While the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa tried to demonstrate unity at the 15th BRICS summit in Johannesburg, the group is not as tightly knit as this week’s event and the lofty rhetoric employed afterwards would suggest. “BRICS has embarked on a new chapter in its effort to build a world that is fair, a world that is just, a world that is also inclusive and prosperous,” South Africa’s president Cyril Ramaphosa said, describing the bloc as “an equal partnership of countries that have differing views but have a shared vision for a better world.” Although it remains to be seen how equal the partnership will be considering the economic dominance of China within the group.
However, as Statista’s Felix Richter notes, according to the Pew Research Center’s latest Global Attitudes Survey, China is seen quite critically in some fellow BRICS countries, with Indians in particular having a very critical view of their powerful neighbor. 50 percent of Indian respondents claimed to have a very unfavorable opinion of China, with another 17 percent viewing China somewhat unfavorably. Relations between the two countries have been worsening for several years over tensions along their ill-defined 2,100-mile border in the Himalayan region. 48 percent of Indians claimed to have no confidence at all in Xi Jinping to do the right thing regarding world affairs, while 58 percent said that wouldn’t take Indian interests into account when making international policy decisions.
Brazilians showed similar levels of suspicion with respect to cooperation with China. While 50 percent of Brazilian respondents said that China wouldn’t take their country’s interest into account, 67 percent expressed little to no confidence in Xi Jinping to do the right thing at the global political stage. That translates to 48 percent of Brazilian respondents having a very or somewhat negative opinion of China, up from just 27 percent in 2019.
In 2012, I was asked by Wiley & Sons to write a book on China’s economic structure from my contrarian point of view. You may or may not recall that, at the time, China was the economic marvel of the world. Unlike most observers, I could see several critical problems with China’s political economy model and wrote about them in “The China Crisis.”
I identified seven key areas—given the basis upon which China or, more accurately, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) operated—that made China’s economic model unsustainable. I wasn’t the first to see this. Gordon Chang wrote about it in 2001 in his book, “The Coming Collapse of China.” Mr. Chang predicted a collapse by 2011, which, of course, did not occur. This is an update of sorts.
Instead, China’s economic clout and technological prowess continue to grow and develop. That explains why, at that time and for the next seven years, all kinds of terms were coined to describe China’s burgeoning economic status. There was the “Beijing Miracle,” “The China Model,” “Chinese State Capitalism,” and other glowing pronouncements that gave near-unanimous affirmation of China’s progress and prognosis for a bright future.
In fact, many experts, economists, and observers were predicting that China’s state capitalism would be the model for emerging nations around the world because of how fast it had transformed China’s economy. It was also predicted that China would soon eclipse the United States in GDP and replace it as the global hegemon.
Regarding this last prediction, it’s important to acknowledge that it appears as if it’s actually coming to fruition. In that regard, however, keep in mind that it’s mostly due to U.S. policy failures rather than what China is doing.
But even our leaders’ traitorous actions that have aided our adversaries in Beijing can’t compete with or prevent the venal nature and deleterious policies that the CCP has inflicted upon the Chinese people for many decades. The United States and other Western nations’ financial and technological investments have certainly delayed the inevitable but won’t stop it.
At its root, of course, is the corrosive nature of corruption. For the CCP, corruption in the form of political graft, wholesale theft from the private sector, and abuse of the financial system are the means to maintain control and gain wealth. Obtaining absolute power is the end goal, not a healthy economy.
Below is a brief look at how seven factors erode the social and economic sustainability in China.
1. Excessive Overuse of Factors of Production
When greasing the palms of Party officials is the main requirement for a project or policy, waste and fraud are not only unavoidable but lead to inefficiency in leveraging factors of production. In 2013, China used 10 times more factors of production than the United States to produce the same product. Has that improved? It’s hard to say, as accurate statistics that reflect poorly on the CCP and Xi Jinping, in particular, are difficult to find.
2. Inefficient Allocation of Economic Goods, Activity
This is related to No. 1 and is manifested in many ways, such as the theft of profitable companies by the Party and turning them into inefficient, debt-ridden “zombie” state-owned enterprises that destroy value and efficiency. It also transfers wealth from the middle class to the Party elite.
3. Stifling Innovation in Middle Class
Lack of freedom of information and the punishment of violators stifles innovation and creativity. Individuals are not allowed to solve problems by themselves. Successful private firms can count on being confiscated by the state at some point. Successful entrepreneurs who speak out about the abuses of the CCP are disappeared and reeducated. This engenders total fear of and reliance upon the state, both of which are what the CCP wants. Crushing individual creativity and innovation stifles a nation’s greatest resource—its people.
From critical areas such as food production to pharmaceuticals, corners are cut, and quality is compromised. Over the years, this not only negatively impacts the health and safety of the people, but it undercuts the authority and legitimacy of the Party.
5. A False Economy: Debt-based ‘Growth’ Is a Cancer on Economy
In a capitalist economy, most development is based on market need, which is determined by local prices and market conditions, which then attract capital. Distorted “development” driven by political expediency isn’t development but a waste of time, money, and resources.
The Evergrande collapse is a prime example of the CCP’s distortion of the economy. China’s overreliance on overdevelopment could be compared to healthy growth in muscle tissue from working out versus that of a cancerous tumor from exposure to toxicity. The former builds up strength and vitality; the latter destroys it. Thus, at some point, even state-owned debt from a state-owned central bank becomes unsustainable.
