Month: October 2024

Authored by Robert Kogon via The Brownstone Institute,

Note that X, rebranded as a “free speech platform,” provides information on platform users to the governments of EU member states in connection with not just illegal speech – and, yes, national legislation in EU countries includes many “speech crimes” – but also legal speech that is deemed “harmful.” 

This is the real innovation involved in the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA): It creates an obligation for platforms to take action in the form of “content moderation” against not just illegal content, but also ostensibly harmful content such as “disinformation.” Note that in the period covered in X’s latest “Transparency Report” to the EU on its “content moderation” efforts, nearly 90% of such requests for information on the purveyors of ostensibly “illegal or harmful speech” came from just one country: Germany. See the below chart.

Note that X also takes action against posts or accounts for “illegal or harmful speech” that is reported to it by EU member states or the European Commission. Such action may involve deletion or geo-blocking (“withholding”) of content. But, as the “enforcement options” linked in the report make clear, it can also involve various forms of “visibility filtering” or restricting engagement — “in accordance with our Freedom of Speech, Not Reach enforcement philosophy,” as the report puts it.

Here again, Germany is top of the table, having submitted 42% of all the reports to X on “illegal or harmful speech” and nearly 50% of the reports from member states. See the chart below. Germany submitted nearly twice as many reports as any other member state — France finished a distant second — and over ten times more reports than comparably-sized Italy. The European Commission submitted around 15% of the reports.

It is also notable that Germany submitted by far the most reports on content entailing “negative effects on civic discourse or elections,” yet another category of speech that is clearly not illegal per se but that is deemed “harmful” enough under the DSA regime to require suppression. (Hence, while the content is not per se illegal, it would be illegal for platforms under the DSA not to suppress it. This ambiguity is at the very heart of the DSA censorship regime.) Germany submitted well over half of all such reports and over 60% of the reports from member states.

Finally, it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of these reports and the related “enforcement actions” undoubtedly involve English-language content. This can be gleaned from the fact that nearly 90% of X’s “content moderation team” consists of English speakers. The “primary language” of 1,535 of the team’s 1,726 members is English, as can be seen in the below chart.

But why should Germany or the EU be accorded any jurisdiction over English-language discourse? Needless to say, Germans are not as a rule native English speakers and only 1.5% of the total EU population has English as their mother tongue.

In any case, two things are very clear from X’s “Transparency Report.” One is that Elon Musk’s “free speech platform” is not that and is in fact devoting enormous resources, both in terms of “trained” human censors and programming, to complying with the EU’s censorship regime. And the other is that Germany is the EU’s — and hence undoubtedly the world’s — undisputed, online censorship champion.

There were 226,350 “enforcement actions” taken by X in response to reports from EU member states or the EU Commission in the reporting period covering barely more than three months. This is to say nothing of the “enforcement actions” taken proactively by X in accordance with its own DSA-compatible terms of service and rules.

Lest readers have trouble reconciling the foregoing with the viral kerfuffle between Elon Musk and Thierry Breton and the famous “proceedings” against X that were initiated under Breton’s leadership, please see Jordi Calvet-Bademunt’s helpful account of the “preliminary findings” of the EU Commission’s investigation here. 

According to a new Bloomberg report, EU officials are even contemplating taking into account the revenues of some of Musk’s other companies in calculating a potential fine against him. Needless to say, despite the fact that the sources are unnamed, this has been widely construed as a further escalation in a mammoth free speech struggle between Musk and the EU. 

But as Calvet-Bademunt’s analysis shows, the EU’s case against X, as it now stands, has nothing to do with insufficient “content moderation” — or, in other words, censorship — but merely concerns other, more arcane, aspects of the DSA.

Interestingly, the original proceedings opened against X did indeed involve “content moderation” and — believe it or not – could even have had a positive impact on freedom of speech, since X was ostensibly being investigated not for failing to remove or suppress user content, but rather for failing to inform users about such “content moderation decisions” or, in other words, shadowbanning. But, as Calvet-Bademunt shows, this aspect has been dropped from the investigation.

