. If they can hang on, their situation could be rescued by a near-total collapse in the purchasing power of their government’s currency, eliminating much or all of their mortgage liabilities in real terms. The mortgagees who have the resources to keep payments going will avoid the crisis. Instead, it will be borne by the mortgage providers and their savers.

Only then does residential property come into its own by offering a degree of protection against a currency collapse.

The role of precious metals

Earlier, we referred to the wisdom of Richard Cantillon when he sold John Law’s unbacked currency in London and Amsterdam for alternatives readily convertible into specie —principally sterling and guilders.

Incidentally, when the Mississippi venture collapsed, taking the livre down with it, Britain’s South Sea Bubble suffered the same fate; but the silver shilling survived. Today, there are no currencies backed by precious metals; instead, they are almost all on a dollar standard, and the dollar is at the heart of our problem. Where the dollar goes, we should assume all other currencies will follow.

We must also dismiss cryptocurrencies as being impractical. Central banks are planning their own versions and the intention is to use them to accelerate their failing monetary policies even faster. Fortunately for their long-suffering subjects, central bank digital currencies are unlikely to see the light of day, given the imminency and potential scale of a financial and monetary crisis.

Initially acting as a reserve of purchasing power, that leaves precious metals emerging to form the basis of a future money, as they always have done throughout history. Gold is the one monetary asset possessed by the majority of central banks that is not fiat — only 24 out of 130 central banks have reported they hold no gold or failed to report a holding to the IMF at the end of last year. After fiat fails, the only way a central banker and his political masters can get paid in a form of money with any purchasing power will be for the state to back its currency with gold. And even then, unless this is done correctly, it will probably be little more than a temporary fix.

One mistake frequently paraded is that gold has no interest rate. Therefore, the logic goes, rising fiat interest rates penalise holders of gold. But this is to misunderstand the role of interest rates. Interest rates compensate a lender for parting with possession of his money, compensates for any expected change in purchasing power over the duration of the loan, and compensates for the risk of being a creditor of the borrower. With a fiat currency whose debasement is obvious to a lender, the combination of these factors can be expected to lead to a high rate of interest, which, as is argued in this article, will lead to higher dollar interest rates to prevent foreign selling of the dollar.

Like folding fiat notes, physical gold in possession has no interest rate, but as money it is routinely loaned, leased and swapped for fiat. This would not happen if gold was not money. Because of its innate stability, gold’s interest rate is low. Figure 4 illustrates why.

The chart shows the monthly price of copper measured in dollars and gold since 1990. Copper is regarded by commodity analysts as a reference for industrial demand for metals, and therefore as a reflection of global economic demand.

Over the last three decades the dollar price of copper has varied between a low of 58% of the price in January 1990, and a high of 418% in 2011, a level which it is approaching again today. The average value over the whole 31 years was 186% of the 1990 price.

Copper priced in gold varied between 45% and 192%, ending up 8% today compared with the start of the period. Its average price over the whole 31 years was up 0.8% on the 1990 price — pretty much unchanged.

Not only has gold been a far more stable form of money over the last thirty years for users of copper, but it has proved to be stable over far longer periods for everything from common commodities to low-tech finished goods. Price stability was an important driver behind the industrial revolution, because it permitted entrepreneurs to calculate production costs and investment returns. Investment in production also tended to reduce consumer prices, increasing standards of living. Not only did consumers have access toimproved products, but their gold-backed currencies went further.

Therefore, we can say unequivocally and, without having to delve into monetary theory, proclaim that only gold can be the basis of the future non-fiat monetary system. The successes and failures of future gold-backed currencies do not concern us yet — those are bridges to be crossed later. Our present interest is to seek protection from the accumulating folies of central banks and their inflationary policies. In that sense, ownership of gold remains our principal link with a post-crisis future.

