Month: January 2024

With more and more shipping companies extending full or partial closures of Red Sea shipping routes due to attacks by Yemeni rebels, global trade could be seriously affected.

As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, according to a new analysis based on 2019 data published in academic journal Communications in Transportation Research, 22-23 percent of maritime-traded goods between non-neighboring countries pass through the Red Sea, more specifically its chokepoints Bab-el-Mandeb and the Suez Canal.

Other estimates even put the share of seaborne cargo passing through the area as high as 30 percent.

You will find more infographics at Statista

The passage is also an important chokepoint for oil shipments – not as significant as the Straight of Hormuz or the Straight of Malacca – but still important.

As a result of the situation, the global oil price has already shown volatility. 

The Red Sea is also an important transit point for global food and fertilizer shipments, a type of commodity trade already thrown into disarray by the war in Ukraine as well as subsequent blockades of Black Sea shipping routes.

 According to Chatham House, Bab-el-Mandeb saw the transit of almost 20 percent of global rice and almost 15 percent of global wheat exports previous to the pandemic and the Ukraine crisis. It is also important for fertilizer shipments.

The biggest chokepoints of global trade (by weight) are centered around China due to the country’s export prowess. 

An estimated 80 percent of goods traded globally are transported via sea routes.

Calculating by value instead of weight, this number is still 70 percent.

Authored by Anders Corr via The Epoch Times,

China’s international organizations are getting bigger and more roguish while claiming to champion a “fair” and “multilateral” international system. Autocracies and human rights abusers—including Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Ethiopia—are signing up for Beijing’s vision of a world in which unelected dictators are ever more free to commit human rights abuse against their citizens and those abroad.

Democracies are opting out of this Chinese Communist Party (CCP) approach and the organizations meant to facilitate such crimes.

On Dec. 29, Argentina announced it had changed its mind and would not accept an invitation to join the BRICS countries (started by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and led by Beijing).

The other international organization led by the CCP, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), also faces trouble with its membership.

Italy, the only Group of Seven (G7) country in the group, officially left the BRI in late 2023.

The democracies that remain in CCP organizations have their own problems.

India follows a foreign policy lacking in democratic values. It engages with Russia through energy and arms purchases, for example, despite Moscow’s war against Ukraine. It neglects to condemn the aggression at the United Nations. The United States wants to attract New Delhi as an ally against Moscow and Beijing, and so has not been more vocal in its criticism. Still, there is an implied financial threat against India for its continued engagement with Russia.

South Africa is a basket case of socialism, criminality, and dysfunction. The situation is so bad that its most important state-owned company, a power utility, cannot reliably keep on the electricity. Its GDP per capita fell almost 23 percent since 2011. That even South Africa, which is a founding member of BRICS and a member of BRI since 2015, cannot leverage its China links for enough development aid to keep on the lights illustrates the poverty underlying Beijing’s claims to support international development.

The original vision of BRICS, of a set of four countries (South Africa was added later) seen by Wall Street as in the fast lane of economic growth, has now boiled down to India, one of the group’s only democracies. That growth is dependent on its trade with the G7.

Economic growth in Brazil and South Africa has continuously sputtered, and Russia and China have plateaued or worse due in part to their frequent opposition to “the West.” Beijing and Moscow are now trying to leverage the group into a currency union that will make its members immune from the kind of sanctions targeting Russia that could also be used against China, should it invade Taiwan.

The most recent BRICS joiners, announced on Dec. 29, are mostly dictators and human rights abusers.

Iran is the worst of the new bunch, with ongoing support for international terrorism against the United States and Israel through its proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. The Houthi flag includes the slogan, “God is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse the Jews, and Victory for Islam.” Belonging to an international organization with Iran should, therefore, be unthinkable.

To reverse the dynamic requires imposing economic and political costs on countries that join China’s international organizations. Sanctions on BRI and BRICS (jointly the “BRI-plus”) countries should be led by the United States, our allies, and other G7 countries, and include decreased access to alliance markets.

The United States, Europe, Japan, and other countries close to the G7, like South Korea, import much more from BRI-plus countries than vice versa. This gives the G7 more trade leverage than the BRI-plus based on the rule that the net importer in a trade relationship has more trade leverage than the net exporter, all else equal. This is consistent with former President Donald Trump’s observation, when speaking about trade with China, that “the customer is always right.”