The fact of the matter, in any case, is that no online platform of any size can remain on the EU market and be a “free speech platform.” The DSA makes this impossible.

A missile fired by an Israeli fighter jet has absolutely obliterated a residential building in Beirut’s southern suburb of Chiyah. The airstrike came amid a series of attacks on the area, shortly after Israel’s military issued warnings and evacuation orders for residents of the building and of the area.

International media correspondents knew the strike was coming, and so were able to set up nearby and capture footage up-close, even including images of the missile flying through the air milliseconds before the strike. The building immediately collapsed in its own footprint.

⚡️Clearer video of the enemy’s strike on Dahye earlier today pic.twitter.com/wSw2pqOzOr

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) October 22, 2024

The projectile may have been a bunker-busting munition, given the way the building collapsed onto itself, to the point of nothing being left.

The last several days have seen IDF warplanes bomb locations said to be sources of Hezbollah financing, including bank branches linked to the Shia organization.

But public hospitals have had their grounds struck as well. Israel’s military has shocked many by proclaiming that Hezbollah hides money or gold beneath the medical facilities which have come under attack.

Surreal moment of waiting for an #Israel-i airstrike on the edge of Ghobeiry. #Beirut #Lebanon pic.twitter.com/ylny2pdO6u

— Nabih (@nabihbulos) October 22, 2024

The UN has said it is “appalled” by an attack on Rafik Hariri University Hospital:

UN rights chief Volker Turk said he was “appalled” by a deadly Israeli strike nearly a southern Beirut hospital yesterday, demanding a “prompt and thorough investigation”.

“I am appalled by the Israeli strike near Rafik Hariri University Hospital in Beirut’s densely populated Jinah neighborhood that reportedly killed at least 18 people, including four children, and wounded 60 others,” Turk said in a statement.

“The fundamental principles of international humanitarian law concerning the protection of civilians must be respected.”

Lebanon’s Health Ministry confirmed Tuesday at least 18 people were killed in that attack, including four children. Nearly 2,500 Lebanese total have been killed in Israeli attacks since the start of the conflict, both civilians and combatants alike.

The number of wounded from the same attack close to the Rafik Hariri University Hospital is at least 60, the ministry said. A staff member at the hospital, Dr Abu-Sittah, was outraged and had this to say:

“The size of the country is bigger but the tactic and centrality of the strategy are identical. To ethnically cleanse an area you need to dismantle the healthcare system in it. When you look at the south of Lebanon and Beirut’s southern suburbs that’s what they’re doing.”

In northern Israel, Hezbollah has continued sanding many drones on the key port city of Haifa. Alarms have been frequently sounding through the whole area.

The Israeli army has also belatedly confirmed the killing of Hezbollah Hashem Safieddine during a prior airstrike on Beirut earlier this month. He was widely expected to succeed Nasrallah as Secretary-General of Hezbollah.

⚡️Hezb-Allah drones currently terrorising the sky of Haifa pic.twitter.com/sYd2rmVmfL

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) October 22, 2024

In Gaza, fierce fighting has return to the north of the Strip. Hamas has issued a statement urging the global community “to stop the crime of forced displacement, ethnic cleansing and massacres” happening in northern Gaza.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is currently in Israel, seeking to discuss the potential for a ceasefire, but that prospect seems more distant than ever at this point.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The state-run Polish Press Agency recently reported on the publication of the latest survey by the publicly financed Center for Public Opinion Research about Poles’ attitudes towards Ukrainian refugees and the proxy war.

The results might surprise casual observers who hitherto assumed that this population is still gung-ho about both due to their supposedly innate and irredeemable Russophobia. Before diving into the details, the reader should review these three prior analyses on this subject:

* 21 February: “A Top EU Think Tank’s Poll Proved That Polish Views Towards Ukraine Are Noticeably Shifting”

* 27 March: “What Do The Latest Surveys Say About Poles’ Attitudes Towards Ukraine & The Farmers’ Protests?”

