US Oil Rig Count Plunges To Annual Decline; Jobs & Production Next?

US Oil Rig Count Plunges To Annual Decline; Jobs & Production Next?

Baker Hughes just reported that the total number of active drilling rigs in the US tumbled by 15 last week to 696 – down 31 rigs on a YoY basis

Source: Bloomberg

However the entire rig count drop was driven by oil rigs (gas rigs were unch), which pushed the oil rig count into an annual decline (down for 5 straight weeks)…

Source: Bloomberg

This is the first annual decline since May 2019.

The first question we have is simple – with rigs now down almost 10% from the February highs – will Oil & Gas Extraction Industry jobs start to decline (after oddly surging last month in today’s data)?

Source: Bloomberg

Specifically, as OilPrice.com reports, Primary Vision’s Frac Spread Count, an estimate of the number of crews completing unfinished wells – a more frugal use of finances than drilling new wells, fell by 2 in the week ending May 26, to 260 – the lowest number of completion crews in operation since January. The number of fracking crews have fallen for four weeks in a row, losing a total of 34. Year over year, it is 23 fewer than a year ago.

So what the f**k data is BLS using?

That drop in oil rigs suggests US crude production is due to decline, which should, all things being equal, imply higher prices (but for now it is not).

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices were up again today with WTI above $71.50 (after trading within a tick of a $66 handle mid-week) ahead of this weekend’s OPEC meeting.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 15:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/nCEXwGg Tyler Durden

Govt. UFO Report Seems To Have Learned From John Durham

Govt. UFO Report Seems To Have Learned From John Durham

Authored by Robert Arvay via American Thinker,

One of the headlines at Space dot Com says, “UFOs will remain mysterious without better data, NASA study team says.”

Image via Pxfuel.

Well, duh — what a disclosure.  Who would have thought that better data are needed?  The writers of the Durham Report could have done a better job than NASA has concerning UFOs.  Yes, the same Durham report that told us all about everything we already knew, concerning high-level seditious crimes — and then eschewed further prosecutions.  That report.

There were signs early on that the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) was not going to finally get around to a long-awaited, full-throated research effort regarding UFO/UAP phenomena.  Disappointingly, the official descriptions of the office, while at least calling attention to the potential seriousness of such phenomena, has the appearance of yet one more paper-pushing “alphabet” bureaucracy.  It seems more interested in keeping 9-to-5 hours than being prepared to be called out of bed at 3 A.M. to respond on scene to an incident.  Ho, hum.

This is in stark contrast to the sense of urgency displayed by the “men in blue who descended (by helicopter) onto U.S. Navy aircraft carriers (Nimitz and Roosevelt) to confiscate all audio-visual recordings associated with detections of unexplainable aerial phenomena by crew members of those ships.  Those incidents reflect quick-time, no-nonsense responses by a secretive government force that is highly interested in the sightings and motivated to conceal them from the public — even silencing witnesses.

AARO has also restricted its scope to current UFO sightings and rejected calls to look into some rather spectacular sightings that have occurred in earlier years.  The Davis-Montham Air Force Base Incident of 1952 is but one of many that cry out for explanation.  True, we should not expect a complete overhaul of every past UFO event, but on the other hand, at least keeping a file on the most significant of them, for reference, is the least one would expect from an agency assigned to investigate what may eventually turn out to be the most world-changing encounter in human history.  AARO seems utterly disinterested in doing that, or in applying the most basic and effective investigative tools at its disposal.

Oh, look, here’s another interesting sighting report that just came in.  See, we’re doing a good job.  Now, where can we put this one?

We cannot be sure of what is going on behind closed doors in Congress.  There are unsubstantiated reports that, in secret hearings, some members of Congress have been…what is the word?  Shocked, amazed, worried?  The question arises: why would government not tell us what it knows, or at least has evidence, about UFOs?