6. Rampant Pollution Making China Unlivable, Causing Social Unrest
China is one of the worst polluters in the world. For example, it is rapidly losing its arable land to toxicity from mining, manufacturing, and desertification. This is happening because decades of state ownership have led to indifference about what happens to the natural resources, also known as the “tragedy of the commons.” Losing arable land by either toxicity or desertification is not easily reversible and leads to greater dependence on external food sources to feed itself.
Water pollution is another environmental disaster brought about by the CCP. When I wrote “The China Crisis,” about 40 percent of China’s waterways either could not sustain life or were unsafe for human consumption. Today, that number is up to 70 percent. Moreover, 80-90 percent of its groundwater is undrinkable.
China’s air pollution is known for being the worst in the world, responsible for millions of premature deaths. State officials claim that air pollution is decreasing in China. Yet, at the same time, China is adding more coal mines for energy production, leading to more pollution, not less. The CCP’s inability to address its pollution crisis reveals its economic model’s failures, adding to civil unrest rather than social support.
7. Dystopian Depression Among Young Generation
When young people lose faith in their nation, they lose faith in their future. One outcome of that pessimism is the decision not to have children. China is not alone in this phenomenon, but like South Korea and Japan, it’s a big problem. Without the energy, drive, creativity, and belief of the young, the fall in population and its effects on consumption, taxes, and other economic factors make China’s economic future bleak.
Unfortunately, its unbalanced social and economic structure will lead to more excessive actions, internally and externally, as economic and social conditions worsen.
James R. Gorrie is the author of “The China Crisis” (Wiley, 2013) and writes on his blog, TheBananaRepublican.com. He is based in Southern California.
Young High Income Earners Are Flocking To Florida And Texas, New Study Shows
This month, financial advisors SmartAsset examined the most recent publicly available IRS data in order to try and determine where young professionals (aged 26-35) who earn $200K per year or more have been moving.
The study considered data from all 50 states and Washington DC, defining “high-earning households” as ones with adjusted gross incomes of $200,000 or more. Specifically, the study looked at
Inflow of young tax filers making $200,000 and above. This is the number of tax returns for people aged 26 up to 35 with adjusted gross incomes of at least $200,000 who moved into a state. Data comes from the IRS and for tax year 2021.
Outflow of tax filers making $200,000 and above. This is the number of tax returns for people aged 26 up to 35 with adjusted gross incomes of at least $200,000 who moved out of a state. Data comes from the IRS and for tax year 2021.
What they found was that rich young people are flocking to New Jersey and Connecticut. Across all age groups, New Jersey lost 2,617 high-earning tax filers in 2021. However, the state netted 1,048 new rich young professionals in the same year. This was the most dramatic reversal from the aggregate trends. Connecticut saw a similar, though less drastic, trend, the report showed.
Smartasset also found that high earners are youngest in Washington. Whether it’s compared with the rich population of all ages or the population as a whole, Washington has a disproportionately large number of young rich people. More than 13% of those making at least $200,000 in this state are between the ages of 26 and 35.
Despite losses, Washington DC remains exceptionally young and rich, the report said. DC lost nearly 700 high-earning tax filers aged 26 to 35, but still maintains a relative population higher than any state. More than 16% of people making over $200,000 fall into that age bracket.
And to the surprise of likely no one, Florida and Texas are once again No. 1 and No. 2. Florida gained a total of 2,175 high earners aged 26 to 35 after accounting for both inflows and outflows, while Texas gained a net 1,909. Despite the losses, New York (-5,062) and California (-4,495) still have the highest count of young high earners of any state by a wide margin.
The top 10 locations that high income young people are moving, per SmartAsset, are:
Florida: Florida gained a net of 2,175 high-earning tax filers between ages 26 and 35. While 3,391 were added in the state, 1,216 either moved or fell out of the income bracket. Most recently, there are 23,537 tax returns with over $200,000 income for this cohort. Florida is one of the nine states that doesn’t charge an income tax.
Texas: Texas actually saw more raw inflow of young, rich professionals than Florida, with 4,048 new filers in the given age bracket. But outflows were also higher at 2,139 filers, for a net migration of 1,909 into the state. Of nearly 700,000 tax returns with more than $200,000 income in Texas, 7% are for people aged 26 up to 35. Texas does not charge income tax at the state level.
New Jersey: New Jersey had the most drastic reversal of the migration trend across all age groups. While high earners generally left, the mix of high earners leaned more into the 26 to 35 crowd. 3,311 new tax filers fell under the $200,000 bracket in this age range, while 2,263 left.
Colorado: Like Texas and New Jersey, those ages 26 to 35 make up a particularly high percentage of people earning over $200,000 (7%). A net 754 tax filers in this income bracket was added to the state after 1,681 migrated in and 927 migrated out.
North Carolina: North Carolina had a total of 13,621 tax returns filed for high earners aged 26 to 35. This demographic makes up 5.9% of all people earning over $200,000 in the state. Across all age ranges, North Carolina had the third-highest net migration of high income earners.
Connecticut: Young people making over $200,000 increased in Connecticut more than the rate across all age groups. Out of 8,274 tax filers in this group, 660 were net additions after a 1,404 inflow and 744 outflow.
Washington: Washington state has the benefit of no state income tax and the highest proportion of young high-earners when compared with the $200,000+ cohort as a whole. A net 464 new high earners were added to the state thanks to a 2,660 inflow and 2,196 outflow.
