BYD’s New Ultra Long-Range Hybrid Can Go 1,250 Miles Without Recharging Or Refueling
Range anxiety with electric vehicles becomes less of a problem when switching to hybrids – a plan almost all of the auto industry is now embracing after finding out the economics of pure BEVs are a prohibitive nightmare.
For example this week Bloomberg reported that BYD had unveiled a new “hybrid powertrain capable of traveling more than 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) without recharging or refueling”.
The technology will be featured in two sedans priced below 100,000 yuan ($13,800) and capable of covering distances comparable to Singapore to Bangkok or New York to Miami on a single charge and tank of gas. This advancement marks a significant stride in fuel efficiency since BYD introduced its first hybrids in 2008.
The Shenzhen-based automaker, known for aggressive pricing strategies that have impacted its profitability, dominates the Chinese hybrid market, holding a 50% market share, Bloomberg writes.
In response to consumer range concerns and environmental considerations, automakers globally are innovating, as demonstrated by Toyota’s recent unveiling of a versatile new internal combustion engine.
BYD, which ceased production of solely fossil-fuel vehicles in early 2022, is expanding its hybrid exports, particularly to markets with limited charging infrastructure. The new upgrades, initially available in China, are expected to be exported soon.
Recall just days ago we wrote that Volkswagen was stepping back from BEVs into hybrids. And back in April we noted that Ford was “re-timing” its efforts to go all electric and back in February we wrote that GM was shifting to plug-in hybrids, too.
CEO Mary Barra said on an earnings call back in February: “Let me be clear, GM remains committed to eliminating tailpipe emissions from our light-duty vehicles by 2035, but, in the interim, deploying plug-in technology in strategic segments will deliver some of the environment or environmental benefits of EVs as the nation continues to build this charging infrastructure.”
The company said it produced more than 3 million new energy vehicles for the year and it marks the second year that BYD has beat out Tesla in total production. BYD produced 1.6 million battery only vehicles, just slightly behind Tesla, and 1.4 million hybrids.
Saudi textbooks have removed the name “Palestine” from most maps where it previously appeared, a study by an Israeli think-tank said. The study, conducted by the NGO Impact-se, tracks changes in Saudi school textbooks over the past five years, as reflected in the 2023-24 academic year.
It reviews 371 textbooks published between 2019 and 2024, and highlights content removed, altered or that which remained unchanged. A social studies textbook for grade 12 defining Zionism as a racist movement was no longer taught from 2023, while another textbook still taught has removed the chapter about the Palestinian cause, the study revealed.
According to the study, the social studies textbooks for grades five and nine consistently don’t name Palestine or Israel on maps, which is an omission from the 2022 versions which only named Palestine on the map.
“Most maps removed the names of all countries not bordering Saudi Arabia, including Palestine, and in some cases all country names were removed,” the report said.
Likewise, two maps in a geography textbook for grades 10-12, which previously named Palestine, now do not display the names of any country bordering Saudi Arabia. The same omission took place in social studies textbooks for grades six and seven.
Islamic studies and geography textbooks for grades 10-12 also removed maps that previously displayed historic Palestine instead of Israel.
A reference to Israel as “the Zionist entity” in the 2021 social studies textbook for grades 10-12 was removed in the 2022 edition, and the entire textbook that included a lesson on Arab and Saudi support for the Palestinian cause was discontinued in 2023.
Less hostile tone
The report also documented some alterations in textbooks that now refer to Israel in a less hostile tone.
For example, the 2022 version of a high school social studies textbook replaced references to Israel as “the Zionist enemy” with “the Israeli occupation army”. The same textbook edited “the Israeli enemy” to “the Israeli occupation”, and “the Zionists” to “the Israelis”, or “the Israeli occupation army”.
Saudi Arabia has not formally recognized Israel since its creation in 1948, but there has been persistent speculation that the kingdom would normalise relations with the state as its Gulf neighbors Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have in recent years.
These rumors, however, were disrupted following the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel and the subsequent Israeli war on Gaza that has killed a reported more than 36,000 Palestinians.
Saudi Arabia has been a strong opponent and critic of Israel’s onslaught. The Saudi foreign ministry said in February that no normalization would take place without a ceasefire and progress toward Palestinian statehood.
Japan’s Largest Nuclear Reactor Remains Idle, Despite Nation’s Energy Crunch
We don’t think it’ll be long before nuclear power once again has a renaissance, as we’ve written about extensively. But for now, the world’s largest nuclear power plant, the Kashiwazaki Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, is sitting idle even as the world’s energy needs continue to grow.
Bloomberg reported this week that the Kashiwazaki Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, recognized by Guinness World Records for its potential 8.2 gigawatt output, stands idle despite once being central to Japan’s goal of deriving 50% of its energy from nuclear power by 2030.
The facility, known as KK, shut down its seven reactors following the 2011 Fukushima disaster, which led to a national reevaluation of nuclear energy. Amidst current economic strategies targeting industries like semiconductor manufacturing and AI, debates are intensifying over whether KK and its operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., should be given another opportunity.
Globally, nuclear power is witnessing a resurgence, as we have been covering here on Zero Hedge. In the U.S., AI-Jesus Sam Altman just had his small modular reactor company, Oklo, listed on NYSE. Around the world in places like France and Poland, the small modular reactor model could be what ushers nuclear back in, with some countries planning for adoption by 2030.
The International Atomic Energy Agency projects that nuclear power capacity could increase by 24% by 2030 and by 140% by 2050 from 2022 levels. Countries like China and India are expanding their nuclear programs, while even Saudi Arabia is exploring nuclear options with the U.S., reflecting a broader recommitment to nuclear energy as a vital resource.
Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the IAEA, said in March: “It’s very important for Japan to be able to count on Kashiwazaki Kariwa again. How many countries have that idle capacity? Many countries wish they just had it.”
Restarting or building new nuclear reactors in Japan is politically challenging. Nuclear power provides steady, carbon-free electricity, unlike the variable output from wind and solar. However, these facilities take over a decade to construct and produce long-lasting hazardous waste.
In 2017, two reactors at the KK plant were approved to restart by Japan’s nuclear regulator, but a firm restart date has not been set due to lacking local government approval. The issue may be addressed in the upcoming regional assembly meeting in Niigata prefecture, where KK is located, Bloomberg noted.
Again, the restart will likely only occur when the obvious benefits outweigh the memories of past disaster at Fukushima.
This occurs as Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s administration reviews Japan’s energy policy, a routine evaluation involving various stakeholders, which could reshape the country’s nuclear energy goals amid criticisms of insufficient clean energy initiatives.
Amidst global energy uncertainties, highlighted by events in Ukraine and the Middle East, Japan’s heavy reliance on imported energy for 70% of its electricity needs is problematic, especially with 21 nuclear reactors currently idle.
Tepco President Tomoaki Kobayakawa concluded, telling reporters in April: “We need to secure a stable electricity source for our customers — it’s important to have some source that’s not dependent on overseas fuel imports.”
President Joe Biden will be virtually nominated as the Democrats’ presidential nominee before the party’s national convention in August to secure his spot on Ohio’s general election ballot.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) was notified months ago that President Biden’s name would not appear on the state’s general election ballot unless he was nominated by the state’s deadline of Aug. 7. The Democrats’ national convention, where the party would typically nominate its chosen candidate, is scheduled for Aug. 19 to 22 in Chicago.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine called a special legislative session to address the issue last week, though lawmakers had not agreed to a solution by the DNC’s announcement on May 28.
“Joe Biden will be on the ballot in Ohio and all 50 states, and Ohio Republicans agree. But when the time has come for action, they have failed to act every time, so Democrats will land this plane on our own,” DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison said in a statement.
“Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice.”
A date for the virtual nomination was not announced, though it is expected to come within the weeks following the committee’s rules and bylaw committee’s vote on changes to the roll call process on June 4.
The virtual process is expected to mirror the format the party used in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the traditional in-person convention will still take place, it will be largely ceremonial.
Ohio revised its certification deadline from 60 to 90 days ahead of the general election in 2010. Since then, lawmakers have twice extended the deadline—in 2012 and 2020—to accommodate both parties’ nominating conventions. This will be the first year just one party has scheduled its convention too late.
The Ohio Legislature is controlled by the GOP, which holds majorities in both chambers. Although lawmakers appeared to be on the cusp of a legislative fix for the dilemma earlier this month, a final solution was never solidified.
A bill that would have extended the deadline and placed President Biden on the ballot was passed by the state Senate, but a provision prohibiting foreign spending on state ballot issues halted its progress in the House. For Democrats, the proposed restriction seemed to be an effort to block future ballot campaigns after their success last year in passing three ballot measures, including a constitutional right to abortion.
Meanwhile, a House bill would add President Biden’s name to the ballot and allow more time for political parties to certify nominees in future presidential elections.
In a May 21 letter to Ohio Democratic Party Chairwoman Liz Walters, the state’s Secretary of State Frank LaRose warned that the party was running out of time to nominate President Biden before ballots would need to be prepared.
“Let me be clear that this is not an action I wish to take, as I believe it to be in the best interest of Ohio voters to have a choice between at least the two major party candidates for the nation’s highest political office.”
The Ohio Senate scheduled one day of legislative activity to address the problem on May 28. Lawmakers in the House will hold two days of committee hearings before voting on the proposed fixes on May 30.
Jeff Louderback and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
Arizona Biology Teacher Quits Due To Students’ “Addiction” To Their Cell Phones
One Arizona high school teach is resigning over his students’ addictions…to their phones.
The constant use of smartphones in his classroom has driven Sahuaro High School’s Mitchell Rutherford to tell Fox News last week that he is “giving up” being a biology teacher because he can’t control phone usage.
“I have been struggling with mental health this year mostly because of what I identified as basically phone addiction with the students,” he commented.
After being a teacher for 11 years, he has resigned. He said last week that he has implemented a “variety of lesson plans” to try and make it clear to his students the negative effects of constant phone usage.
“Here’s extra credit, let’s check your screen time, let’s create habits, let’s do a unit on sleep and why sleep is important and how to reduce your phone usage for a bedtime routine, and we talked about it every day and created a basket called ‘phone jail,’” he told Fox News.
He likened the phones to other addictions in the area: “Opioids, obviously a huge problem, cocaine, heroin, all of those drugs, alcohol, it’s all a big problem, but like sugar even greater than that and then phones even greater than that.”
He said that “something shifted” in the kids during the Covid-19 pandemic and that their addictions to their phones got worse.
Recent studies indicate that pandemic-related disruptions have significantly harmed the education and productivity of K-12 students across the country. Rutherford expressed concerns to the media, initially blaming himself for the growing educational gaps. He noted that some students openly disregarded school, but he ultimately believes that societal changes are needed to instill better habits in children.
“As a society, we need to prioritize educating our youth and protecting our youth and allowing their brains and social skills and happiness to develop in a natural way, without their phone,” he concluded.