It has to be physical metal, because anything else imparts counterparty risk, and that’s the last thing you will want in a financial crisis. When the importance of gold is realised again, there is a significant risk of government confiscation, which is where silver comes into the picture. Central banks own none, or at least none that we are aware of, so in the event of governments doubling down against gold ownership silver would become much more precious.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 09:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3fxcJIp Tyler Durden

Utah Second State To Adopt Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations Law


jesson-mata-A4iiympOucE-unsplash

Earlier this month, Utah became the second state in the country to implement a law that allows home cooks to sell prepared meals from their homes. That very good law, H.B. 94, legalizes what have become known as Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations (MEHKOs).

Utah joins California as the only states with MEHKO laws. These laws are intended to provide low-overhead income potential to out-of-work chefs, stay-at-home parents, recent immigrants, potential restaurant and food truck owners, and students—anyone, really, who has “made side hustles out of their kitchens” before and during the pandemic.

While California’s first-in-the-nation MEHKO law broke important ground when it became law in 2019, its implementation has been a mess. That’s largely because the law requires municipalities to opt in to the law in order to be covered by it, I explained in September.

“While a handful of counties and cities have expressed interest in adopting the law in their own jurisdictions, no California city or county save Riverside County—not one—has adopted the law and drafted rules to implement it,” I wrote.

Thankfully, that’s changing.

“Despite fears from a number of sectors, most of which are exaggerated and some of which are not real at all, we are happy that more jurisdictions are opting in to Homemade Food Operations laws: 7 cities and counties in California, so far, and the State of Utah,” says Peter Ruddock, California Policy & Implementation Director with the COOK Alliance, the nonprofit group that led the fight for California’s law. “This isn’t a game for the impatient. It will likely take a while to get these laws widespread, but COOK Alliance is committed to the effort for the long haul.”

Ruddock is right that the fears expressed by some opponents of MEHKO laws are often exaggerated or just plain made up. At a public hearing this month in Solvang, for example, one interested member of the public urged the city council to ask county lawmakers to reject plans to opt in to the California MEHKO law.

“The Chamber is adamantly against microkitchens,” Solvang Chamber of Commerce leader Tracy Beard told the city council, citing the purported dangers of vehicle traffic that homemade food could cause, along with the “impact [on] the future of gated communities here” that barbecued ribs and fried chicken could have. Beard also called the MEHKO law “nonsense,” and urged the city council to “[p]rotect our struggling local restaurants by refusing to pass the proposed MEHKO ordinance.”

Although the Solvang council bought those arguments, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors rejected those and similar arguments this month and voted to opt in to the state’s MEHKO law.

While California’s MEHKO law is flawed (for reasons other than those cited by Beard), Utah’s law isn’t perfect, either. Like in California, Utah’s law also contains permitting and inspection requirements, which irks some. And Utah’s law doesn’t allow buyers to consume the food in the home where it was produced, meaning home supper clubs aren’t legal.

Thankfully, Utah dispensed with California’s awful opt-in requirement. Instead, Utah’s law caps the number of permits a municipality may issue at a percentage tied to the number of restaurants in a given municipality (15% in larger cities, and 70% in smaller ones). Hypothetically, that means if the state’s most populous county, while includes Salt Lake City, has 1,000 restaurants, then the county health department could issue up to 150 MEHKO permits. Under the law, though, the cap will be lifted in a year.

As Ruddock (of the COOK Alliance) noted, we’re still in the early days of MEHKO laws. Other states have considered adopting their own MEHKOs. For example, as I noted in a column last month, Washington State has considered a similar law. (That bill stalled, meaning I still have to buy my favorite homemade tamales on the black market.)

MEHKOs—like cottage food laws and food freedom laws—provide more choices for consumers and budding food entrepreneurs alike. That’s why I hope MEHKO laws continue to spread to every state in the country.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3wIvjmE
via IFTTT

Credit Suisse Cuts Ties With SoftBank For Quietly Backing Greensill

Credit Suisse Cuts Ties With SoftBank For Quietly Backing Greensill

Back in the pre-pandemic halcyon days of 2019, we reported on what appeared to be a fishy “circular finance” scheme whereby SoftBank appeared to be using a handful of Credit Suisse trade finance funds to mask some of the leverage on the books of certain portfolio companies. On one hand, several SoftBank portfolio companies were among the borrowers on the hook for repaying the ‘trade finance’ fund. On the other, SoftBank was also an investor in the fund. It led us to envision the following scenario.