Tennessee: With a total of 7,345 high earners filing in Tennessee between the ages of 26 and 35, the state added a net of 441 new high earners in this group. 868 high-earning young people moved into Tennessee, while 427 moved out. Tennessee also does not charge state income tax.
Arizona: Arizona gained a net 321 new filers with greater than $200,000 in income between the ages of 26 and 35. While 832 new tax filers in this cohort came to the state, 511 left.
South Carolina: South Carolina rounds out the top 10, with 318 net new young high-earners in the state, for a total of 95,584. Six hundred and one new tax returns were filed at this level, while 283 moved out of state.
Though some may be thinking, “Not again,” there are many who never stopped living as they did in those two years when fear—symbolized by the face covering worn alone while driving vehicles and even when exercising—became a religion heralded by media and public health officials.
However, Priscilla Romans, a former nurse and now a patient advocate, told The Epoch Times that there’s a better way.
“People need to be empowered to take their health care back into their own hands so that they can make informed decisions,” Ms. Romans said.
Most importantly, she said, don’t give in to fear.
“When people ask me, ‘Is this really going to start happening all over again,’ my comment to them is, ‘I don’t know if this is real or not, but I do know that fear makes people sick,’” Ms. Romans said. “So, when we empower people, we infuse them with hope so that they don’t have to be afraid.”
Hope, Ms. Romans said, is a medicine not to be underestimated.
She’s witnessed hope’s benefits firsthand in her patient-advocacy business, Graith Care, which provides patients with alternatives to being solely dependent on the “white coats” of the “medical industrial complex” to determine the right course of treatment.
“People not only get sick from fear but also can make bad decisions and listen to people they can’t trust, which is why I’m very passionate about them getting proactive and having a patient advocate to show them alternatives instead of relying on pharmaceuticals with potential adverse reactions,” Ms. Romans said.
‘They Are Scared of Going Back’
Graith Care began when many patients and medical professionals were seeing how broken the system really was long before COVID-19 brought its corruption to the surface.
“I launched Graith Care from my own home not knowing what was around the corner with all the vaccine mandates, protocols, and the use of drugs like remdesivir that, in many cases, have been deadly,” Ms. Romans told The Epoch Times in a previous interview.
Since then, she’s expanded her business to help people throughout the United States and internationally.
To help those who can’t afford patient advocacy care, she’s set up a nonprofit called Graithful Giving for donations.
In her work, she’s seen the worst of what COVID policies had to offer, from hospital treatment protocols to vaccine injuries.
“My concern with these headlines coming out is that people are still fearful,” she said. “Right from the beginning, people were told to isolate when they shouldn’t have been isolating.”
Some of them went to hospitals and were put on drugs like remdesivir, which only made them sicker, and was fatal in many cases, she said.
“We tended to see more males get caught up in the hospital system,” Ms. Romans said. “Those wives are struggling and have PTSD from having to see their husband dying in a hospital bed. They are very scared of going back.”
A patient advocate, she said, can help navigate the hospital system if one needs to be admitted, but also keep them out of the hospital with other treatments.
Later in the pandemic, people were told to take a vaccine from which Ms. Romans is still seeing injuries, she said.
“It’s happening a lot,” she said. “People’s immune systems have been compromised by this vaccine.”
Morris Brown College in Atlanta and the film company Lionsgate led the way to mandating masks this week as news reports and editorials preached about the “uptick” in cases, while several hospital systems followed suit.
Meanwhile, the resurgence of excitement over face coverings is promoted on media platforms where public health officials and academics like Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist at the University of Texas, responded with a resounding “yes” to a question from PBS NewsHour on whether people should be wearing masks—in crowded places and at home—while encouraging social distancing and vaccines.
“My question is, what happens next? These headlines are a slippery slope, and we want to make sure people are better educated, stay ahead of the eightball, and not panic,” Ms. Romans said. “We want people to think on their own instead of just saying ‘yes’ to everything. We prefer that people are empowered with the information to make informed decisions.”
‘History Repeating Itself’
Dr. Richard Bartlett, a physician of 30 years in Texas who was involved in the effort to get the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine data released by the Food and Drug Administration, told The Epoch Times that though he has seen an increase in COVID cases over the past five days, their symptoms are on par with flu cases rather than the severity of the Wuhan and delta variants of COVID.
“This is clearly history repeating itself as far as an attempt to control the masses,” Dr. Bartlett said.
“There was never any science to back up the multifaceted campaign forced on the American people: masks, lockdowns, social distancing, and later the vaccines. There were no randomized control trials saying this was safe and effective just as there were no randomized control trials for the medical tyranny over the last three years.”
Because of COVID policies, people died alone in hospitals without loved ones at their side being able to say goodbye, Dr. Bartlett recalled.
“That might have been acceptable in a communist regime, but we have patient rights that have been abused, and there were no randomized control trials saying that this was a good idea,” Dr. Bartlett said. “They put plastic bags over patients’ heads as a COVID protocol when someone tested positive for COVID. This was never backed up by randomized control trials saying that was safe and effective.”
Basic patient autonomy—or “your body, your choice”—was trampled, he remembered.
Informed Consent
Physicians and public health officials pushed vaccines on the American public without giving informed consent, not only regarding the financial conflicts of interest the officials had with the companies that made them but also regarding their potential adverse reactions.
“I think this is another power grab, and I’m concerned that we’re going to see more of the same unless the people demand basic patient rights for their children, parents, and spouses,” Dr. Bartlett said.