The United States and allies can also impose costs on foreign banks that support BRI-plus countries.

On Dec. 22, the Biden administration issued an executive order authorizing new sanctions against banks in third-party countries that facilitate the breaking of bans on military exports to Russia. This will hit China and India the hardest.

Imposing costs on BRI-plus countries can also be done by holding membership in the BRI-plus as disqualifying for membership in the G7.

Countries that receive trade, aid, or other economic privileges from the G7 should be expected to shun BRI-plus and improve their observance of free elections and human rights.

Countries would thus reveal themselves as those that support democracy, or not. Only those that do should continue to be supported by the G7.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If you want to know if a society is on the verge of great and tumultuous change you need to ask two very important questions – Are the people angry? And, are the people hungry?

In the US (and in many parts of Europe) the people are indeed very angry, for different reasons depending on their political affiliations.

On the other hand, they aren’t hungry, at least not to the extent that they are desperate.

This could very well change in 2024 given the confluence of events that are swirling as we enter the new year.

I continue to see 2024 as a nexus point of our era for a number of reasons. The globalist timeline for their “Great Reset” mentions 2030 as the prime year for total centralization. This is the year they plan to put their carbon controls in place, remove most oil and gas energy, bring in their digital currency framework, finalize their 15 Minute City programs, establish the IMF and BIS as the overseers of the global CBDC structure, launch their cashless society and integrate ESG related goals into every aspect of the economy.

2030 is only six years away, and that’s a lot to accomplish in such short amount of time. The globalists are going to have to either admit failure and change their timeline, or, create a substantial crisis in the near term to facilitate the Reset.  But before I get too far into the potential ugliness waiting in the next year, lets talk about two of the biggest positive developments for 2024…

The Good…

The Defeat Of The Covid Agenda

I don’t think many people understand how epic and important the battle over covid lockdowns and vaccine passports actually was. The western world was on the verge of complete authoritarianism – Not a totalitarian tip-toe like we have been experiencing for many years, but full bore medical dictatorship and mass censorship. I believe covid WAS the Plan A attempt to create reset conditions, and it failed.

If the establishment had achieved their goal of vaccine passports the fight for freedom would be over.  The passports would have made economic participation impossible for anyone that did not submit to the agenda, creating a secondary class of citizens (mostly conservative) that could then be targeted for systematic elimination.

Luckily, enough people stood up and refused to comply that the plan was derailed. Apparently, the establishment realized there were far too many patriots willing to take up arms and fight if they kept pushing the covid farce. Remember that bizarre moment when most of the covid propaganda simply stopped? Like someone flipped a switch and the media changed narratives overnight?

I remember, and this event was the ultimate vindication for all of us in the anti-mandate movement. All the fear, all the dread, all the doom mongering over “millions of deaths”, it all meant nothing and they proved that the moment they shut down the hype machine and everything immediately went back to normal.

The Public Is Fed Up With The Woke Cult

It took longer than it should have, mainly because too many people refused to believe that the conspiracy was real, but the woke cult has finally crossed the line enough times for the general public to get fed up. The activist insurgency has violated every boundary of decency and truth and they have alienated a large contingent of the population.  Their time is quickly coming to an end.

Signs include the ongoing collapse of woke media giants like Disney, the successful boycotts of products like Bud Light and companies like Target. But if you know how to read social trends you can see more subtle signs. There is a growing disdain for third-wave feminism, LGBT cultism and the insane trans movement. People are less afraid to ridicule SJWs, less afraid of cancel culture and more willing to criticize their delusions.

This is what happens when you target children with sexualized indoctrination and you argue against biological reality. This is what happens when you try to force people to embrace and normalize mental illness. This is what happens when you spend years trying to control people’s speech with “neo-pronouns” and terrorize the internet with cancel culture. This is what happens when you invade every corner of pop-culture and try to hijack it or sabotage it through propaganda. This is what happens when you declare war on traditional western values – Everyone starts to hate you and eventually they will organize to kick your ass.