The stock answer is “national security.”  Okay, that may be true, but in an environment in which government agencies blatantly lie to us about matters concerning only their own career security, the public is fully justified in being skeptical.  The Air Force is understandably not eager to confess to the public that there are Chinese spy balloons in our skies, balloons that were brought to their attention only by nonmilitary people, and then which, because of White House interference, it failed to shoot down while they could have been recovered on land, with reporters present.  How embarrassing.

How much less is the government willing to say, yes, there are unidentified aircraft in our skies, which exhibit capabilities that we do not have and cannot get?  Would we all panic if the government said the best explanation, considering all the known facts, is that these craft are from another planetary civilization?

I am not saying that any such thing is the case.  I am merely saying that I find it odd that the federal government seems comparatively nonchalant about what is potentially the most paradigm-shifting set of events in human history.

(For those who may be interested, my blog at THE UFO PARADOX covers a much wider scope of this subject than can be covered in any one commentary.)

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 14:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/cpzZrKR Tyler Durden

Elon Musk Becomes World’s Richest Person (Again) After Luxury Bust Hits Bernard Arnault

Elon Musk Becomes World’s Richest Person (Again) After Luxury Bust Hits Bernard Arnault

Bloomberg’s billionaire index shows Elon Musk has reclaimed his position as the world’s wealthiest person. He surpassed LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault’s $187 billion fortune by about $7.7 billion to $194.8 billion this week as the luxury bubble deflates

The two centibillionaires have been duking it out for the top spot on Bloomberg’s billionaire index. Arnault’s wealth surged in recent months as investors panic-bought LVMH’s stock on the narrative that demand for brands including Louis Vuitton, Dior, and Celine was ‘still in vogue.’ But it wasn’t until last week when news of softening US demand crushed global luxury brand stocks. 

“Slowing to negative growth year-on-year in the US is a building concern, especially given signs of softening demand from more economically sensitive aspirational consumers,” Deutsche Bank analysts wrote in a note to clients last week.

The sharp fall in luxury stocks has meant Arnault is no longer the wealthiest person, losing about $15.7 billion of net worth since May 17. 

Meanwhile, Musk’s net worth has soared $12.4 billion in the last week as Tesla stock breached the $200 per share level. 

Holding up the rear is Jeff Bezos with $146.3 billion, Bill Gates with $125.9 billion, and Larry Ellison with $118.3 billion.  

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 14:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/5TNHyAs Tyler Durden

US Food Production Has Taken A Very Dangerous Turn In The Wrong Direction

US Food Production Has Taken A Very Dangerous Turn In The Wrong Direction

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

If farmers and ranchers don’t produce enough food, we don’t eat.

So we should always be very thankful for our hard working farmers and ranchers.  Unfortunately, farms and ranches all over the United States have been hit by a string of disasters in recent months, and as a result food production has taken a turn for the worse.  So does that mean that we should expect that there will soon be shortages of certain items?  Unfortunately, it appears that is likely to be the case.  For example, it is being reported that approximately 90 percent of Georgia’s peach crop for this year has been destroyed

Summer is around the corner, and in Georgia, summer means peaches.

But horticulturists at the University of Georgia say roughly 90% of the Peach State’s crop has been destroyed by bad weather and a warming climate.

The last time things were this bad was 1955, according to Lawton Pearson of Pearson Farm in Fort Valley, Georgia.

I really love a good peach.

But if you want to sink your teeth into some fresh peaches in the months ahead, they won’t be coming from Georgia

So don’t count on sinking your teeth into a peach from the Peach State anytime soon.

“Not Georgia peaches,” Pearson says. “I don’t think you’ll see Georgia peaches in the grocery store.”

Perhaps you are thinking that we will just eat more oranges instead.

Unfortunately, it is being projected that a combination of factors will cause Florida’s orange harvest to be 56 percent smaller this year

Florida’s citrus industry posted its worse harvest since 1937, which should give orange fans some pause at the supermarket.

Damage from the 2022 hurricane season, combined with the impact of citrus greening disease, is ravaging the Sunshine State’s orange crop.