Dr. Bartlett referenced a 1995 speech made by former President Bill Clinton on a final report on human radiation experiments conducted by the federal government between 1944 and 1974.
The speech, he said, should have been remembered during this time when American citizens once again became the subjects of an experiment, but this time with novel vaccine concoctions.
President Clinton apologized for the experiments conducted by departments such as the U.S. Department of Defense, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Public Health Services, along with the help of several universities such as Vanderbilt.
“Informed consent means your doctor tells you the risk of the treatment you are about to undergo,” President Clinton said in the speech. “In too many cases, informed consent was withheld. Americans were kept in the dark about the effects of what was being done to them. The deception extended beyond the test subjects themselves to encompass their families and the American people as a whole, for these experiments were kept secret and they were shrouded not for a compelling reason of national security, but for the simple fear of embarrassment. And that was wrong.”
Trying to Mask Children
Dr. Eric Hensen, a Texas physician who’s still facing repercussions from not complying with the now widely discredited mask mandates issued during the pandemic, studied how masks negatively affect health.
Echoing Dr. Bartlett, he said the masks are about control.
“It’s ridiculous and I’m already seeing that they’re trying to put them on kids again, but it’s just going to retard their growth and development, not to mention their social development,” he told The Epoch Times.
Yet public health officials avoid discussing the harms that masks, lockdowns, and vaccines have caused.
“There’s politics at play,” Dr. Hensen said. “I think there are a lot of doctors who bury their heads in the sand and do as they are told to keep their jobs. Eighty percent of doctors work for someone, so they have what’s called the golden handcuffs. If they break out of the narrative, they get fired.”
Dr. Hensen is an independent physician and has maintained an unrelenting defiance of the mask mandates at the cost of a continued legal battle with the Texas Medical Board that charged him with “unprofessional or dishonorable conduct that is likely to deceive or defraud the public” based on a complaint that he wasn’t wearing a mask while treating a patient in 2020.
“Being an experienced ear nose and throat, head and neck surgeon with extensive knowledge and training in the upper airway, I was well aware of the limitations of wearing a facial covering of any kind and aware of the dangers of wearing these face coverings,” Dr. Henson told The Epoch Times in a previous interview.
‘You Have All the Authority’
Dr. Hensen has never seen credible evidence of masks stopping transmission of COVID, he said, but he has seen what harm they’ve caused.
“They make symptoms worse by increasing the viral load into the nasal cavity, which makes you sicker,” he said. “People get ‘mask mouth’ which leads to gingivitis and dental diseases. They cause respiratory problems from breathing harder, thus sucking the virus deeper into their lungs, as well as breathing in the polypropylene plastic fibers, which can cause lung cancer.”
One study (pdf) Dr. Hensen referenced presented “the Foegen effect theory,” which posited that “deep re-inhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virons caught in facemasks as droplets can worsen prognosis and might be linked to long-term effects of COVID-19.”
People who wear masks also experience a weakened immune system caused by an increase in blood carbon dioxide levels and a drop in blood oxygen saturation levels, leading to increases in heart and respiratory rates, he said.
“They become much more prone to infections,” he said.
To those who don’t want to play along this time with the authoritarian health policies, Dr. Hensen said it’s important to remember the concept of individual sovereignty forgotten during the pandemic.
“You have all the authority,” he said. “That’s what our forefathers established for us. We’re not under a king, and our representatives and public health officials work for us, not the other way around.”
Alabama Ready To Be First To Kill Inmate By Forced Breathing Of Nitrogen
Alabama is ready to pioneer a new means of executing convicts — by forcing a condemned man to breathe pure nitrogen.
That man is Kenneth Eugene Smith. Now 58, Smith was convicted in 1988 for killing the wife of a preacher — in a murder-for-hire scheme initiated by that preacher, who hoped to cash in on a life insurance policy and pay off his debts. The victim, Elizabeth Sennett, was found dead in the couple’s home on Coon Dog Cemetary Road in rural Colbert County, having been bludgeoned with a fireplace tool and stabbed nine times in what was supposed to look like a home invasion.
Smith and his partner in crime carried out the murder for payments of just $1,000 each. That partner was executed in 2010. The preacher spared everyone the legal hassle: After investigators honed in on him, he confessed to his sons and their families that he’d had an affair and hired the killers — then immediately strolled to his old pickup truck, sat in the front seat and shot himself, fatally.
An attempt to execute Smith via lethal injection in 2022 was called off when executioners struggled to insert an IV tube into his vein. Now the Alabama attorney general is ready to give it another go, this time using “nitrogen hypoxia.” On Friday, AG Steve Marshall asked the Alabama Supreme Court to set a date.
While colorless, odorless nitrogen comprises 78% of the air we breathe daily, breathing 100% nitrogen will theoretically cause the prisoner to first pass out and then die.
“Placed into a pure nitrogen environment, the convict would be unconscious within a minute (possibly even after a breath or two) and would be dead soon after,” Charles Blanke, a professor of medicine at Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine, told Fox News. “Its failure rate, that is, cases in which the prisoner survives, would likely be much lower than what we see with current death penalty methods.”
Alabama has yet to provide details on its planned methodology — for example, whether inmates would be placed in a gas chamber or simply fitted with a special mask. If it’s the latter, a good seal is essential to ensure the death isn’t prolonged by oxygen in the execution room.
The nitrogen hypoxia method has been on the books in Alabama since 2018. Oklahoma and Mississippi have likewise authorized the method, but none have used it yet. Lethal injections have proven increasingly problematic, owing to shortages of the drugs used in the process.