The only thing keeping the woke movement afloat at the moment is their alliance with corporations and the establishment media. Globalist think tanks still spend billions of dollars funding social justice programs and the current government provides cover for the exploits of far-left zealots. Without the elites, the woke ideology would not exist. Millions of Americans are ready to snuff it out for good.

The Bad And The Ugly…

Election 2024

As I have mentioned in past articles, I still believe there might not be a presidential election in November. Though, current conditions would allow for one as long as nothing changes dramatically in the next several months. There hasn’t been this level of national division over an election since the Civil War and regardless of what happens or which side “wins” there will be a high potential for a violent reaction.

The election of 2024 is developing into its own Black Swan event. Any indication that Donald Trump will be arrested before November or any widespread blue state plans to remove him from the ballot will be seen as election interference and I have no doubt that many Americans will seriously consider armed revolt.

Then again, Trump’s mere presence as a candidate will be used by far-left groups as a rationale to stoke riots. His re-entry into the Oval Office would mean endless mob actions and perhaps even terrorist attacks. So, in this regard it doesn’t really matter if we end up with Biden or Trump, the eventual outcome will probably be the same – Civil unrest followed by a declaration of martial law in the next couple of years.

My position on Trump has always been one of skepticism, primarily due to his terrible cabinet choices (including Anthony Fauci). However, I recognize that after four horrendous years of Joe Biden’s woke authoritarian empire there is no way that half the country is going to tolerate another term, especially if that term is achieved through perceived sabotage.

Then there is the potential for shock events, such as Biden stepping down at the last minute. Trump being arrested but winning anyway.  Or, a major geopolitical crisis which is used by the Democrats as an excuse to “postpone” the election. And make no mistake, there are many of these triggers in place today.

Geopolitical Tensions Soaring

The potential for war on multiple fronts, including Ukraine, Israel, and perhaps Taiwan is extraordinary in 2024. For now, I am focused on Israel’s conflict in Gaza and the chances of retaliation from surrounding Islamic states. As I’ve mentioned in previous articles, Gaza has no chance whatsoever of stopping Israel militarily and they never did, but that’s not really relevant. What matters is how their neighbors respond.

Lebanon and Hezbollah appear poised to commit to war on Israel in the near term, but Iran is the big question mark.  Would they openly engage the Israelis?  Such a move would completely destabilize all of the Middle East, disrupt a massive portion of the world’s oil supply and probably draw the US and Europe into the fray.

The biggest threat, for now, is the shutting down of shipping lanes through the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. This could disrupt supply chains and energy resources for many months and accelerate the economic crisis. And, this could in turn be used by the establishment as a rationale to put boots on the ground in the region.

Economic Powderkeg

The economic situation is far more distressed than international relations, believe it or not.  There is a precarious game being played by the Federal Reserve with US debt and interest rates, culminating in a Catch-22 that I have been warning about for years.

Some analysts argue that the Fed is about to cut rates in 2024 (I remain doubtful); but if they do, get ready for an immediate and renewed spike in inflation. If they don’t commit to substantial rate cuts then the national debt will continue climbing by around $600 billion per month (around $7 trillion a year). This is unsustainable and it threatens the world reserve status of the dollar.

If the Fed’s intent is to influence elections (again, I highly doubt this), then they aren’t going to be helping Joe Biden much by cutting rates. Biden is already known as the inflation president; creating another ramp in CPI by the end of 2024 would be a disaster for his campaign. And, keeping Biden in office would only further cement public outrage over socialist policies as the economy continues to dive into either stagflationary crisis or deflationary depression depending on which path the central bank chooses.

And remember, the 30%-plus price increase we have seen across the board on necessities in the past few years is going to remain in place for quite some time. It doesn’t matter what the Fed does, you are going to continue paying 30% more to survive compared to 2019-2020, and for many people this is swiftly killing their standard of living. This is why no one takes “Bidenomics” seriously – Until they see a return to cost normalcy it doesn’t matter what kind of spin Biden places on jobs numbers or CPI.

Nobody cares.

Catch-22

I suspect the Fed will continue down the path of deflation. They might try to cut rates once or twice, but when CPI jumps they will go right back to higher rates and tighter credit. This is exactly what they did in the 1970s and early 1980s, though, the US wasn’t adding $600 billion in debt every month during that particular crisis.