This will likely cause citrus prices to skyrocket nationwide, as Florida farmers recorded its smallest orange harvest in 90 years, according to the state’s latest agriculture report.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture said in January that only 18 million boxes of Florida oranges would be on the market in 2023, a 56 percent drop from last year.

I think that there will still be Florida orange juice in the stores.

But I also think that it will cost a lot more.

Meanwhile, there is grave concern about the winter wheat harvest in the middle of the country.

At this point, the drought has been so bad that over one-fourth of all winter wheat in the state of Kansas might not even get harvested

Month after month without enough rain has made Kansas the epicenter of a stubborn drought covering parts of the Great Plains.

While the drought that plagued almost the entire western half of the U.S. last year has relented, it has only gotten worse in Kansas. The state is experiencing the most severe drought in the country and its worst in a decade.

If rains don’t come soon, more than one-quarter of the state’s wheat fields could be in such dismal conditions farmers don’t even harvest them, according to Kansas Wheat.

If you like to eat things made from wheat, this should greatly concern you.

At the same time, supplies of beef are becoming tighter as well because the size of the U.S. beef cow herd is now “the smallest since 1962”

Now, the U.S. beef cow herd is the smallest since 1962. Drought and high feed costs drove producers to send animals to slaughter instead of keeping them for breeding. Farmers who fatten cattle have gained leverage in sales negotiations over the meatpackers that dominate the market, such as Tyson Foods Inc (TSN.N), Cargill Inc (CARG.UL) and JBS USA (JBS.UL).

Over the past couple of years, I have written so many articles about the relentless megadrought that has plagued the western half of the country.

I warned that this endless drought would cause enormous problems for food production, and now that day has arrived.

The good news is that there is not going to be famine in the United States in 2023.

We are still going to have enough food to eat.

But without a doubt food supplies are getting tight, and famine has started to erupt in many of the poorest parts of the globe.

Of course food is not the only thing that is in short supply. 

It is being reported that drug shortages in the United States are “approaching record levels”

Thousands of patients are facing delays in getting treatments for cancer and other life-threatening diseases, with drug shortages in the United States approaching record levels.

Hospitals are scouring shelves for supplies of a drug that reverses lead poisoning and for a sterile fluid needed to stop the heart for bypass surgery. Some antibiotics are still scarce following the winter flu season when doctors and patients frantically chased medicines for ailments like strep throat. Even children’s Tylenol was hard to find.

We are in the process of transitioning from an era of plenty to an era of scarcity.

For most of us, going to the store and getting whatever we want has never been a problem.

But now conditions are rapidly changing, and the entire world is competing for steadily diminishing resources.

At the same time, global food production is being hit by drought, disease, natural disasters and incredibly crazy weather patterns.

As I detail in “End Times”, severe global famine is inevitable this century.  No matter what choices are leaders make now, it is just a matter of time before global demand for food greatly exceeds global production of food.

Most of you that are reading this live in wealthy countries, and wealthy countries will have the resources to purchase most of the food that is actually produced.

But even though wealthier countries will fare relatively better than poorer countries, the truth is that everyone will suffer.

So I hope that you are preparing for the challenging times that are ahead, because they will shake our society to the core.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 14:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/6rMBAC4 Tyler Durden

India’s Imports Of Russian Oil Hit A Record High

India’s Imports Of Russian Oil Hit A Record High

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  • India’s imports of Russian crude surged to a record high in May, with the country taking in 1.96 million barrels per day.

  • India imported more oil from Russia than it did from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the U.S. combined.

  • India’s imports of Russian crude have undermined OPEC, with OPEC’s share of imports to India hitting the lowest in at least 22 years.

India’s oil imports from Russia continue to surge as cheaper Russian crude exports find more and more buyers in the world’s third-largest crude oil importer. 

India shattered its previous records of imports of Russian crude and took in May 1.96 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude from Russia—an all-time high, according to data from energy cargo tracker Vortexa.