Just imagine for a second that you’re the treasurer or CFO of a mid-sized corporation, and your looking for somewhere to park money where you can earn a decent return without taking too much risk. One of the Credit Suisse corporate bankers comes to you one day with an idea. They call it “supply-chain financing”. The new strategy is essentially just another tool to help companies more “flexibility” in managing their short-term financing needs. It’s a fool-proof idea, the banker explains, because even if the companies default, there are all kinds of insurance policies and other safeguards in place to help make the lenders whole.

So you invest. A few years later, your banker calls with some bad news. Four of the 10 companies to which the fund was most heavily exposed imploded, and are likely headed for liquidation. It could be years before the lenders are made whole – if ever – and you and your fellow unlucky investors are simply along for the ride, but you can probably kiss that money goodbye.

Several months later, you open the FT, only to discover that many of the other investors in the fund, as well as the advisor managing the fund, were all financially linked to the companies in which the fund was investing. The circular flow of money from the funds to the companies’ suppliers means that, for these other investors, any losses stemming from loan defaults have already been offset, since they’re basically paying themselves…with your money.

Well, that appears to be what happened to some investors who weren’t too happy when they found out that several Credit Suisse ‘supply chain finance’ funds were essentially part of an elaborate shell game orchestrated by SoftBank to help inflate the value of Vision Fund portfolio companies by making them look more financially healthy than they actually were.

Fast forward to 2021, and this has more or less come to pass: the trade finance funds at the heart of the scheme have more or less gone to zero (they’ve become “impossible to value”) after the firm organizing them, Greensill Capital, collapsed. All the worst fears about the SoftBank-backed companies involved with the fund have been proven correct: SoftBank was essentially using the fund to obscure the debt burdens of some of its poorest performing portfolio companies, but mostly it was Credit Suisse’s most profitable clients, including high-net worth individuals and sovereign wealth funds, have been left holding the bag. Credit Suisse launched an investigation into the collapse back in March amid reports that the bank was considering making some of its clients whole.

Following another embarrassing report published Friday by Bloomberg, which revealed that Credit Suisse had blacklisted Sanjeev Gupta, the steel tycoon at the heart of Greensill’s collapse, back in 2016, yet continued to lend to him inadvertently via its trade financing unit, Credit Suisse has decided to blacklist SoftBank and its portfolio companies, announcing Friday that it won’t do any new business with one of Japan’s biggest companies.

Here’s more from BBG:

Credit Suisse Group AG is cutting ties with SoftBank Group Corp., distancing itself from a key backer to Lex Greensill’s collapsed supply-chain finance empire after conflict of interest allegations.

The Swiss lender will no longer do any new business with the Japanese firm, people with knowledge of situation said, asking not to be identified because the matter is private. The decision may ripple across Credit Suisse’s investment bank: SoftBank has been a prolific deal-maker and last year Credit Suisse and other banks held about $8 billion of SoftBank shares in collateral, pledged by founder Masayoshi Son.

It is unclear how long the ban lasts for, or whether it impacts any ongoing deals.

Credit Suisse conducted an internal review into the Greensill funds after allegations of possible conflicts of interest involving SoftBank last year, but it was apparently too little, too late. But the investigation did confirm what the public already knew: A number of SoftBank portfolio companies received loans via supply-chain funds at Credit Suisse, while SoftBank was also an investor in the Credit Suisse funds. In the aftermath, SoftBank pulled $700M out of the funds and the bank also changed its investment guidelines for Credit Suisse’s funds to reduce the maximum exposure to a single borrower.

Not only is Credit Suisse likely furious at being misled by SoftBank, which added insult to injury by managing to pull its funds before the trade finance fund was gated by CS, but the bank is apparently facing unprecedented pressure from Swiss regulators and lawmakers who have apparently had enough of CS’s bumbling risk-management practices (the Greensill collapse was only part of one of the worst quarters in the banks’ history). One Swiss lawmaker who spoke to Reuters said the fallout from the Greensill collapse had damaged the reputation of the broader Swiss banking industry.