How this deflation translates will depend on other factors including geopolitical factors (as mentioned above).  I predict we are about to see an aggressive resurgence of unemployment by the end of the year.  Americans are not buying more, they are merely spending MORE for the same amount of stuff.  The stagflationary process always leads to a painful decline in overall consumption and standard of living – We had our three-year boost due to covid helicopter money, and now that boost is fading.  Any action by the Fed on rates at this point will not help retail or the service sector, it will only serve to keep stock markets afloat a little longer.

Again, the end result is the same no matter what the central bankers do, and this is by design.  If the US elections play into the establishment’s plans at all, I suspect it would be more in line with the optics of a renewed Trump presidency.  It might serve globalist interests more to keep the system intact, not to protect Biden but in preparation for Trump’s return, only to collapse the entire house of cards once he enters office (or even right after he wins).  Setting up conservatives as scapegoats for full spectrum economic crisis makes a lot more sense than trying to maintain the facade for Biden for another four years.

If the globalists fail to set the stage for the Reset in 2024, then they may be facing a mounting movement to bring them to justice.  The juggling act is about to come to an end.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

How consumers feel about their favorite streaming services jacking up prices. 

The point behind ‘cord-cutting’ was to enjoy premium content and movies through streaming platforms like Hulu, Netflix, Disney+, and AppleTV+, among others, to skip the middleman (big cable) and save money. 

However, streaming companies got too greedy in 2023. They increased monthly subscriptions to improve ‘profitability’ and have triggered the beginnings of what appears to be a cancellation wave. 

A new report from The Wall Street Journal cites data from subscription analytics provider Antenna that shows customer defections across streaming services topped 6.3% in November, up from 5.1% a year earlier. 

Antenna said about one-quarter of US subscribers to these major platforms, also including Discovery+, Max, Paramount+, Peacock, and Starz, have canceled at least three subscriptions in the past two years.

This comes as ‘streamflation‘ hits consumers’ wallets. 

“With the streaming services increasing their rates like they are, it’s, like, ‘OK, do I pay for the cable?'” said one person who spoke with WSJ. 

Some folks have downgraded plans of major streaming services for more ads and limiting the number of devices: 

More than one-third of new US Netflix customers in November opted for the ad tier, compared with 11% a year earlier, when the ad-supported version was introduced. Streamers say ad-supported plans are a win-win for them and price-sensitive customers, bringing in revenue from monthly subscriptions as well as ad sales. -WSJ 

Antenna said some customers who canceled streaming services return later: 

One in four people who cancel a premium streaming service typically resubscribes to that service within four months, and one in three does so within seven months. Half do so within two years. -WSJ 

Peak streaming? 

Via The Libertarian Institute,

According to a new poll, the number of voters who view foreign policy as a top issue has doubled during the past year. Joe Biden has defined his presidency by waging a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, backing the Israeli onslaught in Gaza, and engaging in a military buildup in the Asia-Pacific to fight a future war with China. 

The Associated Press survey found, “About 4 in 10 US adults named foreign policy topics in an open-ended question that asked people to share up to five issues for the government to work on in the next year.” Last year, only 18% of Americans said foreign wars were a top issue. 

About 20% of Americans are concerned about overseas wars, up from five percent. Five percent of Americans mentioned the Israel war in Gaza. Four percent named the war in Ukraine, down from six percent in the previous year.

President Biden is struggling in recent polling. Two demographics that Biden won in 2020 now prefer Trump. A USA Today poll found Trump at 39% ahead of Biden at 34% among Latino voters. The trend was repeated among young voters who preferred Trump, 37%, to Biden, 33%.

Younger voters are the most likely Americans to object to President Biden’s support for the Israeli war against Hamas and Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip.

As the Israeli military operations in Gaza indiscriminately kill and starve Palestinian civilians, more Americans are protesting Biden’s support for Tel Aviv. The President has recently been confronted with chants of “Genocide Joe”.

The New York Times reported on Tuesday that Biden has been more involved regarding Israel than any other issue and the White House has no plans to place conditions on the weapons sent to Tel Aviv for use amidst its brutal war. 