India’s Russian oil imports alone were higher than the 1.74 million bpd in India’s combined imports from the next four largest suppliers – Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the U.S.  

Russian oil accounted for a massive 42% of all Indian crude imports, compared to negligible volumes India had imported before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

A year since the war began, India has turned from a marginal buyer of Russian crude to the most important market for Moscow’s oil alongside China. Indian refiners, not complying with the G7 price cap and looking for cheap opportunistic purchases, have snapped up many of the Russian Urals cargoes, which used to go to northwest Europe before the EU embargo. 

Record imports of cheap Russian crude into India have undermined OPEC’s share of supply so much that OPEC’s share of all Indian oil imports has hit the lowest in at least 22 years.

Russia has been India’s top crude oil supplier for months now and overtook Iraq as the top supplier for the 2022/2023 fiscal year. Russia accounted for nearly a fourth of India’s crude oil imports in 2022/2023 as the world’s third-largest crude importer welcomed on average 1.6 million bpd of Russian crude out of a total of 4.65 million bpd of imports.

In recent months, India’s spot purchases of crude from the Middle East have fallen, as cheaper Russian spot barrels are making their way to Indian refiners. Indian Oil, the largest refiner in the country by capacity, is committed to its term deals with Middle Eastern producers, but spot purchases from the Middle East have dropped amid the Russian competition, Shrikant Madhav Vaidya, chairman of Indian Oil, said last month. 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 13:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/XHgihFA Tyler Durden

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel Celebrated Selfishness as a Virtue


Rachel Brosnahan in "The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel"

After years of toiling against a culture that refused to recognize or celebrate the value of our hero’s unique gifts, there was a possible breakthrough. A chance was seized. A microphone was commandeered. The nation’s airwaves were unexpectedly filled with a message about the value of selfishness, individuality, and ambition.

I’m talking, of course, about the finale of The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, which concluded its five-season run on Amazon Prime last week.

“I want a big life. I want to experience everything. I want to break every single rule there is,” Miriam “Midge” Maisel (Rachel Brosnahan) said, near the end of her final set, in a moment that effectively summed up the character’s first principles over the course of the show’s arc. “They say ambition is an unattractive trait in a woman—maybe. But you know what’s really unattractive? Waiting around for something to happen. Staring out a window, thinking the life you should be living is out there somewhere, but not being willing to open the door and go out there and get it, even if someone tells you you can’t.”

It was a bit more terse than another famous speech delivered at the climax of a story that celebrates many of the same themes. Or perhaps it was a more verbose version of Howard Roark’s famous declaration in The Fountainhead, after being informed that it’s unlikely anyone will let him design buildings in the way he wanted: “That’s not the point,” he said. “The point is, who will stop me?”

Over the course of five seasons, no one stopped Midge Maisel. Not when she stormed onto the stage at New York City’s famous Gaslight Cafe in a bathrobe to deliver her first impromptu set after discovering her husband’s infidelity in the show’s premiere. Not when she similarly broke away from an interview to deliver that monologue in the finale. It wasn’t all smooth sailing in between—indeed, one of the show’s strengths was its willingness to let Midge struggle, even seem to fail at times—but that’s not the point, is it? The point is, no one stopped her.

More than most other shows on television, Mrs. Maisel celebrated the selfishness that is essential to success in comedy and show business at large. Midge was always a selfish character, but the show’s final season leaned into that trait in a refreshing way. Rather than having her grow to be a better mother or romantic partner, or learn some self-sacrificial lesson about helping others succeed, the showrunners (Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino) put the spotlight on Midge’s defining trait, while also acknowledging the trade-offs that come with it.

The final season culminated with Midge getting her long-sought-after break—a four-minute set on The Gordon Ford Show, which we’re told is the highest-rated late-night program on television in the show’s fictional version of 1962 America—and used various flash-forwards to leave no doubt that it was, in fact, the springboard to a wildly successful career in show business. She got there by breaking the rules and by demanding to be first in line, yes, but also by refusing to compromise on who she was.