Those shortages are driven in part by manufacturers not wanting their product used to kill people — even the most evil ones. In 2011, Hospira, the only domestic producer of one of three lethal-injection ingredients — sodium thiopental — stopped making it. In 2012, the FDA made it illegal to import the drug to be used in executions.
Given its novelty, nitrogen hypoxia will be ripe for legal challenges on behalf the condemned. “No state in the country has executed a person using nitrogen hypoxia and Alabama is in no position to experiment with a completely unproven and unused method for executing someone,” Equal Justice Initiative attorney Angie Setzer told Associated Press.
Alabama doesn’t have to prove the humanity of nitrogen execution. “The burden is on the condemned inmate to show that it is torturous rather than the burden being on the state to show that it’s not,” said Richmond University law professor Corinna Barrett Lain in an interview with Scientific American. Lain’s choice for most humane method? Firing squad.
Alabama death row inmates are literally lining up to be polished off via nitrogen. In legal action dating back five years, several inmates have sued to be killed that way, rather than lethal injection.
The Biden administration is investing up to $24 million to develop messenger RNA-based (mRNA) platforms and technology aimed at more effectively fighting cancer and other diseases.
The administration’s new biomedical research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), is providing the $24 million investment in the “Curing the Uncurable via RNA-Encoded Immunogene Tuning” (CUREIT) project, according to an Aug. 23 statement from the White House.
CUREIT will be led by a team at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia.
The funding will be granted over a three-year period.
The latest investment is part of President Biden’s “Unity Agenda” announced during his 2022 State of the Union address; which the president says is aimed at bringing both Republicans and Democrats together to make progress on issues such as combating cancer, and tackling the opioid epidemic and mental health crisis.
“Last year, as part of his Unity Agenda, President Biden worked with Democrats and Republicans in Congress to establish and fund ARPA-H to drive breakthroughs to prevent, detect, and treat cancer and other diseases,” the White House statement reads. “Through CUREIT, ARPA-H is now moving aggressively to deliver on their mission, and to advance the goals of the Biden Cancer Moonshot and the President’s Unity Agenda,” the statement continues.
According to the White House, the aim of CUREIT is to create a “toolbox of mRNA and related technologies that could be used to ‘turn on’ helpful immune responses,” such as prompting immune cells to target and attack cancerous tumors.
The technologies could also extend to autoimmune disorders, transplants, and infectious diseases, the White House said.
Multiple COVID-19 vaccines, including those from Pfizer and Moderna, have been developed using mRNA technology platforms.
The White House said those vaccines have saved “millions of lives in the United States and around the world” and that a “toolbox” of mRNA platforms could help ” transform the fight against cancer and other difficult diseases.”
Various experts, including doctors and professors, have raised concerns over mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
Retsef Levi, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told The Epoch Times in February that the shots are causing “an unprecedented level of harm, including the death of young people and children.”
Multiple studies have also linked the messenger RNA vaccines with myocarditis, a potentially life-threatening inflammation of the heart, as well as vascular and organ damage.
The virus itself also can cause myocarditis.
According to a statement from Emory University, many types of cancer—as well as other debilitating diseases— have dysregulation of the immune system at their core. This impairs the body’s ability to control the immune response, leaving patients more vulnerable to the disease.
“Immune modulation is a way to enhance the body’s immune response,” the university said. “The conventional methods of immune modulation—vaccines, antibodies, small molecules, and cell-based therapies—face limitations in their ability to engage immunity and manufacturing complexity,” university officials wrote.
To overcome these limitations, researchers at the University’s Santangelo lab will develop a “novel class of mRNA-based drugs” to precisely “turn on or turn off” genes in individual immune cells. In other words, the mRNA-based drugs will directly target immune cells within the body, prompting the creation of target proteins that may improve immune function and fight against cancer.
Researchers will also combine messenger RNA-expressed antigens and gene modulators “outside the body” to prevent and treat diseases.
“By combining mRNA-encoded antigens with gene modulation technology, we will be able to radically enhance specific immune responses,” said Philip Santangelo, PhD, a professor in the Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering at Emory and Georgia Institute of Technology.
“This technology, which operates transiently without modifying DNA, can offer a potential breakthrough in treating cancers, autoimmune disorders, and infectious diseases,” he added.
In a statement Thursday announcing the new multi-million dollar investment, President Biden called it “an important step forward” in achieving his ambitious goal to create breakthroughs in how to prevent, detect, and treat cancer and other diseases.
“I’ve long said that America can be defined by a single word: Possibilities. My Unity Agenda is bringing both parties together in that spirit — to get big things done for the American people. There is more work to do, but there’s nothing we can’t do if we do it together,” the president said.
“A skilled team at Emory University in Atlanta will work to adapt these technologies to turn more cancers into curable diseases,” he continued. “This is a bold endeavor that has the potential to transform the fight against cancer and other difficult diagnoses,” President Biden concluded.
High Earners 50-And-Older Get 2-Year Break On 401(k) Catch-Up Rule
The Internal Revenue Service on Friday announced that it would postpone enforcement of a law that would require high-earners to exclusively allocate “catch-up” contributions to Roth-style investment accounts — rather than pre-tax accounts that confer an immediate income tax benefit.