* 8 July: “Interpreting A Top EU Think Tank’s Latest Survey On Polish Attitudes Towards Ukraine”

Having shared the evolving statistical context for those who are interested, it’s now time to highlight what the latest survey showed.

Only a little more than half of Poles (53%) support accepting more Ukrainian refugees, while two-thirds (67%) want to deport conscription-aged Ukrainian males (25-60 years old).

Less than half (46%) support Ukraine continuing to fight Russia, slightly less (39%) want it to give up territory for peace, and a little bit more (44%) believe that this will ultimately happen in any case.

The military-strategic context within which these results were obtained is that Poland confirmed in late August, several weeks before the survey was conducted between 12-22 September, that it had already maxed out its military support for Ukraine.

Mainstream Media outlets like CNN also began sharing glimpses of just how bad everything had become for Ukraine too.

The Volhynia Genocide dispute, which deeply enrages most Poles, returned to the fore of bilateral relations in early September as well.

This confluence of factors served to catalyze the preexisting trends that were discovered by the previously cited surveys and led to the surprising situation where two-thirds of Poles want to deport conscription-aged Ukrainian males even though less than half support Ukraine continuing to fight Russia.

In other words, they want to send them to their deaths for a cause that they themselves no longer support, which hints at a vindictiveness towards them that’s only now being discussed by top officials.

Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz told an interviewer last week that:

“The fact is that our society is very shocked by the sight of young men from Ukraine driving the best cars, spending weekends in five-star hotels. And this is unfair to Poles, who contribute to healthcare, benefits, education, not to mention weapons supplies and other assistance.”

He himself also expressed resentment towards his state-level Ukrainian peers by accusing them of taking Polish aid for granted.

In his words, “We gave Ukraine military equipment worth over 15 billion złoty and we were the first to do so when others were wondering whether they could send anything. If we, as Poland, had not given them all those tanks, planes and other weapons, there would be no one to help today. And I have the feeling that the Ukrainian side does not remember this, is not aware that if it were not for this Polish help, they would not have reached the stage they are at today. This is not right.”

It therefore naturally follows that a growing number of Poles have become fed up with Ukrainian refugees and the proxy war after feeling that their country has been taken advantage of. Poles are a generous people, but they also have enough self-respect to not tolerate ingratitude from those who they help. Ukrainians and their state have spit in Poles’ faces for far too long, which is why most of the latter now want to throw those that have leeched off of them into the Russian meatgrinder as revenge. 

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

On Monday, Israeli Knesset members and senior government ministers attended a conference on re-establishing Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip that was held in southern Israel near the Gaza border.

The conference, titled “Preparing to Resettle Gaza,” was organized by the Israeli settler organization Nachala and members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party.

At least ten out of the 32 Likud party members in the Israeli Knesset were set to attend the conference, including May Golan, who is in Netanyahu’s government as the minister for Social Equality and the Advancement of the Status of Women.

In a speech at the rally, which drew hundreds of attendees, Golan vowed Palestinians in Gaza would face another “Nakba,” referring to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs when the modern state of Israel was formed in 1948.

“We will hit them where it hurts – their land,” Golan said, according to Haaretz. “Anyone who uses their plot of land to plan another Holocaust will receive from us, with God’s help, another Nakba that they will tell their children and their grandchildren about for the next 50 years.”

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, leader of the Jewish Power party, also delivered a speech at the conference, and he received a very warm welcome. Haaretz reported that attendees broke out in chants of “Look over here, it’s our next Prime Minister” and “Death penalty for terrorists,” referring to Ben Gvir’s calls to execute Palestinian prisoners to make room in Israeli prisons.

In his speech, Ben Gvir said, “We will encourage the voluntary transfer of all Gazan citizens. We will offer them the opportunity to move to other countries because that land belongs to us.”

Far-Right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir leads the crowd in song at the “Preparing to Resettle Gaza” Conference, which took place over two days on Israel’s southern border with Gaza.