“Part of me feels like I’m abandoning these kids,” he said, adding, “I tell kids to do hard things all the time, and now I’m leaving? But I decided I’m going to try something else that doesn’t completely consume me and drain me.”
You’d have to be hiding under a rock to be unaware that inflation is one of the most pressing issues of our time. After a shocking 23% increase in the cost of living since 2019, all but the wealthiest of Americans are getting squeezed and seeing their living standards plummet at an alarming rate. Grinding inflation is causing once-affluent people to become merely middle class, former middle-class people to become working class, while working class people are being forced into the ranks of the working poor and even the destitute. According to the most recent Gallup Poll, inflation was America’s number one worry with 55% of people polled saying that they worried about inflation “a great deal,” while the latest Fed survey showed that two-thirds of Americans believe that inflation has made their financial situation worse.
The sad truth is that inflation is not an inevitable fact of life or an inherent flaw of capitalism; it is a direct byproduct of unbacked paper money and central banking. The United States experienced virtually no inflation for over a century until the Federal Reserve was founded in 1913 and the U.S. dollar was progressively downgraded from a gold-backed currency to a paper currency that could be — and has been — printed to oblivion.
Though the U.S. is no longer on the gold standard, savers and investors have been able to effectively protect their wealth from the ravages of inflation by creating their own personal “gold standard,” so to speak, by investing in gold and silver bullion. Unfortunately, the U.S. government taxes capital gains on gold and silver bullion at an unfairly high rate, which is particularly infuriating because those so-called “gains” are not actually gains at all as they are simply compensation for the plunging purchasing power of the dollar, which is the U.S. government’s fault in the first place! Thankfully, as I will discuss later in this piece, there is a glimmer of hope in the form of a new bill that intends to eliminate U.S. federal capital gains taxes on physical gold and silver.
What is Inflation & What Causes It?
In order to truly understand the virtues of gold and silver, it’s important to understand inflation, what causes it, and how destructive it is to society. Simply stated, inflation is an increase in the money supply that manifests in the form of pricier goods and services as well as a loss of purchasing power of the currency that is being inflated. The money supply is the number of units of currency in existence; the more units in existence, the less each unit is worth.
Contrary to popular belief, the rising money supply itself is inflation; the rising cost of goods and services is just an inevitable consequence of that inflation. General inflation is always monetary in origin and is not caused by supply shocks such as an energy crisis or a drought that pushes up food prices. As the Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously stated, “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.”
The long-term chart of the U.S. adjusted monetary base, which is one of several widely followed money supply measures, shows how the country’s money supply surged by an astounding 55,440% from 1920 to 2020. (Note that the Federal Reserve stopped publishing this data series in late-2019, which is serious reason for suspicion. Are they trying to hide how much they’ve debased the U.S. dollar? You decide.)
Though the U.S. money supply has grown as a function of time, there have been a series of pivotal events that have accelerated and further enabled that process:
The U.S. Federal Reserve was founded in 1913 with the primary responsibility of issuing and managing the U.S. dollar. Unfortunately, it has proven to be a terrible steward of our nation’s currency because it has been all too willing to create new dollars to enable government spending. For example, the dollar lost half of its purchasing power within just six years of the Fed’s founding due to its funding of America’s role in World War I. Massive wartime inflation ensued, devastating the dollar’s purchasing power.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took the U.S. off the Gold Standard in 1933. The United States was on the Gold Standard from 1834 until 1933, which meant that the dollar was backed by and redeemable in gold. For nearly a century, holders of dollars could trade $20.67 to receive an ounce of gold. The Gold Standard helped to limit the expansion of the money supply. To create inflation and counteract deflation during the Great Depression, FDR banned private American citizens from owning gold and forced them to turn in their gold to the Federal Reserve for $20.67 per ounce in 1933. Foreign governments could still redeem their dollars for gold, however. The dollar-gold exchange rate was then changed to $35 per ounce, which meant that the dollar was devalued by 59% against gold. Sure enough, the money supply and cost of living were soon increasing at a rapid rate once again.
Until 1965, U.S. dimes, quarters, and half-dollars were made from an alloy that consisted of 90% silver. In response to the rising price of silver (which itself was a byproduct of inflation), Congress enacted the Coinage Act of 1965, which eliminated silver from dimes and quarters, and reduced the silver content of the half-dollar from 90% to 40%. In 1970, silver was eliminated from the half-dollar. The new coins were made from nickel and copper, which are much cheaper, non-precious metals. Because the melt value of the older silver coins exceeded their face values, the coins were quickly removed from circulation by people who were aware of their greater value — a classic example of Gresham’s Law (i.e. “bad money drives out good money”). The older silver coins are still very popular with precious metals investors today. The Coinage Act of 1965 is often overlooked but represents a significant debasement and downgrade of the U.S. dollar.
From 1933 to 1971, foreign governments could still redeem their dollars for gold, which meant that the dollar was still backed by gold in some sense. On August 15th, 1971, President Richard Nixon ended all convertibility of dollars into gold, which turned the U.S. dollar into a pure fiat or paper currency that could be printed with no limitations whatsoever. Almost immediately, the money supply started growing at a breakneck pace, which led to the infamous inflation of the 1970s. The U.S. experienced an 8.21% average annual rate of inflation from 1971 to 1980, producing a cumulative price increase of 46%.
To combat the 2008 Financial Crisis and Great Recession, the Federal Reserve used an unconventional and aggressive monetary stimulus tool known as quantitative easing or QE. In simple terms, QE is digital money printing in which the Fed buys assets such as U.S. Treasury bonds and mortgage bonds in order to fund government spending and pump liquidity into the economy and financial markets. From 2008 to 2014, the Fed printed approximately $3.5 trillion via its QE programs, which caused the money supply and cost of living to soar.