“Bank directors don’t take responsibility for their action because there is no need to. There are no real sanctions for mismanagement,” said Gerhard Andrey, a Green member of the Swiss parliament.

“The scandals that have hit Credit Suisse, from Mozambique to Greensill, are damaging for Switzerland’s reputation. We have proposed a reform … that would mean if something goes wrong, then the manager is on the hook,” he said.

Swiss lawmakers are expected to further discuss the issue of holding CS executives accountable in the coming weeks, which begs the question: Could CEO Thomas Gottstein, who has weathered the crisis so far while laying off a raft of subordinates, actually be pushed out?

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 08:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2RUolwb Tyler Durden

Utah Second State To Adopt Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations Law


jesson-mata-A4iiympOucE-unsplash

Earlier this month, Utah became the second state in the country to implement a law that allows home cooks to sell prepared meals from their homes. That very good law, H.B. 94, legalizes what have become known as Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations (MEHKOs).

Utah joins California as the only states with MEHKO laws. These laws are intended to provide low-overhead income potential to out-of-work chefs, stay-at-home parents, recent immigrants, potential restaurant and food truck owners, and students—anyone, really, who has “made side hustles out of their kitchens” before and during the pandemic.

While California’s first-in-the-nation MEHKO law broke important ground when it became law in 2019, its implementation has been a mess. That’s largely because the law requires municipalities to opt in to the law in order to be covered by it, I explained in September.

“While a handful of counties and cities have expressed interest in adopting the law in their own jurisdictions, no California city or county save Riverside County—not one—has adopted the law and drafted rules to implement it,” I wrote.

Thankfully, that’s changing.

“Despite fears from a number of sectors, most of which are exaggerated and some of which are not real at all, we are happy that more jurisdictions are opting in to Homemade Food Operations laws: 7 cities and counties in California, so far, and the State of Utah,” says Peter Ruddock, California Policy & Implementation Director with the COOK Alliance, the nonprofit group that led the fight for California’s law. “This isn’t a game for the impatient. It will likely take a while to get these laws widespread, but COOK Alliance is committed to the effort for the long haul.”

Ruddock is right that the fears expressed by some opponents of MEHKO laws are often exaggerated or just plain made up. At a public hearing this month in Solvang, for example, one interested member of the public urged the city council to ask county lawmakers to reject plans to opt in to the California MEHKO law.

“The Chamber is adamantly against microkitchens,” Solvang Chamber of Commerce leader Tracy Beard told the city council, citing the purported dangers of vehicle traffic that homemade food could cause, along with the “impact [on] the future of gated communities here” that barbecued ribs and fried chicken could have. Beard also called the MEHKO law “nonsense,” and urged the city council to “[p]rotect our struggling local restaurants by refusing to pass the proposed MEHKO ordinance.”

Although the Solvang council bought those arguments, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors rejected those and similar arguments this month and voted to opt in to the state’s MEHKO law.

While California’s MEHKO law is flawed (for reasons other than those cited by Beard), Utah’s law isn’t perfect, either. Like in California, Utah’s law also contains permitting and inspection requirements, which irks some. And Utah’s law doesn’t allow buyers to consume the food in the home where it was produced, meaning home supper clubs aren’t legal.

Thankfully, Utah dispensed with California’s awful opt-in requirement. Instead, Utah’s law caps the number of permits a municipality may issue at a percentage tied to the number of restaurants in a given municipality (15% in larger cities, and 70% in smaller ones). Hypothetically, that means if the state’s most populous county, while includes Salt Lake City, has 1,000 restaurants, then the county health department could issue up to 150 MEHKO permits. Under the law, though, the cap will be lifted in a year.