Ben-Gvir was greeted by eager applause from the crowd. “We are the owners of the… pic.twitter.com/hbVP7XdTSK

— Rachel Fink (@RachelSFink) October 21, 2024

Ben Gvir and other proponents of conquering Gaza have framed their idea as “voluntary” for the Palestinians, but the Israeli military campaign has made most of Gaza uninhabitable. Palestinians in northern Gaza are currently facing Israeli evacuation orders to move to the south under the threat of death by military action or starvation.

Other Israeli ministers who attended the conference include Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Yitzhak Wasserlauf, the minister for the development of the Negev and Galilee.

Daniella Weiss, a leader of Nachala, vowed that Jewish settlements would begin popping up in Gaza within a year. “In less than a year, each one of you can call me and ask me if I succeeded in fulfilling my dream,” she told reporters at the conference. “Actually, you don’t even have to call me. You will witness how Jews go to Gaza and Arabs disappear from Gaza.”

Daniella Weiss, one of the leaders of the settlement movement, was a featured speaker at the “Preparing to Resettle Gaza” Conference which took place over two days on Israel’s border with Gaza. Speaking to foreign journalists, she vowed to renew the Jewish presence in Gaza within… pic.twitter.com/SFmNA8SZce

— Rachel Fink (@RachelSFink) October 21, 2024

Weiss also made it clear that her ambitions for Israeli expansion did not stop in Gaza or the West Bank. “The real borders of greater Israel are between the Euphrates River and the Nile.”

Haaretz recently reported that the Israeli government is not seeking to revive ceasefire talks with Hamas and is now pushing for the gradual annexation of large portions of the Gaza Strip.

Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

I’m part of a supper club that meets monthly. It was founded at the height of the lockdowns when everyone was being forced into masks and being muscled into getting the shot. This group resisted both, despite the imposing certainty of the mandates.

All these years later, the community is still bonded. Friendships formed and lasted. The culture is one of deep questioning. Each meeting is replete with incredulity toward official pronouncement, a shared perception that elite opinion and elite institutions were simply wrong. And not just about COVID but about everything.

It’s not a political group at all. Its central theme concerns the failure of conventional wisdom and all the ways in which legacy institutions preached error over several years. These days, as all polls have revealed, this view is widely held. Many of the most pressing trends of our time are about dislodging an old elite (in media, corporate life, government) and replacing them with people interested in new ways.

I’ve noticed a common feature among many of the rising stars that are displacing the falling stars of the old elites. They are much more humble about what they know and what they do not know. They are happy to admit it. The days of “I am the science” and “We are your source of truth” seem to be ending. The guru scientist and soothsaying academic have fallen from their perches of influence.

Replacing them is a new generation of thinkers who are happy to admit what they do not know. The other day, for example, Tucker Carlson said he often feels what is called imposter syndrome. This is the belief that every achievement is really just a lucky break, a sneaky feeling that we have temporarily pulled the wool over people’s eyes.

It’s a humble admission, one we should all appreciate. It’s a common feeling among anyone commonly described as a genius. Even Elon Musk must feel this. Ironically, the person who believes that the moniker of genius is unjust is the person most likely to deserve it.

The problem of constantly deciding whether we are great or terrible at what we do, toying with the belief that we are geniuses just before worrying that we will be exposed as frauds, is just part of life and a real sign of humility.

A good example comes from an account of a man who competed as a pianist in the amateur Van Cliburn contest in the 1990s:

“I haven’t felt this nervous before any recital and tell myself that I should be confident, having already made it through the previous rounds. But I can’t shake the fear that I’m a fraud who lucked into the finals while all the other finalists are pros, even if they’re called amateurs. An extra degree of scrutiny directed at me is attributable to the conspicuous nature of my profession [journalist], which is no consolation at the moment. Reverse psychology—I’m not a fraud, I’m a star—doesn’t help, either. Star, fraud—the only thing I conclude is that I should be focusing on the music.”