After its trial run in 2008, quantitative easing became a permanent tool in the Fed’s toolbox. After all, what government wouldn’t want the ability to fund its increasingly reckless spending with money created out of thin air? When the COVID-19 pandemic came along in 2020, the Fed quickly created approximately $5 trillion worth of new currency via QE to keep the economy afloat during the government-imposed lockdowns. That $5 trillion funded a dizzying number of stimulus programs including the purchase of debt securities and other assets, PPP loans, stimulus checks, and generous unemployment benefits. Unfortunately, that sharp expansion of the money supply caused a cumulative price increase of 23% since 2019 and has made so many Americans’ lives miserable in the process.
The long-term U.S. Consumer Price Index chart going back to 1800 shows how each progressive assault on the dollar’s integrity caused the cost of living to skyrocket while causing the dollar’s purchasing power to plummet. Most people are unaware that U.S. consumer prices were largely stable for nearly a century until the Federal Reserve was founded in 1913, which let the inflation genie out of the bottle in a tremendous way. Since the Fed was founded, U.S. consumer prices have increased more than thirty-fold! It’s hard to imagine a time when there wasn’t steady and consistent inflation, but that was the reality in the 19th century when money — thanks to its backing by gold and silver — was far sounder than it is today despite our advanced technology and accumulated knowledge.
Since the Fed was founded in 1913, the U.S. dollar has lost nearly 97% of its purchasing power and there is no end in sight, unfortunately:
Another way of visualizing the dollar’s stunning loss of purchasing power is by comparing it to gold, which has been used as money for six thousand years and is the most stable store of value in existence. Over the past century, the U.S. dollar’s purchasing power has plunged by 99.17% relative to gold:
Here are some tangible and relatable examples of how the destruction of the dollar affects everyday Americans:
An income of over $200,000 per year is needed for a family of four to live comfortably. In some states like California, New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, an income of approximately $300,000 is necessary for a family to live comfortably. Meanwhile, the average annual salary is just $59,428, 74% of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, and 67% are unable to cover an unexpected $400 expense.
The surge of inflation since the pandemic means that the average American household must spend an additional $11,434 annually just to maintain the same standard of living that they had in January of 2021.
Since President Biden took office in 2021, the cost of groceries is up 21%, gasoline is up 47%, shelter is up 20%, electricity is up nearly 30%.
The median U.S. home price just hit an all-time high of $434,000, which is a roughly 30% increase since the pandemic started. As a result, first-time buyers need a household income of nearly $120,000 just to afford a median-priced home.
Those who can’t afford to buy a home are typically forced to rent, but with the typical monthly rent now $1,957, even renting has become unaffordable for a record half of all renters.
The average cost of health insurance for a family of four is approximately $23,968 per year.
It now costs roughly $306,924 to raise a child through age 17.
The average American family can expect to spend $1,984 per month on child care, which is more than a mortgage payment or rent almost everywhere in the United States.
The average cost of a new vehicle is a near-record $48,510.
There are many other examples like the ones above, but the message is clear — even a modest lifestyle is becoming almost impossible in America, and it’s entirely the fault of the U.S. government, the Federal Reserve, and a currency that isn’t backed by anything. As the quote commonly attributed to Thomas Jefferson presciently states, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
Sure enough, the U.S. homeless population surged by 12% in 2023 to the highest level in at least fifteen years and is only going to grow worse as the dollar is debased as a function of time. We are in a very different world from the one in which a father could support a family comfortably on one income while going on annual family vacations and saving money for retirement and their children’s educations, as was common in the mid-to-late twentieth century; that’s the difference between life with sound money and life without sound money.
Here are some of the best quotes about inflation and its devastating effect on living standards:
“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.” ― Vladimir Lenin, founder & first leader of the Soviet Union
“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some…the process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.” ― John Maynard Keynes, economist
“As I have repeatedly said, inflation is a form of taxation without representation. It is the kind of tax that can be imposed without being legislated by the authorities and without having to employ additional tax collectors.” ― Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize-winning economist
“[Inflation] is a way to take people’s wealth from them without having to openly raise taxes. Inflation is the most universal tax of all.” ― Thomas Sowell, economist
“In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.” ― Alan Greenspan, economist & former Fed chairman
How Gold & Silver Protect Wealth
As we have seen, the U.S. government and Federal Reserve’s constant assault on the paper dollar makes it a terrible store of value and it will continue to be diluted to oblivion in the years and decades to come. The dollar is merely useful as a medium of exchange at best — a hot potato to be traded for useful goods and services as quickly as it is received. Anyone who is holding a large portion of their wealth in U.S. dollars over long periods of time is giving the government a license to steal their hard-earned wealth.
Unlike paper currencies, gold and silver bullion have proven to be the best stores of value for millennia. Gold and silver are extremely effective at preserving wealth because they can’t be printed or created out of thin air the way that paper currencies are, which means that their prices rise over time as the paper money supply grows. Holders of gold and silver see the value of their assets rise while the currency is debased, which is what allows them to preserve their wealth.
It’s important to point out, however, that gold and silver are not actually rising in value in an absolute sense; the paper currencies that gold and silver are denominated in are losing value due to debasement, which is why gold and silver appear to rise in price. In that scenario, gold and silver are simply maintaining their value and purchasing power — the so-called “gains” are illusory. A good example of this is how a quality men’s suit has long been worth the equivalent of one ounce of gold. In the 1930s, both a suit and an ounce of gold cost approximately $35. Now, nearly a century later, both cost around $2,300.