The percentage of Americans naming foreign policy as a priority issue more than doubled from last year. Below it ranks second only to the economy…

“Biden has involved himself more intensely in the conflict than almost any other issue in three years in office,” the outlet reports. “But there is no serious discussion inside the administration of a meaningful change in policy, like cutting off the arms supply to Israel. Instead, Biden remains determined to navigate the crisis within the crisis by using the credibility he earned through steadfast support of Israel to shape its next chapter.”

Confounding leftists in and outside of major media who’ve spent years portraying Donald Trump as a racist, Hispanic support for the former president continues to surge — to the point that Trump is now the first choice among the increasingly significant US demographic. 

Meanwhile, black enthusiasm for Biden has plummeted since 2020, leaving many in the Democrat electoral cornerstone eager to vote for a third-party candidate. These are among several findings of a new USA Today/Suffolk University poll that are sure to compound Democrats worries about the 2024 election. 

RT If We Should Finish The Wall 👇🏽👇🏽 pic.twitter.com/deDaf98rl0

— TrumpLatinos (@TrumpLatinos24) January 2, 2024

Trump boasts a five-point lead among Hispanics, with Biden trailing 39% to 34%. That is an absolute sea change from 2020, when Biden’s Hispanic share blew Trump out of the water, 65% to 32%.   

While Biden received 87% of the black vote in 2020, only 63% intend to vote for him in November. It’s not that they’re surging toward Trump. Indeed, USA Today reports his black support is holding steady at the same 12% he received in 2020. Rather, fed up with Biden, 20% of blacks plan to vote for someone other than Biden or Trump. 

There’s even more for the Democratic National Committee to wring their hands over. Like other recent surveys, the USA Today/Suffolk poll found Trump winning among voters under age 35, by a 37% to 33% spread. Similar to blacks, 21% of young voters plan to vote for someone outside the two major parties — at least, if Biden and Trump are the nominees. While it wasn’t reported as part of this poll, it appears already-weak youth support for Biden has been further sapped by his overwhelming support for Israel’s destruction of Gaza in response to the Oct. 7 Hamas military and terrorist attack on southern Israel. 

The Biden administration treated Hispanic voters like we were stupid going into 2020. Playing “Despacito.” Referring to us as breakfast tacos. They ran on an open border platform thinking Hispanics would embrace it. It’s backfired. This is hurting innocent people. Trumps going… pic.twitter.com/KX3IadstXw

— Anna Paulina Luna (@realannapaulina) December 26, 2023

The 2024 field features multiple independent and third-party candidates that varyingly appeal to blacks, progressive leftists and independent voters, including Cornel West, Jill Stein and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. In the USA Today/Suffolk poll, the inclusion of seven independent and third-party yielded a small net advantage for Trump, nudging his overall lead over Biden from 2 points in a head-to-head to 3 points in a multi-candidate race. Kennedy came in third, grabbing a 10% share.  

“Although Trump hasn’t grown support among Black voters, he has closed the deficit because third-party voters come off of Biden’s support among Blacks,” David Paleologos, director of Suffolk’s Political Research Center, told USA Today. “A young voter or a person of color voting ‘third party’ is a vote away from President Biden, and a vote away from President Biden is a vote for Donald Trump.”

Biden’s losing Black & Hispanic voters partly due to immigration. Black ppl in cities like Chicago are upset because Migrants are given more benefits than black ppl. US foreign policy decisions are to blame for this. Thanks @RisingTheHill https://t.co/1Q2uI0nXMP pic.twitter.com/t24nrzeYgW

— Sabby Sabs (@SabbySabs2) January 2, 2024

  

Submitted by Sam Bourgi of CreditNews

For the average American, 2023 was the worst year ever for housing affordability—and now there’s more data to back it up.

According to Redfin data analyzed by Creditnews Research, the average U.S. household can only afford 15.5% of the homes that went up for sale in 2023—the lowest on record.

By comparison, the average household had the means to buy 20.7% of homes for sale in 2022 and over 40% before the pandemic.

Redfin data also showed the number of affordable homes for sale plunged to record lows in 2023, falling 40.9% to 352,500.

According to Redfin’s Lily Katz, “elevated mortgage rates and stubbornly high prices made the listings hitting the market more expensive” in 2023.