That article appeared in 1999, and the passage above is the one that stood out to me. It signifies that search that all of us make to define a sense of precisely who we are based on our skill level and, in turn, what to expect from others in their treatment of us. Mostly, however, it works in the opposite direction. We extract information from what others around us say about us and infuse that sense into our self-perceptions.

From little league baseball through one’s school years and all the way to professional life, the following happens to everyone. You do something amazing, and everyone sings your praises. But now you have a new problem: expectations are newly high for your performance. This is especially true if you have won or received a promotion or raise: Now you have to get out there and kill it every time, else you will be seen as undeserving.

There’s an added problem to being perceived as a genius. Others will want to tear you down and revel in your fall. Envy is the most hidden, but most deeply dangerous of the deadly sins. Those who envy victims are almost always surprised because they were expecting their achievement to be followed by accolades and promotion, not resentment and nefarious plots. But the only way to avoid envy is intolerable: never be excellent.

Elon faces this daily of course. But so do insurgent political candidates and newly popular media figures. The forces trying to tear them down are everywhere.

In poor societies, this is the common and tragic response. It’s also a feature of declining societies in which ever more people have money, power, and influence who have done nothing to merit either. They owe their status to legacy and inertia, and cling to it against all winds of change.

Today such entrenched elites exist in all sectors: the corporate world, government, academia, media, politics, nonprofits, and more. Everyone has encountered them. They are everywhere. There is a word to describe them: fakers.

The number one fear of a faker is being found out, so every day is spent in scheming and plotting to prevent that. This is why fakers surround themselves with people who are willing to be complicit in the coverup of incompetence, i.e., “Yes men” whose main skill is nodding in agreement. For this reason, fakers breed other fakers and promote them to flood the zone of fakes in hopes of hiding for longer.

They all develop what today is being called “testy” personalities which they deploy as tactics of intimidation, always with this habit of resenting anyone who questions their words and judgment. They are prickly because they have a grim truth to hide always: namely that they have not merited their status, title, power, or income, and possess a fraction of the abilities of the people over whom they rule.

In the corporate world, they love calling staff meetings because fakers have learned the art of time-killing blather to cover up for their fundamental incompetence. They have nothing better to do so they call many and make them last as long as possible.

Fakers loathe competence and punish it. They drip poison in people’s ears to stop the social and professional advancement of their betters. They drive out those with skill in an effort to avoid being shown up. In doing so, they are a source of quiet chaos all around them.

There is really no cure for this problem. Once a professional is promoted beyond his or her competence—due to family connections, personal relationships, identity visuals, indulging and exploiting undeserved credit and praise, or whatever—there is no going back. The only possible solution, and it is ultimately a compassionate one, is full professional termination. This is because they cannot be dialed back lest they seethe with resentment and plot retribution.

Of course that solution requires competent leadership in a position to make hard decisions, which is precisely what the fakers are working to prevent.

In the credit-soaked, bloated, and credential-obsessed economic structures of the 21st century, fakers are everywhere. They demoralize competent employees, demotivate hard work and improvement, foment distrust within and without, and ultimately wreck and discredit whole institutions.

The imposter syndrome, in contrast, is something felt by every truly competent person. To some extent, all reputations of geniuses are exaggerated. Despite the high reputations of the Wright Brothers, Alexander Graham Bell, and Eli Whitney, there is in fact an ongoing dispute about who was first in flight, who invented the telephone, and whether the cotton gin was actually improved much at all by Whitney’s machine.

Historians of invention have yet to discover any innovations that were genuinely the product of a single mind. What we find again and again is the phenomenon of Multiple Discovery, with many people competing for the title of the first. It is for this reason that Nobel Prizes are increasingly given to teams of researchers. It seems more accurate to say that genius is in the air and perceived by many different people in different places, even if they have never had contact with each other.

F.A. Hayek showed that the highest forms of intelligence do not live so much in individuals’ minds but in social processes and institutions that no single human mind can fully conceptualize. The result is an order that no man can accurately comprehend or describe, much less design. This is precisely the core of his defense of freedom in speech and action: we need this process to be adaptable to become ever smarter and more reflective of a multitude of intelligences that emerge from human action.