The show’s celebration of selfishness extended beyond Midge herself and did so in a way that fits with Ayn Rand’s conception of the term. While there is nothing wrong—and plenty right—about putting one’s own needs first, Rand emphasized that selfishness also indicated moral first principles: Being selfish means, essentially, being true to one’s self and refusing to subvert the individual to the desires of others.

Throughout the show, Midge repeatedly encountered supposedly successful people whose showbiz fame was predicated on committing the Randian cardinal sin of subverting their individualism for mass appeal. First and most apparent was Sophie Lennon (Jane Lynch), a snooty Manhattanite who donned a fake accent and fat suit to perform stand-up as a crass housewife from Queens. There was also Shy Baldwin (Leroy McClain), the closeted homosexual who performed as a womanizing pop singer. Finally, there was Ford, the late-night host with a fake marriage who didn’t write his own jokes or have as much creative control over his own show as he liked to think. As the lies those characters lived were peeled back, Midge (and the audience) discovered them to be—to varying degrees—pathetic, tragic, and pitiable.

Midge steadfastly refused to play that game, announcing early on that she would achieve fame on her own terms. Her comedy act was a reflection of that perspective, rooted as it was in the lived experience of a divorced Jewish mother from the Upper West Side. Her manager Susie Myerson (Alex Borstein) and real-life comic Lenny Bruce (Luke Kirby), fellow outsiders who disdained the phoniness of their industry, stood alone in recognizing and encouraging Midge’s unique talent.

To be sure, there was plenty of the traditional form of selfishness in Midge’s character too. Her big break came after she persuaded Myerson to apply a particularly nasty form of leverage over Ford so he would break his personal rule against allowing his writers to appear as guests on his show (which is, it should be said, a very reasonable rule). By doing so, she blatantly stepped to the front of the line ahead of other comedians who toiled in the obscurity of the writers’ room far longer than she did.

But the show left no doubt that she deserved the break when it came. She wasn’t just the one writer in Ford’s bullpen who found the right leverage to make him break his rule—she was also the best of the bunch, and therefore the one most deserving of special treatment in the show’s Randian-tinged perspective. Her selfishness, in all its forms, was duly rewarded.

Still, Mrs. Maisel also demonstrated that the selfishness necessary for success is not without its trade-offs. In the fifth season’s flash-forwards, we learned that Midge’s strained and distant relationship with her two children continued even after both reached adulthood. If Midge’s success was the result of never compromising on her individualism, then that same character trait naturally made her a poor mother, a role where self-sacrifice is fundamental. Her relationship with her parents was similarly difficult, though one might note that strained or absent family ties only reinforce the similarities between Midge and Rand’s heroes, most of whom lack children or relatives who aren’t portrayed as losers and leeches.

The dark side of Midge’s ambition and selfishness was always part of the show’s award-winning formula. Her inability to separate her real life and stage persona cost her friends and opportunities along the way—most prominently getting her canned from a tour as Baldwin’s opening act after she inadvertently outed him during a set. There were lessons to be learned, but Midge never abandoned her individuality in order to set things right.

Over its five seasons, Mrs. Maisel veered into other libertarian-adjacent themes, including casting a critical eye toward the obscenity laws that limited free speech in 1950s/’60s New York City—and which Midge got arrested for violating. The final season dealt in a small way with the tragic end of Bruce’s career and placed the blame for his personal decline squarely on the persecution he suffered at the hands of government censors. “I can’t step foot in any club east of the Grand Canyon,” he lamented at the start of the final episode. Offered Myerson’s help to get back on top, he selflessly declined, telling her to use her favors on someone else. There’s a hint of a moral there.