The chart below shows how gold follows the U.S. M2 money supply higher over the long run:
Silver also follows the money supply higher over time, though it is more volatile than gold and has longer periods of time when it lags or outpaces money supply growth:
Why It’s Time to Stop Taxing Capital Gains on Gold & Silver Bullion
As we have seen, the United States government and Federal Reserve have been absolutely terrible stewards of the dollar and have crushed the middle class with their incessant debasement of our currency. It’s hard to imagine those institutions doing an even worse job than they already have — it’s practically criminal and any reasonable person can be forgiven for thinking that it’s being done knowingly and even intentionally. As the economist Milton Friedman so accurately stated, inflation is a form of taxation without representation, which was one of the main grievances that led our colonial American forefathers to revolt against Great Britain. The American people have virtually no say in how our currency is managed, yet we are forced to use that currency by law. We are completely trapped.
Though everyday Americans are essentially powerless concerning the management of our national currency, we have a few options for preserving our wealth at the individual level, such as the personal “gold standard” that I mentioned earlier in this piece (i.e., preserving wealth by investing in gold and silver bullion). As we’ve written about previously, there’s a major issue that makes that strategy far less effective than it should be and is holding it back from much wider adoption: U.S. federal capital gains taxes on gold and silver bullion.
The issue is not just that there are capital gains taxes on gold and silver bullion in the first place, but also that the capital gains tax rate on bullion is much higher than the capital gains tax rate on other investment assets. The U.S. Internal Revenue Service considers gold and silver bullion to be in the “collectibles” category — just like art, baseball cards, and Beanie Babies — and taxes capital gains on those items at a hefty 28% rate. In contrast, the long-term capital gains tax rate on stocks and bonds is just 15% for most people and even 0% for those with lower incomes. Essentially, the U.S. government is picking winners by showing favoritism toward stocks and bonds as opposed to gold and silver bullion.
It’s extremely unfair for the U.S. government to tax so-called capital gains on gold and silver bullion when those “gains” are not really gains at all but are the result of the debasement of paper money, which is the very fault of the U.S. government! That’s a perfect example of how we are “being ground between the millstones of taxation and inflation,” as Vladimir Lenin put it. People don’t invest in gold and silver bullion to get rich; they’re just looking to preserve their wealth. People who are looking to get rich typically gravitate toward hot, speculative tech stocks, cryptocurrencies, and flipping houses — not staid gold and silver bullion, which is commonly derided as a “Boomer investment” by today’s young, hotshot crypto speculators (though I don’t agree with them, of course).
Introducing The Monetary Metals Tax Neutrality Act
A couple of weeks ago, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that there was a new bill called The Monetary Metals Tax Neutrality Act (H.R. 8279) that aims remove all federal income taxation from gold and silver bullion. The bill was introduced by U.S. Representative Alex Mooney (R-WV) and backed by the Sound Money Defense League and other free-market activists. Representatives Scott Perry (R-PA) and Randy Weber (R-TX) also cosponsored the bill. “My view, which is backed up by language in the U.S. Constitution, is that gold and silver coins are money and are legal tender,” Rep. Mooney said. Mooney further stated, “If they’re indeed U.S. money, it seems there should be no taxes on them at all. So, why are we taxing these coins as collectibles?”
According to the Sound Money Defense League’s press release:
“Sound money activists have long pointed out it is inappropriate to apply any federal income tax, regardless of the rate, against the only kind of money named in the U.S. Constitution. And the IRS has never defended how its position squares up with current law.
Furthermore, the U.S. Mint continuously mints coins of gold, silver, platinum, and palladium and gives each of these coins a legal tender value denominated in U.S. dollars. This formal status as U.S. money further underscores the peculiarity of the IRS’s tax treatment.”
(It is also worth pointing out that many countries around the world don’t impose capital gains taxes on gold and silver bullion including Bahrain, Barbados, Belize, the Cayman Islands, the Isle of Man, Jamaica, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Singapore, and others.)
The Sound Money Defense League’s press release also stated:
“The Monetary Metals Tax Neutrality Act aligns with a broader national trend. With most states having already eliminated sales tax on the purchase of precious metals, state legislatures are increasingly introducing and approving measures to eliminate state income taxation of gold and silver.
Alabama and Nebraska each passed their version of this policy this year. Arizona, Arkansas, and Utah approved similar measures in recent years. And Iowa, Georgia, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Kansas also considered income tax exemptions in 2024, with several approving the bill across multiple committees and chambers.”
You can read the text of H.R. 8279 here and track its status here.
Everyone who believes in sound money, justice, and fairness should support The Monetary Metals Tax Neutrality Act. To do so, please contact your local elected officials and let them know that you support this bill and feel free to forward them this article as it explains the flaws of paper money and central banking, as well as how gold and silver bullion have helped people preserve their wealth for thousands of years. Also, you can use Twitter/X to reach out to Rep. Alex Mooney, the Sound Money Defense League, and the Sound Money Defense League’s Policy Director Jp Cortez to ask them how you can help and get involved in supporting this important bill. BullionStar has always been a vocal proponent of sound money and free markets, and will continue to support this bill and the overall movement to the best of our ability.
Scientific misconduct has cast a long shadow over the fields of medicine and public health, significantly impacting public trust and posing serious ethical and legal challenges.
Cases from the United States, UK, and Australia reveal a troubling pattern, where scientific integrity is compromised, and often influenced by the commercial interests of multinational corporations.