Where does that leave us as individuals? All we can hope to do is precisely what the pianist quoted above says: “I should be focusing on the music.” That is to say, do the best we can on the task in which we are engaged. You will have moments of genius and moments of failure, sometimes home runs and sometimes strikeouts, good performances and bad. Knowing this is neither a complex nor a syndrome; it is the stuff of life.

It is perfectly normal to worry that the plaudits one receives are not truly merited. The most successful musicians I’ve known are not the best; it’s just that they work harder to become successful. It’s the same with writers, scientists, engineers, or entrepreneurs. They are great because they focus on constant improvement.

The “natural talents” among us rarely blossom because they don’t have to work at it. At the same time, seeming disabilities become abilities because they motivate us to overcome them.

History will surely record that elite arrogance over the last four years has proven to be their undoing. In contrast, we might be watching the rise of a new generation of leaders in many fields who approach their craft with a different ethos: the humility to recognize one’s limits, a dedication to authenticity, and a passion for genuine excellence in the service of others. We can hope.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

The IRS on Oct. 22 unveiled the new federal income tax brackets for 2025.

As The Epoch Times’ Zachary Stieber reports, each bracket was changed, including the top one.

Single taxpayers making more than $636,350, or couples making more than $751,600, will be subject to a 37 percent tax rate.

That’s up from $609,350, and $731,200, respectively.

Here are the other new brackets, with the old income threshold in parentheses:

• 35 percent tax for singles making more than $250,525 ($243,725) and married couples making more than $501,050 ($487,450)

• 32 percent tax for singles making more than $197,300 ($191,950) and married couples making more than $394,600 ($383,900)

• 24 percent tax for singles making more than $103,350 ($100,525) and married couples making more than $206,700 $201,050()

• 22 percent tax for singles with incomes over $48,475 ($47,150) and married couples making more than $96,950 ($94,300)

• 12 percent tax for singles with incomes over $11,925 ($11,600) and married couples making more than $23,850 ($23,200)

• 10 percent tax for singles with incomes of $11,925 or less ($11,600 or less) and married couples making $23,850 or less ($23,200 or less)

The IRS also said it is increasing the standard deduction for individuals by $400 to $15,000, and for married couples by $800 to $30,000.

Authored by Bruce Davidson via The Brownstone Institute,

The excessive medical response to the Covid pandemic made one thing abundantly clear: Medical consumers really ought to do their own research into the health issues that impact them. Furthermore, it is no longer enough simply to seek out a “second opinion” or even a “third opinion” from doctors. They may well all be misinformed or biased. Furthermore, this problem appears to predate the Covid phenomenon.

A striking example of that can be found in the recent history of prostate cancer testing and treatment, which, for personal reasons, has become a subject of interest to me. In many ways, it strongly resembles the Covid calamity, where misuse of the PCR test resulted in harming the supposedly Covid-infected with destructive treatments.

Two excellent books on the subject illuminate the issues involved in prostate cancer. One is Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers by Dr. Mark Scholz and Ralph Blum. Dr. Scholtz is executive director of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute in California. The other is The Great Prostate Hoax by Richard Ablin and Ronald Piana. Richard Ablin is a pathologist who invented the PSA test but has become a vociferous critic of its widespread use as a diagnostic tool for prostate cancer.

Mandatory yearly PSA testing at many institutions opened up a gold mine for urologists, who were able to perform lucrative biopsies and prostatectomies on patients who had PSA test numbers above a certain level. However, Ablin has insisted that “routine PSA screening does far more harm to men than good.” Moreover, he maintains that the medical people involved in prostate screening and treatment represent “a self-perpetuating industry that has maimed millions of American men.”

Even during approval hearings for the PSA test, the FDA was well aware of the problems and dangers. For one thing, the test has a 78% false positive rate. An elevated PSA level can be caused by various factors besides cancer, so it is not really a test for prostate cancer. Moreover, a PSA test score can spur frightened men into getting unnecessary biopsies and harmful surgical procedures.