The change in the law, inflicted by December 2022’s SECURE 2.0 Act, stipulated that, starting in 2024, 401(k) participants making catch-up contributions by virtue of being age 50 or older must put those contributions in Roth accounts if their prior-year Social Security wages were more than $145,000. Friday’s announcement means people fitting that description can allocate catch-up contributions to pre-tax accounts for another two years.
Unlike traditional pre-tax contributions, Roth contributions do not reduce a participant’s current-year taxable income and thus don’t provide immediate tax relief. The Roth payoff comes later, as qualified distributions are income-tax-free. Conversely, pre-tax contributions are full taxable when distributed.
Some higher earners anticipate being in a lower tax bracket when they start tapping their 401(k) in retirement, compared to the bracket they’re in today. That means they’re more enthused about reaping current-tax-year savings from pre-tax contributions rather than the tax-free treatment in retirement.
For 2023, the regular 401(k) contribution limit is $22,500.Participants who are 50 and older can contribute another $7,500 in catch-up contributions, for a total of $30,000.Vanguardsays 16% of eligible participants made catch-up contributions in 2022.
A participant in the 35% tax bracket can cut his income tax bill an extra $2,625 by making a $7,500 pre-tax, catch-up contribution — in addition to tax savings from the other regular contribution.
“The administrative transition period will help taxpayers transition smoothly to the new Roth catch-up requirement and is designed to facilitate an orderly transition for compliance with that requirement,” the IRS said. The widely-despised instrument of government theft also clarified that the SECURE 2.0 Act doesn’t bar anyone from making catch-up contributions, regardless of income, in 2023 or beyond. Some feared a textual error had accidentally banned catch-up contributions altogether.
The new and now-postponed rule about catch-up contributions only applies to 401(k) and similar accounts, not to Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs).
Given the uncertainty of future tax rates — imposed by a government that’s hurtling toward insolvency— many advisors say it’s a good idea to diversify the tax flavor of your retirement accounts. Having a substantial bucket of Roth money provides flexibility in managing your tax bills in retirement…assuming Uncle Sam doesn’t pull a Darth Vader and “alter the deal” by revoking the tax-free treatment for “wealthy” Americans.
Beijing has embarked on an ambitious strategy that includes taking a nationwide genetic survey of its 1.4 billion people every half-decade. The new plan has sparked concerns over the authoritarian regime’s violation of personal privacy, and its possible anti-humanitarian motives.
China’s Ministry of Science and Technology recently promulgated regulations for the management of China’s human genetic resources, effective July 1. Almost buried in wordy statements about “filing, prior reporting, supervision, and inspection” of human genetic resources is the mandate that a “national survey of human genetic resources shall be carried out every five years and may be carried out according to actual needs when necessary.”
According to the ordinance, human genetic resources comprise “materials”—substances like organs, tissues, and cells that contain human genes; and “information”—data generated from the use of the “material.”
Political commentator Zhuge Mingyang spoke to The Epoch Times on Aug. 15 about China’s genetic plan.“Overseeing the Chinese people in terms of bioengineering and genetics and then threatening the whole world: this is [CCP’s] ultimate purpose,” he said.
Mr. Zhuge believes that research into human genetics could affect health care, biosecurity, the economy, national defense, and many other areas. However, he said that past evidence suggests that the CCP’s aims may be even more sinister or controversial.
Massive Arbitrary DNA Collection
The new guidelines mandate that those who collect genetic information must “respect and protect the privacy and rights of providers and obtain written informed consent.” However, that sort of transparency under the CCP’s rules has long been questioned.
In September 2016, CCP mouthpiece CCTV claimed that China has the world’s largest national gene bank. This suggests that China has long been collecting genetic data without seeking the consent of the people concerned, experts say.
A report released in 2022 by New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) indicated that a massive arbitrary collection of DNA from residents had taken place in all seven prefectures or municipalities of the Tibet Autonomous Region, covering the western part of the Tibetan Plateau.
“The reports Human Rights Watch studied indicate that DNA was to be collected from all residents of these areas, including temporary residents,” HRW reported. “None of the reports indicate any conditions under which a resident could refuse to provide a sample.”
HRW condemned the arbitrary collection as a severe violation of human rights and privacy, citing a report from a Tibetan township in Qinghai province in December 2020 that stated that “DNA was being collected from all boys aged five and above.”
“The authorities are literally taking blood without consent to strengthen their surveillance capabilities,” said Sophie Richardson, China director at HRW.
‘Bio-Atomic Bombs’
On Nov. 10, 2017, the People’s Liberation Army newspaper published an article (pdf) titled “How Genetic Weapons Affect Future Wars,” saying that the 21st century has entered the era of genetic weapons.
The military article emphasized the advantages of a genetic weapon: “Since a genetic weapon is a new virus ‘cut’ with a genetic code known only to the designer, it is difficult for the opposite to decipher and develop a new vaccine against it in time.”
Moreover, as vaccine research and development races to keep up with the pace of genetic weapons, there will be a constant need for new genetic weapons.
The article also said that with the rapid development of genomics, the complete gene sequences of more and more disease-causing microorganisms had been discovered, and these microorganisms could cause a “biochemical crisis.”
“As long as a breakthrough in the genetic code is found, it will be easy to transform them into ‘bio-atomic bombs’ with great destructive power to achieve military purposes without using a single soldier,” it said.
In 2015, a Chinese military paper discussed the weaponization of SARS coronaviruses. Chinese military scientists predicted a third world war would be fought with bioweapons.
In late 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, ultimately killing millions of people around the world. The virus source is suspected to be linked to a virus research institute in Wuhan, China.