This analysis is based on home listings in 97 of the most populous U.S. metro areas. A house is considered “affordable” if the buyer’s mortgage payment is no more than 30% of their region’s median household income.

The 30% threshold isn’t some arbitrary number.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development says households that spend more than a third of their income on housing are far more likely to run into financial troubles.

Redfin’s data mirror Creditnews Research’s Housing Affordability Report, which showed that the average American’s mortgage burden is the worst since 1981 when rates peaked at over 18%.

Although the housing affordability crisis is often blamed on record home prices, it’s the root cause behind those prices that has been working against homebuyers in 2023.

Homeowners aren’t budging

Americans who purchased a home before 2021 have built up massive equity as their property values surged during Covid. According to Fed research, homeowners saw their equity rise from $139,100 in 2019 to $201,000 in 2022.

So, why aren’t they selling and cashing in? Because they don’t want to trade in their current mortgage rate for a much higher one.

According to Creditnews Research, 23.4% of existing mortgages were originated in 2021 when rates were below 3%. Another 17.8% of mortgages were originated in 2020—the year the Fed cut interest rates back to zero.

Now, nearly two-thirds (64.5%) of U.S. mortgages have rates under 4%. These buyers have “golden handcuffs” —they don’t want to give up their current rate for a much higher one.

Although mortgage rates have declined since late October, they’re still double what they were before 2021.

With homeowners refusing to sell, housing inventories have plunged to 20-year lows, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). And less supply means buyers are competing for fewer listings—a feedback loop that keeps pushing prices higher.

According to NAR data, the housing market has about 3.5 months’ worth of supply at the current sales pace. As a result, existing home sales have plunged to 13-year lows and are on track for their worst year in more than four decades.

Experts predict lower mortgage rates, but will they help?

With mortgage rates declining for eight consecutive weeks, industry experts believe rates will continue heading lower in 2024.

The NAR has pegged 30-year interest rates as low as 6.1% in 2024 before rebounding slightly to 6.3%. The Mortgage Bankers Association has a similar view and expects rates to drop to 6.1% by the end of the year.

Meanwhile, Mortgage News Daily’s chief operating officer Matthew Graham believes rates could fall even below 5% next year.

Lower mortgage rates should help ease housing costs, but even 5% might not be enough to fix the housing shortage—the root cause of record home prices.

“The supply of homes for sale remains scarce,” wrote Nancy Vanden Houten, an economist at Oxford Economics. “Lower mortgage rates may bring some sellers off the sidelines, though most homeowners with mortgages still have rates well below current market rates.”

More than 140 brands of drugs are going to see their prices hiked heading into the new year.

And we’re guessing because there isn’t one “punchable face” scapegoat like Martin Shkreli to take the heat for the entire industry which has spent yet another year whoring itself to Washington D.C. and sponsoring corporate media, the price hikes will go largely unnoticed by government officials who would normally fein outrage about the issue.

Healthcare research firm 3 Axis Advisors found that Pfizer, Sanofi and Takeda are among other drugmakers that’ll hike prices on more than 140 brands and 500 different drugs/dosages, according to a Reuters report. 

At the same time, we’re sure the media will swoon over the Biden Administration’s significantly discounted prices on 10 other high cost drugs, set to be published in September. As per usual, the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing…

Starting in 2026, under the Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare can directly negotiate drug prices. But concerns are rising about potential supply chain disruptions due to extended conflict in the Middle East, affecting Red Sea shipping routes. Meanwhile, GlaxoSmithKline and two other companies plan to reduce prices on various drugs, including treatments for asthma, herpes, and epilepsy, starting in 2024, with at least 15 drugs seeing price cuts in January, the report says.

The reductions follow earlier insulin price cuts by various companies to dodge penalties from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act, which mandates Medicaid rebates from drug firms if their price hikes exceed inflation. Starting January 2024, these rebates could exceed the drugs’ net cost.

3 Axis President Antonio Ciaccia said: “Every major former blockbuster insulin is going to get thrown under the tires of this policy.” 

Drugmakers have generally limited price increases to 10% or less since facing criticism for excessive hikes in the mid-2010s. Despite high inflation, there hasn’t been a significant acceleration in price increases for existing products. Since 2019, median price increases have been about 5%, as reported by 46brooklyn, a drug pricing non-profit.