But the hero and moral center of the show was always Midge—indeed, everything in the show revolved around her—who used her talents and shamelessly seized every favor offered to her. Even in flash-forwards to her later years, we saw her tireless work ethic continue. And while Midge would surely fall short of Rand’s ideals about what defines an objectivist hero—despite her propensity for delivering diatribes into a microphone—The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel left little doubt that she’d never have succeeded without putting herself first.

The post <em>The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel</em> Celebrated Selfishness as a Virtue appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/yMSC7xj
via IFTTT

The Supreme Court Is Not in a ‘War on Science’


The U.S. Supreme Court

Last fall, Robert Redford (yes, that Robert Redford) took to the pages of USA Today to offer a dire warning of the dystopian future awaiting us if the Supreme Court reined in the Clean Water Act in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a case argued by our firm, the Pacific Legal Foundation. The Supreme Court has unanimously rebuked the EPA for its overreach and environmentalists are reprising tired talking points—like Redford’s—about the Court’s supposed war on science.

Those arguments miss one very important fact: None of the Court’s decisions that its critics so hate have anything to do with science. The Supreme Court has one job and one job only: to interpret and apply the laws passed by Congress and signed by the president. That’s it.

Consider last year’s West Virginia v. EPA. The Court held that Congress never gave the EPA the authority to adopt its Clean Power Plan and that any “decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.”

Or consider the Court’s ruling in National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) on constitutional challenges to OSHA’s nationwide employer COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The justices ruled that OSHA did not have the authority to create a vaccine mandate because the Occupational Safety and Health Act didn’t give OSHA the power to set health and safety standards except those that relate to occupational hazards that are specific to the workplace. COVID-19 was a risk found in some workplaces, but it wasn’t a risk specific to the workplace—it was everywhere.

Which brings us to Sackett v. EPA, the cause of so much agita for Redford and his friends. Last week, the Court decided that the Clean Water Act applies to actual bodies of water—not any ground that is occasionally damp.

When Chantell and Michael Sackett bought land in Idaho to build their dream home, they had no idea they would start a 15-year legal battle that would take two trips to the nation’s highest court to settle. The EPA claimed their property was a federally protected wetland and ordered them to stop construction and return the land to its original form or face fines upward of $40,000 per day.

One problem: The Clean Water Act only applies to “navigable waters” and—as the Supreme Court ruled last week—only wetlands that share a continuous surface water connection with them.

In each of these cases, the central question was whether Congress gave the EPA or OSHA the power they were claiming, and, in each case, the Supreme Court said no.

In response to these cases, the apocalypse brigade brayed about the Court’s disregard for science. In West Virginia v. EPA, they insisted that the science was settled, and the EPA’s Clean Power Plan was critical to address climate change. In NFIB v. OSHA, they contended that the science demanded a vaccine mandate to protect workers. And in Sackett v. EPA, they protested that science required the EPA to regulate every sometimes-soggy patch of land from coast to coast or else fish will grow two heads and the Cuyahoga River will catch back on fire.

Of course, these may be reasonable arguments to make to policy makers—if we set aside nagging questions about just how settled the science really is. And those policy makers can, and should, consider arguments based on scientific expertise. But Supreme Court justices aren’t policy makers.

If the law, properly interpreted, is out of step with science, it is not for the Court to ignore a statute’s plain meaning, but for Congress—the legislative branch and the people’s representatives—to fix the problem and make new laws that are grounded in science.

The Supreme Court should be agnostic on questions of science but clear and resolute on questions of law. After all, that’s the Court’s job.

The post The Supreme Court Is Not in a 'War on Science' appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/0iKpb2t
via IFTTT

Critical Letters Are True Friendship

In reading for my festschrift essay for John Witte (“The Influence of the Catholic Intellectual Tradition on the Common Law”), I ran across this fascinating paragraph by Anthony Grafton on how Johannes Kepler didn’t publish a monograph on chronology (i.e., the study of historical dates) but instead developed his scholarship through letters, with Grafton including a great quote from Blake. Enjoy.