This article explores these impacts, the erosion of trust in journals and institutions, and the legal consequences faced by entities engaging in or abetting such misconduct.
Erosion of Public Trust
Public trust is the cornerstone upon which the medical field rests. However, instances of scientific misconduct, particularly those involving pharmaceutical giants, have led to a growing public skepticism prompting some experts to initiate programs such as Restoring Invisibile and Abandoned Trials (RIAT) Initiative.
One notorious example is Study 329, a clinical trial funded by GlaxoSmithKline that misleadingly promoted the safety and efficacy of the antidepressant paroxetine in adolescents.
The misleading publication in 2001 has had long-standing effects on antidepressant use in children, contributing to a mistrust in pharmaceutical research.
The study exposed allegations of researchers miscoding side effects to the extent that serious adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the paroxetine group, five in the imipramine group, and two in the placebo group.
Ten of the 11 serious adverse events in the paroxetine group were psychiatric, for example, depression, suicidality, hostility or euphoria, some of the very issues the medications were indicated to treat.
In 2004, Dr. Elspeth Garland, a professor at the University of British Columbia, called attention to the “weak or non-existent evidence of efficacy” of SSRIs in this setting and the “serious psychiatric adverse effects” of paroxetine.
A British Medical Journal editorial documents that there has been no correction, no retraction, no apology and mostly no comment from the authors, journal editor, or from the universities where authors worked in 2001.
The RIAT analyses of Study 329 and the lack of any correction of the original flawed paper have major implications for clinical practice decisions being made on the basis of published clinical trials.
Leading experts on clinical trials now believe that we must question the validity of the data and conclusions of all published clinical trials that have not been subject to independent analysis.
Independent analysis of Study 329 demonstrated serious harms and a lack of efficacy for acute and longer-term use of paroxetine and imipramine for adolescents with major depression.
This example of the RIAT initiative reveals that the current methods of trial conduct, analysis and publication are unacceptable and required further oversight.
Published conclusions about efficacy and safety of drugs without independent analysis cannot be accepted as trustworthy.
It is essential that primary trial data and protocols for all clinical trials be made available for independent analysis.
Decline in Journal Credibility
The integrity of scientific publishing has been seriously questioned in light of misconduct. The retraction of high-profile papers has not only marred the reputation of journals but also shaken the faith of the public in medical research outputs.
For instance, the retractions of COVID-19 research papers by reputable journals due to questionable data integrity have only added to the public’s confusion and distrust during a global health crisis.
Independent evaluations of clinical trials for medications and vaccines, like the COVID-19 vaccine, are essential as a utilitarian tool to safeguard the community from potentially harmful practices by multinational companies.
These evaluations ensure that all side effects are accurately reported and assessed, mitigating risks associated with underreporting.
For example, during the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, independent reviews were crucial in identifying rare but serious side effects, such as blood clots associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. This led to tailored usage recommendations to maximise safety.
However, during the COVID period, drug regulators, government officials and pharmaceutical companies were suspected of hiding data, underemphasising side effect reports, reports of harm and deaths until public inquiries, court challenges, and independent media came knocking.
Although dismissed as conspiracy theories, the issue of scientific misconduct, suppression/censorship of independent data and expert testimony remains an area of significant concern.
Similarly, the re-examination of the anti-inflammatory drug Vioxx highlighted the importance of independent scrutiny after initial trials underreported serious cardiovascular risks, leading to its eventual market withdrawal.
These cases underscore the value of independent evaluations in maintaining transparency, fostering public trust, and ensuring that the collective health benefits of medical products outweigh potential risks.
Legal Repercussions and Corporate Influence
Legal actions against pharmaceutical companies have revealed a pattern of behaviour intended to prioritize profits over public safety. Notably:
Merck’s Vioxx Controversy: Merck faced numerous lawsuits for concealing the risks of its painkiller, Vioxx, which was linked to increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. The company settled for $4.85 billion in 2007, one of the largest pharmaceutical court settlements.
Pfizer Inc.: In 2009, Pfizer Inc. was fined $2.3 billion for violations under the False Claims Act, marking it as the largest healthcare fraud settlement at that time. This legal action addressed Pfizer’s illegal promotion of several pharmaceutical products, including the anti-inflammatory drug Bextra. The settlement included a criminal fine of $1.195 billion and civil liabilities amounting to approximately $1 billion. This case highlighted significant issues regarding the underreporting of side effects and the unethical promotion of medical products beyond their approved usage, demonstrating the critical need for independent evaluations to safeguard public health.
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Study 329: In 2012, GSK agreed to pay $3 billion in fines, in part for fraudulently promoting paroxetine. This case highlighted the issue of publishing biased research to support pharmaceutical sales, leading to one of the largest healthcare fraud settlements in U.S. history.
AstraZeneca and COVID-19 Vaccine: The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine faced scrutiny and legal challenges due to initially undisclosed rare blood clot risks. Though not leading to significant legal penalties, this issue has fuelled debates on transparency and safety in emergency vaccine approvals.
Global Legal Frameworks
Various countries have developed frameworks to address and mitigate scientific misconduct:
United States: The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) oversees the integrity of biomedical and behavioural research supported by the Public Health Service. Penalties for misconduct can include debarment from funding and criminal charges.
United Kingdom: The UK Research Integrity Office offers guidance and support for good research practice but lacks enforcement power. Legal actions tend to be taken directly against entities like pharmaceutical companies rather than individual researchers.
Australia: The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research outlines standards for honesty, rigour, and transparency. Breaches can result in withdrawal of funding and reporting to professional bodies.