The Times published an investigative report on June 10, alleging that Wuhan scientists were involved in the creation, dissemination, and cover-up of the COVID-19 virus, in collaboration with the Chinese military.
China’s leading genetic science company, BGI Genomics, which has been blacklisted by the U.S. government as a “Chinese military company operating in the United States,” asserted on its official website that it could provide a wide range of complete gene synthesis services, including artificially designed DNA sequences.
In 2017, Wang Jian, co-founder and chairman of BGI, said at a business conference, “We can chemically synthesize any life in the next 5 to 10 years,” Chinese state media The Paper reported.
As for chemically synthesized life, Wang Jian warned that it would spawn social, ethical, religious, philosophical, and legal problems.
Genetically Edited Babies
In November 2018, Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced that the world’s first genetically edited babies, twin girls, had been born in China. The edit targeted a pathway used by the HIV virus to enter cells, and was hoped to give the babies immunity to HIV.
The case sparked debates worldwide, both about whether the approach could ultimately realize AIDS immunity, and also about the ethical implications of Mr. He’s actions.
Critics said Mr. He’s action seriously breached scientific ethics; the modified gene would be passed on from generation to generation, with immeasurable potential risks. Further, the technology was used to change specific characteristics of human beings, “opening Pandora’s box,” according to Mr. Zhuge.
On the Way to Digital Totalitarianism
Mr. Zhuge noted that the CCP already has the world’s largest stockpile of surveillance cameras. Facial recognition technology and big data are a way of life in China. With the addition of a national gene pool, the CCP will undoubtedly be on its way to digital totalitarianism, he said.
In July 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce placed 11 Chinese companies on a list of “entities” subject to export controls, accusing them of cooperating with CCP authorities in human rights abuses, massive arbitrary detentions, forced labor, and mandatory collection of biometric data from ethnic minorities. Two subsidiaries of BGI Genetics were listed.
In June 2020, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute released a report alleging that China “is building the world’s largest police-run DNA database in close cooperation with key industry partners across the globe.”
Unlike the managers of other databases used for criminal identification, however, the CCP government deliberately collects DNA samples from tens of millions of people with no criminal record.
“Unconstrained by any checks on the authority of its police, the Chinese Government’s police-run DNA database system is extending already pervasive surveillance over society, increasing discriminatory law enforcement practices and further undermining the human rights and civil liberties of Chinese citizens,” the report said.
According to the report, beginning in 2013, state authorities obtained biometric samples of almost the entire population of the Tibet Autonomous Region (3 million inhabitants) under the guise of free annual medical examinations.
HRW disclosed in December 2017 that the Xinjiang authorities collected DNA samples, fingerprints, scans, and blood type information from residents between 12 and 65 through a free “annual physical” program.
Living Organ Banks
“The mandatory data banking of a whole population’s biodata, including DNA, is a gross violation of international human rights norms, and it’s even more disturbing if it is done surreptitiously, under the guise of a free health care program,” said HRW’s Ms. Richardson.
The China director also criticized Xinjiang authorities for collecting DNA and other biometric data from ethnic minorities to track individuals, update facial recognition technology, or target other family members.
The collection of biological information may also be used to fill the organ banks of the communist regime, which profits from live organ harvesting from imprisoned political dissidents, prisoners of conscience, and ethnic and religious minorities.
Since March 9, 2006, the World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong has made public hundreds of recorded pieces of evidence about the CCP’s mass genocide of Falun Gong adherents. Detained practitioners of the peaceful meditation practice are frequently killed by live organ harvesting.
Falun Gong is a peaceful spiritual practice that is popular around the world and has been persecuted by the CCP for 24 years, ever since its former leader Jiang Zemin initiated the persecution in July 1999.
Many pro-democracy activists, petitioners, ethnic minorities, and religious people have been forced to undergo blood draws after being arrested in China.
Chen Xiaojun, an adherent of Falun Gong who has been arrested several times in China for his beliefs, fled China and came to New Zealand in 2015.
Mr. Chen told The Epoch Times that in many places in China, once arrested, “the first thing they [the police] do is to take a tube of blood from the detainee.” He suspects that the police enter all the biological information of the victim into a database to screen for organ harvesting.
51 Year Old Indiana Man On Meth Pulled Over For DUI In Kids Power Wheels Jeep
Today in “your tax dollars at work” news, an Indiana man was arrested for driving under the influence last week as he made his way down the road in a child’s Power Wheels Jeep.
An officer was on patrol at about 9PM when he spotted the kids car with “no lights or reflectors” that was “difficult to see”, the police said in an official release. The officer then pulled the vehicle over, according to the NY Post.
That was when they noticed 51 year old driver John McKee showing “signs of impairment”. McKee then promptly failed a field sobriety test and was taken to a local hospital where toxicology reports showed that he was under the influence of methamphetamine and marijuana.
“Mattel’s Power Wheels Jeeps are battery-powered, ride-on vehicles made for children. An owner’s manual for one model lists a weight capacity of 130 pounds and warns never to use the toy at night or in any roadway where cars may be operating,” Fox 59 added.
He had been previously convicted of operating a vehicle while impaired, the report noted.
He faces a felony charge of operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a prior conviction and has been placed in Knox County Jail, the Post reported.