As Ruddock (of the COOK Alliance) noted, we’re still in the early days of MEHKO laws. Other states have considered adopting their own MEHKOs. For example, as I noted in a column last month, Washington State has considered a similar law. (That bill stalled, meaning I still have to buy my favorite homemade tamales on the black market.)

MEHKOs—like cottage food laws and food freedom laws—provide more choices for consumers and budding food entrepreneurs alike. That’s why I hope MEHKO laws continue to spread to every state in the country.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3wIvjmE
via IFTTT

UK Carrier Strike Group Joins NATO Drill Ahead Of Indo-Pacific Voyage

UK Carrier Strike Group Joins NATO Drill Ahead Of Indo-Pacific Voyage

Authored by Alexander Zhang via The Epoch Times,

Britain’s new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth is taking part in a massive NATO exercise in the Mediterranean this week ahead of its eight-month maiden voyage to Asia designed to counter the security challenges posed by the Chinese regime.

The war games, dubbed Steadfast Defender 21, are aimed at simulating the 30-nation military alliance’s response to an attack on any one of its members.

Military personnel participate in the NATO Steadfast Defender 2021 exercise on the deck of the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth off the coast of Portugal, on May 27, 2021. (Ana Brigida /AP Photo)

But this is just the beginning of the Carrier Strike Group’s eight-month maiden voyage to the Far East, during which it will cross through the South China Sea in a signal to Beijing that sea lanes must remain open.

Commodore Steve Moorhouse, Commander of the Carrier Strike Group, said the deployment will be “a hugely powerful statement” of Britain’s readiness to defend Western interests.

“It shows that we are a global navy and wanting to be back out there,” he said.

“We’ll not only be exercising militarily but also supporting the government’s wider objectives in the region,” which is “an increasingly important part of the world.”

A pilot manoeuvers an F-35 jet as military personnel participate in the NATO Steadfast Defender 2021 exercise on the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth off the coast of Portugal, on May 27, 2021. (Ana Brigida /AP Photo)

He said he hopes that “this deployment will be the first of a more persistent presence for the United Kingdom in that region.”

Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO Secretary-General, said the alliance doesn’t regard China as an adversary, but has had to react to the shifting balance of power as the Chinese regime keeps increasing its defence budget.

“We know that China will soon have the biggest economy in the world, they already have the second-largest defence budget and the biggest navy in the world. And of course, this matters for NATO and NATO allies. And we need to take that into account when we continue to modernise and adapt NATO,” he told reporters.

Stoltenberg said the drill highlighted the Western allies’ willingness to cooperate on security issues.

“It sends a message of NATO’s resolve and our capability and willingness to defend all allies against any threat. And it also sends a message of how NATO allies can operate together.

“This is a British aircraft carrier, the Queen Elizabeth, with fifth-generation aircraft from the United States, with U.S. marines and a Dutch frigate helping to protect it. So it also demonstrates how we operate together, bring allies together.”

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 08:10

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/34AbUbr Tyler Durden

US Still Pressing Turkey To ‘Return’ S-400 Missiles To Russia: “We Offered Alternatives”

US Still Pressing Turkey To ‘Return’ S-400 Missiles To Russia: “We Offered Alternatives”

Now least two years into the Turkey F-35 and S-400 crisis, the US appears desperate to end the inter-NATO rift which has not only seen Washington-Ankara relations hit their lowest point ever, but which has on the Turkish side been a major factor in pummeling the economy, including sending the lira spiraling lower over consecutive months. 

“We have offered alternatives to Turkey, they know exactly what to do if they want to get out from underneath these sanctions,” US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman told CNN Turk in an interview on Friday.

“I hope that we can find a way forward,” she said in statements which came as Sherman is in Ankara for the first such diplomatic trip to Turkey of a Biden official under his administration

Patriot system, US Army

“Turkey is well aware of the steps it needs to take,” Sherman continued in the televised remarks. “We have talked about ways to take them. And this will be a decision for Turkey to take.” 

No doubt this is a reference to the Trump admin’s efforts to push the US Army’s Patriot systems in place of the Russian S-400 anti-air missiles, long seen as capable of compromising US technological secrets connected with the F-35’s stealth and radar-evading technology (for which Turkey was cut out of the Lockheed F-35 program).