Despite these facades existing globally, the exaggerated COVID crisis has raised many questions about the perceptions the community have about such bodies and their capacity to discharge their duties independently.
With regard to the COVID crisis, we saw many pharmaceutical executives, public figures, media personalities, so-called public health experts, politicians, and corporations making statements about the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccines that did not appear in some of the contracts for the vaccines globally.
This, in addition to the journals purporting to find results without the clinical trial ending, demonstrated a perceived bias that perforated the halls of institutions that would otherwise protect citizens from such overreach.
Instead, these institutions turned into corporate cheerleaders supporting the utilitarian benefits of an untested mRNA genetic experiment that were showing significant safety signals in relation to genotoxicity, carcinogenicity and fertility problems early on.
The Way Forward: Safeguarding Scientific Integrity
To protect science from undue corporate influence, stronger regulatory and legislative measures are necessary. These include:
Enhanced Disclosure Requirements: Researchers and journals must disclose all conflicts of interest and funding sources to prevent biased research outcomes.
Independent Oversight: Bodies like the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States are pivotal in the independent review and approval of drugs, ensuring that corporate interests do not compromise public safety.
Public and Transparent Research Registers: Initiatives like the AllTrials campaign advocate for the registration of all clinical trials and the full publication of their results to prevent data suppression and selective reporting.
The challenge of scientific misconduct in public health is a multifaceted problem that extends beyond individual instances of fraud to include systemic issues related to the influence of multinational corporations, major institutions, and persons acting in their capacity as public officials.
Restoring public trust requires a concerted effort to enforce rigorous legal and ethical standards in scientific research and publishing.
Only through transparency, accountability, and enhanced regulatory oversight with strong judicial responses can we hope to protect the integrity of science and ensure that it serves the public good, rather than specific corporate interests.
References
Legal case of GlaxoSmithKline: United States v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Case No. 11-10398-RWZ (D. Mass. July 2, 2012).
Settlement announcement for Merck’s Vioxx: In re Merck & Co., Inc. Securities, Derivative & “ERISA” Litigation, 2:05-md-01657 (D.N.J. 2007).
We’re all familiar with the term, “quantitative easing.” It’s described as meaning, “A monetary policy in which a central bank purchases government securities or other securities from the market in order to lower interest rates and increase the money supply.”
Well, that sounds reasonable… even beneficial. But, unfortunately, that’s not really the whole story.
When QE was implemented, the purchasing power was weak and both government and personal debt had become so great that further borrowing would not solve the problem; it would only postpone it and, in the end, exacerbate it. Effectively, QE is not a solution to an economic problem, it’s a bonus of epic proportions, given to banks by governments, at the expense of the taxpayer.
But, of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that governments have passed off a massive redistribution of wealth from the taxpayer to their pals in the banking sector with such clever terms. Governments of today have become extremely adept at creating euphemisms for their misdeeds in order to pull the wool over the eyes of the populace.
At this point, we cannot turn on the daily news without being fed a full meal of carefully-worded mumbo jumbo, designed to further overwhelm whatever small voices of truth may be out there.
Let’s put this in perspective for a moment.
For millennia, political leaders have been in the practice of altering, confusing and even obliterating the truth, when possible. And it’s probably safe to say that, for as long as there have been media, there have been political leaders doing their best to control them.
During times of war, political leaders have serially restricted the media from simply telling the truth. During the American civil war, President Lincoln shut down some 300 newspapers and arrested some 14,000 journalists who had the audacity to contradict his statements to the public.
As extreme as that may sound, this practice has been more the rule in history than the exception.
In most countries, in most eras, some publications go against the official story line and may very well pay a price for doing so. But, other publications go along with the official story line to a greater or lesser degree and are often rewarded for doing so.
It should come as no surprise, then, that media outlets often come to report the news in a less than accurate manner.
Mark Twain is claimed to have said, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” Quite so.
Still, only fifty years ago, much of the then “Free World” enjoyed a relatively objective Press. Even on television, reporters such as Walter Cronkite, Huntley and Brinkley, etc. presented the news in a bland manner. It wasn’t very exciting, but at least it was relatively balanced and, to this day, most people who were around then still have no idea as to whether reporters like Walter Cronkite were liberal or conservative. Although he was a committed Democrat, he never allowed that to significantly colour his reporting.
But today, we have a very different corporate structure as regards the media. The same six corporations hold the controlling interest of over 80% of the media. And those same corporations also own a controlling interest in the military industrial complex, Wall Street, the major banks, Big Pharma, etc.
What we’re witnessing today is media having been transformed into something more akin to a three-ring circus than journalism of old. This is no accident.
The present travesty that is the 21st century media, is journalism in name only.
So, why should this be so?
Well, as it happens, people tend not to like governments dominating their lives – simple as that.
And yet, the primary objective of any government is to increase its size and power as rapidly as the populace will tolerate it. The only reason that they rarely do this quickly, is that they can’t get away with it. Like boiling a frog, it takes time to lull the populace into submission, bit by bit.
Once having had enough time to do so, there comes a point at which the government becomes woefully top-heavy, as well as unworkably autocratic. At such times, all that’s necessary to make people rebel is an economic crisis.
Such is the case in much of the world today – the EU, the US, Canada, etc.. Even in their arrogance, the powers that be have to be aware that they’re right at the tipping point. An economic crisis would almost certainly push the situation over the edge.
When truth threatens to undermine machinations for self-aggrandizement, individuals tend to obfuscate in order to delay the inevitable fallout. Governments are no different.