One person who understood the potential dangers of the test well was the chairman of the FDA’s committee, Dr. Harold Markovitz, who decided whether to approve it. He declared, “I’m afraid of this test. If it is approved, it comes out with the imprimatur of the committee…as pointed out, you can’t wash your hands of guilt. . .all this does is threaten a whole lot of men with prostate biopsy…it’s dangerous.”

In the end, the committee did not give unqualified approval to the PSA test but only approved it “with conditions.”

However, subsequently, the conditions were ignored.

Nevertheless, the PSA test became celebrated as the route to salvation from prostate cancer. The Postal Service even circulated a stamp promoting yearly PSA tests in 1999. Quite a few people became wealthy and well-known at the Hybritech company, thanks to the Tandem-R PSA test, their most lucrative product.

In those days, the corrupting influence of the pharmaceutical companies on the medical device and drug approval process was already apparent. In an editorial for the Journal of the American Medical Association (quoted in Albin and Piana’s book), Dr. Marcia Angell wrote, “The pharmaceutical industry has gained unprecedented control over the evaluation of its products…there’s mounting evidence that they skew the research they sponsor to make their drugs look better and safer.” She also authored the book The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It.

A cancer diagnosis often causes great anxiety, but in actuality, prostate cancer develops very slowly compared to other cancers and does not often pose an imminent threat to life. A chart featured in Scholz and Blum’s book compares the average length of life of people whose cancer returns after surgery. In the case of colon cancer, they live on average two more years, but prostate cancer patients live another 18.5 years.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, prostate cancer patients do not die from it but rather from something else, whether they are treated for it or not. In a 2023 article about this issue titled “To Treat or Not to Treat,” the author reports the results of a 15-year study of prostate cancer patients in the New England Journal of Medicine. Only 3% of the men in the study died of prostate cancer, and getting radiation or surgery for it did not seem to offer much statistical benefit over “active surveillance.”

Dr. Scholz confirms this, writing that “studies indicate that these treatments [radiation and surgery] reduce mortality in men with Low and Intermediate-Risk disease by only 1% to 2% and by less than 10% in men with High-Risk disease.”

Nowadays prostate surgery is a dangerous treatment choice, but it is still widely recommended by doctors, especially in Japan. Sadly, it also seems to be unnecessary. One study cited in Ablin and Piana’s book concluded that “PSA mass screening resulted in a huge increase in the number of radical prostatectomies. There is little evidence for improved survival outcomes in the recent years…”

However, a number of urologists urge their patients not to wait to get prostate surgery, threatening them with imminent death if they do not. Ralph Blum, a prostate cancer patient, was told by one urologist, “Without surgery you’ll be dead in two years.” Many will recall that similar death threats were also a common feature of Covid mRNA-injection promotion.

Weighing against prostate surgery are various risks, including death and long-term impairment, since it is a very difficult procedure, even with newer robotic technology. According to Dr. Scholz, about 1 in 600 prostate surgeries result in the death of the patient. Much higher percentages suffer from incontinence (15% to 20%) and impotence after surgery. The psychological impact of these side effects is not a minor problem for many men.

In light of the significant risks and little proven benefit of treatment, Dr. Scholz censures “the urology world’s persistent overtreatment mindset.” Clearly, excessive PSA screening led to inflicting unnecessary suffering on many men. More recently, the Covid phenomenon has been an even more dramatic case of medical overkill.

Ablin and Piana’s book makes an observation that also sheds a harsh light on the Covid medical response: “Isn’t cutting edge innovation that brings new medical technology to the market a good thing for health-care consumers? The answer is yes, but only if new technologies entering the market have proven benefit over the ones they replace.”

That last point especially applies to Japan right now, where people are being urged to receive the next-generation mRNA innovation–the self-amplifying mRNA Covid vaccine. Thankfully, a number seem to be resisting this time.