At this point of course Turkey has long had possession of the S-400, and has even successfully field tested it, thus it’s long a “done deal” – yet it’s reportedly not yet been activated in terms going fully operational. Sherman’s comments implied, however, Washington’s willingness to work with its uneasy NATO ally at “reversing” the S-400 implementation. 

“They still want Turkey to move the S-400 systems out of the country or return it,” a top Turkish official told Middle East Eye, while also emphasizing that Sherman has thus far not offered any “new” proposal or specific alternative (other than the aforementioned Patriot missiles. 

“Multiple Turkish officials said in the past that Ankara wasn’t considering the removal of the system from the country since it was a done deal and there was no turning back,” the MEE report continues.

Erdogan himself has for years been vehement in public statements that it’s ‘impossible’ for Turkey to reverse course. But as MEE notes, “However, Turkey has yet to fully activate the S-400 system, in order to prevent any escalation with Washington” – particularly in the form of expanded sanctions. 

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 07:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/34vBL4l Tyler Durden

Decentralization: Why The EU May Be Better Than The US

Decentralization: Why The EU May Be Better Than The US

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

Over the years, I’ve been pretty hard on the European Union. Both as an editor and a writer, I’ve published articles criticizing its central bank and its unelected, bureaucratic central government. Especially objectionable is the EU ruling class’s propensity for cynical politics built around threatening and intimidating voters and national governments who don’t conform to Brussels’ wishes.

Recall, for example, how the EU threatened the United Kingdom with retaliatory tariffs and legal action designed to dissuade the British from voting to pull the UK out of the EU.

Many within the EU continue to push petty anti-British policies to this day.

Moreover, the Brussels government has taken steps to force into line various EU member states that don’t conform to EU edicts on immigration or internal politics. For example, over the past year, Brussels has launched legal proceedings against Poland because of steps taken by Poland’s elected government to reform the regime’s judicial system. The EU has also taken legal action against Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic over immigration policy.

Even worse, many within the bloc continue to push for a so-called “United States of Europe” which will presumably drive the bloc toward far more political unity and control by the Brussels regime.

Simply put, the EU is a force for political centralization which threatens to further abolish what remains of more localized autonomy in Europe.

The United States Is Even Worse

Yet, for all of the EU’s insistence on moving in the wrong direction—that is, the direction of political centralization—the EU remains remarkably decentralized by American standards. Indeed, when it comes to its degree of centralization, and the degree to which the central bureaucracy exercises control over member states, the EU is far superior to the United States.

This is evident in several ways. When it comes to border control, welfare programs, and control over each member states’ political institutions, the EU is clearly far more decentralized than the United States. Best of all, it is still possible for EU member states to actually leave the union, as demonstrated by Brexit.

Indeed, for those of us who favor greater political decentralization in the United States, a step toward the EU’s current situation would be a move in the right direction for the US—at least in terms of its political structure—even if the EU itself is presently trending in the wrong direction. 

The European Welfare State Is Relatively Decentralized

One key area in which Europe is more decentralized than the US is in its welfare state. European member states are fortunate in that their welfare programs remain decentralized, and that the bloc does not have any social-benefits program comparable to the US’s Social Security program.

This isn’t to say the EU doesn’t have any social-spending programs administered in Brussels. The EU bureaucracy takes in tax revenues from member states and then redistributes those funds around the bloc. In practice, this means wealthier EU members are net payers while poorer EU members are net receivers. Funds largely go toward “economic development” projects and agriculture.

Although transfer payments are a reality in the EU, the EU has nothing like the US’s system of a single nationwide program that directly taxes individuals and then pays that money back out, directly to individuals.

For example, with Social Security and Medicare, individual workers in the US are directly taxed by the central government and then those funds are transferred by the central government from wage earners to retirees. Other similar programs include food stamps and Medicaid.