So it was that, in 1999, the largest banks entered into a massive lending scam that would most certainly collapse within a decade. However, before putting the scam in place, they arranged for a “bailout” by the government, which would effectively pass the bill to the taxpayer, while the banks themselves simply increased their own wealth massively.
Of course, QE, as massive as it was, was a mere Band-Aid solution. All those involved (big business and the government) understood that it would hang like a sword of Damocles over the economy until it inevitably came crashing down – a fate far worse than if QE had never been implemented.
And so, for those entities to have invested into the domination of the media was, in fact, essential. Had they not done so, it’s entirely likely that, with a free press, the man on the street would, by now, have figured out that he’d been hoodwinked.
Thus do we see the journalistic equivalent of Quantitative Brainwashing, in which the inevitable realization is delayed for as long as possible.
And, in order to make sure that the public do not figure out what’s been done to them, the news reporting becomes Orwellian in its endless repetition of a false narrative.
It is, however, true that, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Eventually, the Band-Aid peels back to reveal an infection that’s far beyond what had been generally perceived. It then falls away in layers, as increasing numbers of people become aware that they’ve been scammed – that the media is entirely corrupt and that the media’s owners – big business – have, with the enthusiastic compliance of the government, robbed them on a wholesale basis.
Historically, that’s when the jig is up. What happens then is a matter of historic record.
* * *
It’s clear the Fed’s money printing is about to go into overdrive. The Fed has already pumped enormous distortions into the economy and inflated an “everything bubble.” The next round of money printing is likely to bring the situation to a breaking point. We’re on the cusp of a global economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. That’s precisely why bestselling author and legendary speculator Doug Casey just released this urgent video. Click here to watch it now.
Bond Yields Soar As Rate-Cut Hopes Plunge; Stocks, Oil, & Gold All Sold
A quiet macro day in the US – mixed bag of regional Fed survey data (Richmond Manufacturing good, Richmond Biz Conditions bad, Dallas Services bad) and plunging mortgage apps) – followed a hotter than expected inflation print in Germany, which sparked a further hawkish shift lower in rate-cut expectations with 2024 falling back to a 50-50 coin toss for 2 cuts or 1; and 2025 tumbling to less than 3 more cuts…
Source: Bloomberg
Treasury yields surged higher, led by the long-end (2Y +2bps, 30Y +7bps)…
Source: Bloomberg
…steepening the curve even more…
Source: Bloomberg
2Y Yields ramped within 0.25bps of 5.00%, erasing all the gains from payrolls and CPI…
Source: Bloomberg
And higher yields are starting to hit stocks. Today was relatively unusual for recent times with no big BTFD bounce back after almost non-stop selling from the cash close last night. Small Caps lagged on the day with S&P and Nasdaq the best looking horses in the glue factory. The cash open offered a little blip higher but that was sold into…
The Dow broke below its 50- and 100-DMA and Small Caps broke below their 50DMA…
‘Most Shorted’ stocks were monkeyhammered lower… again…
Source: Bloomberg
But, of course, MAG7 stocks levitated…
Source: Bloomberg
…as NVDA hit another new record high…
Since NVDA’s earnings, everything but AI has been sold…
Source: Bloomberg
The dollar followed rates higher, back near one-month highs…
Source: Bloomberg
…which hit gold…
Source: Bloomberg
…sent oil lower with WTI back below $80…
Source: Bloomberg
…and bitcoin also fell back below $68,000 (despite the Blackrock flows news)…
Source: Bloomberg
Ethereum slipped back below $3800….
Source: Bloomberg
Finally, while financial conditions remain drastically loose (especially relative to Fed rates), we note that they are starting to tighten…
Source: Bloomberg
We’ve seen this before a few times this year – so let’s not hold our breath, but The Fed surely wants the market ‘tighter’ than it is before it starts actually ‘easing’.
Watch: NYU Grads Go Into Debt For These Worthless Degrees
You’re about to meet a group of New York University graduates with fresh degrees, likely burdened with a few hundred thousand dollars in debt unless their elite liberal parents footed the bill. Many companies are increasingly viewing woke degrees as liabilities rather than assets.
If these graduates are lucky—and don’t end up as Starbucks baristas—they will have a bright and colorful future at some woke mega-corporation. There, they will be placed in non-productive managerial roles to advance destructive ESG and DEI movements.
It all starts at NYU classrooms indoctrination camps, where the kids are being uploaded the woke mind virus by activist professors. These kids are being brainwashed into not improving society but, in fact, being managers to spread wokesim to dismantle Western society.
In return, these corporations can out woke each other – and they have. Remember the Bud Light incident more than a year ago?
The brewer’s pro-trans marketing executive nuked the brand by featuring transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in a TikTok promotional ad in April of 2023, an attempt to score high brownie points with DEI & ESG indexes. Again, these woke degrees are not productive and are only a means to spread wokeism, which is at risk to the company’s brand.
The problem with these useless degrees is that they’re based on a woke system. With an anti-woke tide sweeping the nation and wokeism falling apart, some degrees are worthless.
These are real majors that NYU students are going into debt for. This is not satire. pic.twitter.com/rNXWhTeCrC
Furthermore, New Discourses, an expert on the woke mind virus, recently wrote an open letter to students, explaining that pursuing woke degrees in college won’t lead to a positive outcome in the end.
Let’s get back to an education system that focuses on actual learning, not woke activism. This is destructive, and that is why Elon Musk is seizing the opportunity to create a new university.
Don’t worry. The Biden administration will be bailing these folks out.