Pfizer, leading in January price hikes for two consecutive years, plans to raise prices on 124 drugs, with an additional increase on 22 drugs by its Hospira division. Excluding various doses and formulations, 30 Pfizer and six Hospira drugs will see price increases. Takeda’s Baxalta and Belgian firm UCB Pharma follow, with 53 and 40 drug hikes, respectively.

Sanofi, despite earlier commitments to reduce insulin prices in 2024, will increase prices on some vaccines by 9%. January is typically the peak month for drug price hikes, with 1,425 increases in 2023, slightly down from 1,460 in 2022.

While established drug price increases have moderated, prices for new drugs are soaring. In the first half of 2022, new drug prices reached an average of over $220,000, up from around $180,000 in early 2021, marking a 20% rise consistent with a JAMA study showing annual 20% increases in U.S. drug launch prices from 2008 to 2021.

By Brayden Lindrea of CoinTelegraph

US-based Bitcoin miner CleanSpark Inc. reportedly plans to set up an in-house trading desk sometime in 2024 to maximize returns from its Bitcoin holdings. According to a Jan. 2 report from Bloomberg, the firm’s CEO Zachary Bradford said the move would make use the the “large Bitcoin” balance the company has.

“We really think that doing it ourselves is the best way, especially with the large Bitcoin balance we have,” Bradford told Bloomberg. “It just makes financial sense to do it in-house.”

In December, CleanSpark said it held 2,575 BTC at the end of November, worth around $116 million at today’s prices.

CleanSpark reportedly plans to make strategies based on regulated crypto offerings, such as the option contracts traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange or its affiliates.

“We may have to move a small amount into different accounts but we will keep the cold storage custody with holders like Coinbase with segregated accounts,” Bradford added.

A major Bitcoin miner plans to set up an in-house trading desk. That could have an impact on market structure in crypto. Also, it is remarkable to see the sector is morphing from a cottage industry into something like this. Exclusive below👇https://t.co/4aPhIIG9ql

— David Pan (@DavidPan_1) January 2, 2024

Bradford thinks more Bitcoin miners will set up in-house trading desks, adding: 

“That way, you can manage it with your own risk profiles and expertise and keep a really close eye on it.”

CleanSpark’s (CLSK) share price increased around 440% to around $11 in 2023, lifting the firm’s market cap to $2 billion, according to Google Finance.

The share price appreciation erased a nearly 80% share price fall in 2022 when the cryptocurrency industry’s market cap plummeted as low as $832 billion following the collapse of FTX.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX started the new year with a Falcon 9 rocket launch of the firm’s first-ever direct-to-cell satellites. 

The six @Starlink satellites on this mission with Direct to Cell capability will further global connectivity and help to eliminate dead zones → https://t.co/FgiJ7LOYdK pic.twitter.com/zFy7SrpsYs

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) January 3, 2024

Six of the 21 Starlink satellites launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, have direct-to-cell capabilities that provide connectivity for most 4G LTE devices when in range. 

Falcon 9 launches 21 @Starlink satellites to orbit from California, including six with Direct to Cell capabilities → https://t.co/FgiJ7LOYdK pic.twitter.com/IKBkTSB63C

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) January 3, 2024

SpaceX plans to “eliminate dead zones” with its new service that could be rolled out in 2025, pending regulatory license for commercial use. 

The initial rollout in the US will be with SpaceX’s US mobile partner, T-Mobile. Other partners include mobile operators in Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, New Zealand, and Switzerland. 

Musk commented on the launch Tuesday night. He said, “This will allow for mobile phone connectivity anywhere on Earth.” 

“Note, this only supports ~7Mb per beam and the beams are very big, so while this is a great solution for locations with no cellular connectivity, it is not meaningfully competitive with existing terrestrial cellular networks,” Musk said. 

This will allow for mobile phone connectivity anywhere on Earth.

Note, this only supports ~7Mb per beam and the beams are very big, so while this is a great solution for locations with no cellular connectivity, it is not meaningfully competitive with existing terrestrial… https://t.co/ymHpw8XBHl

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 3, 2024

SpaceX is also expected to have another record year of rocket launches.