At first I regretted the absence of a Chronologia nova or a Great Chronology of the Old Testament–especially as it made the task of expounding Kepler’s technical views on any particular subject diabolically complex. But gradually it has become clear to me that Kepler saw chronology, as he and his contemporaries saw some other subjects, as particularly appropriate for treatment in letters–especially letters that exemplified William Blake’s principle, “Opposition is true friendship.” Kepler described chronology as a field that profited particularly from the open exchange of opinions and criticism, and his own practice as a chronologer exemplified this view at every point. In fact, Kepler’s chronological work represented an effort not only to establish the truth about the past but also to set out, systematically, the proper conditions for doing so–conditions that, as Kepler formulated them, had to do with the canons of discussion, often among scholars who belonged to opposing ideological camps.

Anthony Grafton, “Chronology, Controversy, and Community in the Republic of Letters: The Case of Keplar,” in World Made by Words: Scholarship and Community in the Modern West (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2009), 124.

The post Critical Letters Are True Friendship appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/mNAKvTi
via IFTTT

The 2021 Baby Boom Didn’t Last


Pacifier

After years of consecutive declines, U.S. birthrates ticked up slightly in 2021. But that pandemic baby boomlet didn’t extend into 2022, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The new CDC data are based on 99.91 percent of all 2022 birth records received and processed by the National Center for Health Statistics as of mid-February 2023. They show that what some had hoped might be the start of an extended baby boom was not to be.

The number of U.S. births decreased once again in 2022—albeit less than 1 percent from the previous year. There were 3,072 fewer births in 2022 than in 2021, and 47,573 more births last year than there were in 2020.

Last year saw a total of 3,661,220 U.S. births, for a general fertility rate of 56.1 births per 1,000 women ages 15 through 44.

In 2021, there were 3,664,292 U.S. births. Following declines of about 2 percent per year from 2014 through 2020, 2021 saw a 1 percent rise in births over 2020.

There was lots of speculation—and no clear answer—as to why more women were having babies in 2021. Some believe that the rise of remote work played a role. Some suggested it was because people were flush with cash from government stimulus payments and extra unemployment benefits. Still others argued that it was just a matter of slightly shifted birth timing—people who delayed trying to get pregnant during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic having babies a few months later than they otherwise would have. The fact that the birth boomlet didn’t continue throughout 2022 could support any of these theories, though it’s weakest for the remote work theory since many remote working situations continued into 2022.

In any event, the fall represents an ongoing trend in U.S. fertility, which has been sliding mostly steadily since 2007. The U.S. is far from alone in this trend. Replacement-level fertility is considered to be a fertility rate of 2.1, and many countries around the world—including the U.S.—fall far short of that.

The 2022 fertility rate was 1.665 (ever-so-slightly higher than the 2021 fertility rate of 1.664). This number represents an estimate of “the number of births that a hypothetical group of 1,000 women would have over their lifetimes, based on the age-specific
birth rate in a given year,” according to the CDC.

Falling fertility rates have spawned a lot of concern, and that’s not totally unwarranted. But there’s also a bright spot in this phenomenon: a massive decline in teen pregnancies.

The 2022 data are no exception, with the number of teen pregnancies reaching another record low.

The number of births to 15-to-19-year-olds was down 3 percent last year, to 13.5 births per 1,000 girls and women in that cohort. “Rates declined for both younger (aged 15–17) and older (aged 18–19) teenagers,” the CDC reported. Since 2007, the birthrate for these age groups has declined by 67 percent and, since 1991, by 78 percent. (For 10-to-14-year-olds, the 2022 birthrate was 0.2 births per 1,000 women, which is unchanged
since 2015.)

Birthrates were also down for women in their early 20s. Last year saw 60.4 births per 1,000 women ages 20 through 24—a birthrate decline of 2 percent from 2021 and 43 percent since 2007.