This means millions upon millions of Americans look directly to the federal government for a “check in the mail.” Although all US states have their own welfare programs of various sorts, these tend to be very small compared to the federal welfare apparatus. Naturally, this tends to give the federal government far more control over the lives and personal budgets of Americans than if the welfare system were funded and administered at the state or municipal level.

In Europe, by contrast, the welfare state is administered and funded overwhelmingly at the level of the member country. Britain’s National Health Service—even when the UK was part of the EU—has always been a British program. The same is true of the UK’s pension programs.

Other member states function in a similar fashion. France, for example, has an immense welfare state, but those who receive transfer payments through the French system do not ultimately depend on the Brussels government for these payments.

The political implications of this are immense. The national nature of the American welfare state acts as an enormous impediment to any effort of an American state to break away from the union. Any American state that seeks to leave the US would, for instance, likely face opposition from voters who fear the loss of benefits doled out by the central government. Indeed, were the European welfare state unified to the degree that it is in the United States, it is extremely unlikely that Brexit would have ever happened. British pensioners and recipients of “EU welfare” payments would have been too fearful of losing their benefits—just as many opponents of Scotland’s independent referendum feared the loss of transfer payments from London. It’s not a coincidence that elderly residents of Scotland (and “out-of-work benefits claimants”) lopsidedly voted against Scottish independence.

The Member States’ Legislatures Still Dominate Lawmaking in the Bloc

Government regulation in Europe is increasingly a matter for politicians in Brussels. Yet, for the most part, the administration of government continues to be dominated by the governments of the member states.

Although the tug-of-war between Brussels and the national legislatures continues, the fact is member states generally retain unilateral control over national budgets, law and order issues, and over social policies like abortion. There is no European equivalent of the FBI, for instance. 

Moreover, as conflicts between east and west within the bloc over migrants continues, we see that member states are both more willing and more capable of pushing back against edicts from the central government than is the case with American states.

Member states even have unilateral control over their own national borders. While most members of the EU are subject, de jure, to the Schengen Agreement and its successor agreements, member states still maintain the de facto unilateral control. This was on clear display during the early months of the covid-19 panic when numerous member states within the EU closed down much of the travel across their borders.

Exit Is Still Possible

Nothing better illustrates the EU’s greater level of decentralization than the fact that member states can still peacefully and legally leave the bloc.

This was demonstrated when the United Kingdom finally left the EU after several years of negotiations following the national referendum on Brexit in 2016. Although the Brussels government sought to make it as difficult as possible for the UK to withdraw, it was nonetheless impossible to deny that the UK could legally do so. Moreover, in the practical sense, there was ultimately nothing the EU could do to prevent the UK from leaving, largely because the other EU members were not willing to support military action to force the UK to continue within the bloc.

We could of course contrast this with the United States. In the case of the US, any Americans hint at the possibility of secession, opponents of secession chortle that “the secession question was solved by the US Civil War!” Those who invoke this phrase, of course, are signaling that they believe any attempt at secession justifies military invasion and occupation.

Fortunately for the Europeans, the EU has yet to progress to the point where it can take military action against its own people with impunity. In America, on the other hand, any overture toward asserting independence from Washington brings veiled or not-so-veiled threats of violence.

What Brussels Bureaucrats Really Want

None of this is to say that the bureaucrats who run the EU in Brussels wouldn’t love to have all of the powers the US government currently enjoys. For years, the EU has been moving toward expanding its military capabilities, while calling for greater fiscal controls to expand the European Central Bank’s monetary policy. Some now call for using the covid-19 crisis as a justification for creating a “stronger EU.” 

But, however strong Europhiles’ calls are for political unity, old habits die hard. Many Europeans still aren’t willing to turn their national legislatures into mere adjuncts of a central government that will rule from Brussels. 

Americans, on the other hand, have historically had no such qualms about empowering a central state to a level that would delight any Europhile bureaucrat. It’s too late for American member states to assert independence from the central government without facing an avalanche of legal, political, and even military opposition. Europeans would be wise to not put themselves in a similar position.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/29/2021 – 07:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3i0f1l9 Tyler Durden