Below is my column in The Messenger on the expanding evidence in the Biden corruption scandal and the need for Congress to take commensurate action to investigate the matter. After this column ran, Fox’s Brian Kilmeade conducted an interview with Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Shokin. What was striking about the interview is not just the contradiction with other accounts (like insisting that he was investigating Burisma and the investigation was expanding when he was fired), but that he claimed that Kilmeade was the first to seek to interview him. This is just Shokin’s account and many question his veracity. However, it is astonishing that this is the first interview that I have seen of one of the key figures in this scandal. It highlights the need to still fully investigate a scandal that the media has largely avoided in prior years. However, the greatest case for an impeachment inquiry was made by Attorney General Merrick Garland himself.
Here is the column:
When Congress returns next month, it has little alternative but to launch a long-discussed impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. For House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the case for an inquiry came from a most unlikely source: Attorney General Merrick Garland.
The debacle in the Hunter Biden investigation has left most objective legal analysts in disbelief, with one CNN analyst calling it an “unholy mess.”
Even before the collapse of a widely condemned“sweetheart deal” with Hunter, the investigation headed by U.S. Attorney David Weiss was a growing concern for many observers. In prior years, I wrote about Garland’s refusal to appoint a special counsel despite the obvious conflicts posed by the potential involvement of President Biden in his son’s alleged influence-peddling scandal. I also raised the problem of an investigation that remained ongoing for years as the statute of limitations expired on major potential crimes.
It turns out that the same concerns were being raised within the Weiss team. Two IRS whistleblowers recently confirmed that the expiration of potential tax felony crimes was raised with Weiss and the Department of Justice (DOJ). There reportedly was an agreement to extend that period, including on the violations tied to the most controversial alleged payments from sources in Ukraine and other countries. The two witnesses testified that the Justice Department instead allowed the statute of limitations to expire.
These two whistleblowers — and, more recently, a former FBI agent — said that the DOJ tipped off the Biden team on attempts to interview Hunter and to conduct searches. They describe an investigation that was anything but the “routine” matter described by congressional Democrats in seeking to block House investigations.
What followed has bordered on the burlesque. Weiss cut a deal with Hunter’s legal team that was widely derided. After years of investigation, he and the DOJ agreed to a couple of tax misdemeanors, a papered-over gun charge, and no risk of jail time for the president’s son. The deal disassembled in court after a few questions from the presiding judge about sweeping immunity language and other curious elements. When District Judge Maryellen Noreika asked the prosecutor if he had ever seen any agreement like this one, he replied “no.”
House Republicans had previously demanded that Weiss and his team answer questions about the investigation and the plea bargain. And an appearance before a House committee was planned when Garland suddenly preempted that by doing what many of us have demanded for years: He appointed a special counsel. To the amazement of many, though, he appointed the one prosecutor who should have been categorically excluded — David Weiss.
Section 600.3 of the DOJ’s code on special counsels requires an appointment from outside the Justice Department, for obvious reasons. While another prior special counsel, John Durham, also came from within the Justice Department, Durham was retiring from the department at the time of his appointment. Not only did Garland have to ignore his own regulations to appoint Weiss but he also had to ignore the main qualification: The appointed outside counsel should be someone with “a reputation for integrity and impartial decision-making.”
Weiss could well have a legitimate defense to Republican complaints that he ran a fixed investigation into Hunter or accusations that he made false statements to his own team. However, he clearly remains under suspicion by many people. That is reflected in an ABC News/Ipsos poll in which almost half of Americans lack trust that the DOJ will conduct the Hunter Biden investigation in a “fair and nonpartisan manner.”
In addition to this controversial appointment, Garland again refused to expressly extend the special counsel’s mandate to include influence-peddling allegations involving President Biden.
Even some liberal pundits are mystified by these moves and why Garland would not simply appoint someone in compliance with the regulations who could guarantee a new and full investigation.
So Weiss is now investigating crimes that continue to dwindle in number due to the long delays in prosecution. It is like waiting for winter to go goose hunting in Canada, long after the geese have flown South. Everyone just gets dressed up and fires aimlessly into an empty sky.
While Hunter still can be charged on the same meager grounds (and possibly the addition of a Foreign Agents Registration Act charge), the alleged fix remains in the Biden investigation.
Now, however, Congress will have a more difficult time getting answers out of Weiss because he can claim he is engaged in an ongoing special counsel investigation, and he can use the eventual special counsel report as much to defend his own actions as to detail any potential crimes.
At the same time, the Biden administration still is resisting the sharing of information with the House, including records held by the National Archives.
For months, I have discussed a potential impeachment of the president with Republican House members and have encouraged them not to repeat the abuses of House Democrats in the use of “snap impeachments” and the discarding of fact hearings in the House Judiciary Committee.
Garland, however, has effectively forced their hands.
While Garland seems incapable of imagining any crime involving the president, he has made a conclusive — if unintended — case for an impeachment inquiry.
With the investigative impediments created by the Weiss appointment and by Garland’s refusal to expressly extend the special counsel’s mandate to the allegations of Biden family influence-peddling, there is little choice but to commence an impeachment inquiry. The authority of the House is at its apex when carrying out its duties under the impeachment clause.
Whatever interest — or ability — remains to prosecute Hunter Biden, Congress has a separate duty to confirm any high crimes and misdemeanors committed by President Biden. Indeed, the Democrats themselves established precedent for carrying out retroactive impeachments for prior offices, including any which may have occurred when Biden was vice president.
With the current state of the Hunter Biden investigation and the baffling conduct of Attorney General Garland, there is no alternative for the House but to launch the impeachment inquiry.