Things remained relatively unchanged for women in their late 20s and women in their early 30s. The 2022 birthrate for women ages 25 through 29 was 93.4 births per 1,000 women, which represents a very slight (less than 1 percent) increase in the birthrate for this cohort and a slight decrease (down 1 percent) in the total number of births for this cohort. There were 97 births per 1,000 women ages 30 through 34, a 1 percent decrease from 2021’s birthrate and essentially no change in the total number of births.

Birthrates rose for women in their late 30s and women in their 40s, continuing recent trends. There were 54.9 births per 1,000 women ages 35 through 39 and 12.5 births per 1,000 women ages 40 through 44, a birthrate increase of 2 percent and 4 percent, respectively. There were 1.1 births per 1,000 women ages 45 through 49, which represents a 12 percent rise in the number of births to this cohort from 2021–2022.

None of these changes are surprising. Young people this century have been starting families later in life than earlier generations did and having fewer children overall, too. And though we’ve been seeing big increases in the number of children born to women in their 30s and 40s, these haven’t been big enough to totally offset falling birthrates among U.S. teens and 20-somethings.

Interestingly, recent declines in the U.S. total fertility rates aren’t driven primarily by people choosing childlessness but by people with kids having smaller families.

There are all sorts of explanations for why this might be—though many fall apart when you look at actual data—and no clear answer. But one thing that’s been abundantly clear is that government attempts to boost fertility rates are doomed to fail—as I noted in Reason‘s June cover story (“Storks Don’t Take Orders From the State“).

The post The 2021 Baby Boom Didn't Last appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/Gw1kcyH
via IFTTT

FBI To Finally Hand Over Biden Corruption Docs Under Threat Of Contempt

FBI To Finally Hand Over Biden Corruption Docs Under Threat Of Contempt

Rather than face a potential contempt of Congress vote in the GOP-controlled House, the FBI has agreed to hand over a subpoenaed document from the Biden family investigation which a whistleblower says contains allegations that Joe Biden, when he was VP, engaged in a bribery scheme to change US policy in return for $5 million to his family businesses.

Once the existence of the document was made known, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) demanded to see it, followed by a subpoena from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY).

FBI Director Christopher Wray indicated as recently as Wednesday that he wouldn’t turn over the document, but would allow lawmakers to come to the FBI and read it in person. According to Just the News, however, a deal was struck late Thursday for the FBI to bring the document to the Capitol.

Chairman Comer will receive a briefing from the FBI and review the document on Monday,” his committee told JTN. “Chairman Comer has been clear that anything short of producing the FD-1023 form to the House Oversight Committee is not compliance with his subpoena. This unclassified record contains pages of details that need to be investigated further by the House Oversight Committee.

The FBI told Just the News that it wanted to accommodate Congress, while maintaining sensitive confidential human source information which is often recorded in memos before it can be corroborated. In other words, according to the FBI ‘it might be fake news!’

Director Wray offered to provide the Committee’s Chairman and Ranking Member an opportunity to review information responsive to the subpoena in a secure manner to accommodate the committee, while protecting the confidentiality and safety of sources and important investigative sensitivities,” said the bureau. “The FBI has continually demonstrated its commitment to working with the Committee to accommodate its request, from scheduling briefings and calls to now allowing the Chair to review information in person. The FBI remains committed to cooperating with the Committee in good faith.”

The bureau also cautioned that FD-1023 forms  are “used by FBI agents to record unverified reporting by a confidential human source. Documenting the information does not validate it, establish its credibility, or weigh it against other information verified by the FBI. -Just the News

Revealing unverified or possibly incomplete information could harm investigations, prejudice prosecutions or judicial proceedings, unfairly violate privacy or reputations, create misimpressions in the public, or potentially identify individuals who provide information to law enforcement, placing their physical safety at risk,” the agency statement continued.

They didn’t seem to mind creating ‘misimpressions in the public’ when they launched the Trump-Russia investigation despite knowing that the Steele Dossier was a complete fabrication.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 06/02/2023 – 12:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/MPJgb46 Tyler Durden