China may have failed once again to stabilize its moribund housing market and flagging economy, with its latest superficial attempt to stimulate consumer demand by releasing another modest trickle of overdue but insufficient monetary and fiscal stimulus measures, but it is certainly not giving up on hopes to prop up the market at almost any cost.

Following relentless prodding from the central government, share buybacks on mainland China’s biggest exchanges have soared to a record high this year as Beijing pushes for companies to return cash to shareholders as part of its efforts to revive a flagging stock market.

According to the FT, there have been Rmb235bn ($33bn) in buybacks across mainland-listed shares so far in 2024, more than double last year’s total and far surpassing the previous record of Rmb133bn in 2022, according to financial data provider Wind.

The scramble to repurchase shares comes as China’s government unleashes its biggest round of economic stimulus since the Covid-19 pandemic, which however has again been seen as insufficient by the market. Beijing is keen to boost investor sentiment, underscoring growing urgency to restore confidence in an economy hit hard by a property sector crisis and weak consumer demand. The government is stepping up efforts to hit its year-end GDP growth target of 5%.

While the benchmark CSI 300 index had risen as much as 20% over the past month amid Beijing’s bid to breathe new life into its equity market after years of dismal performance, it has since given up much of the gains as expectations of even more stimulus measures did not materialize.

Goldman’s China strategist Kinger Lau argued that buybacks made “economic sense” for companies with cash to spare given how far Chinese share prices had fallen, and added that such a move could also bolster the government’s coffers when it held big stakes in companies.

The surge in buybacks began even before the Chinese authorities announced Rmb300bn in central bank loans to fund share repurchases last week; that news however will surely supercharge the buybacks even more.

More than 20 Chinese companies, including state oil group Sinopec, have announced share buyback plans exceeding Rmb10bn since the announcement of the central bank scheme on Friday, according to a Financial Times calculation based on exchange filings.

Jason Bedford, a China banking analyst formerly at UBS and asset manager Bridgewater, said Beijing was seeking an equity rally by encouraging buybacks. “Clearly, the government has been pushing this throughout the year,” he said.

Kin Chan, chief investment officer at Argyle Street Management in Hong Kong, said that China was following “a Japanese approach, which is telling companies to do share buybacks”.

“As a stock market player, this is wonderful, but does this solve the economic problem? I have no idea,” he said.

Meanwhile, as China is coming up with feat of financial engineering to prop up its flagging stocks in hopes of creating a virtuous wealth effect cycle, in the US insiders are doing just the opposite.

At a time when stocks have had no shortage of buyers, as even formerly bearish hedge funds capitulate and unleash the biggest buying spree of stocks since 2021, joining retail investors and record US buybacks, all helping propel US stocks to a sixth straight up week, US company insiders are dumping in near record amounts.

As Bloomberg notes, while business leaders were busy last week offering reassuring earnings guidance, underneath the rosy outlook was a different trend: They were selling stock… which has traditionally been a major red flag as these are the people who best know the inner workings of the companies they run.

As shown below, a gauge of insider sentiment, one that tallies the number of sellers versus buyers, is poised to hit the highest monthly reading in more than three years, data compiled by the Washington Service show.

The figures chime with various high-profile sales that have made headlines recently, including Warren Buffett’s unloading of Apple and Bank of America stock, as well as sales by Nvidia insiders, including CEO Jensen Huang.

Granted, some of the exits no doubt have nothing to do with the business outlook, driven instead by the need for cash to buy a house or pay for kids’ tuition. And the stock rally has been mostly invulnerable for months amid Federal Reserve interest rate cuts and generally good tidings on the economy and earnings.

Still, the last time the insider indicator shot up, in July, it was a precursor to market pain, with the S&P 500 subsequently falling 8%.

Authored by Eric Lendrum via American Greatness,

The voter rolls in Michigan claim that there are 8.4 million people registered to vote in the crucial swing state, even though the state’s total population is almost half a million less than that.

According to the Daily Wire, the state of Michigan had previously been sued by the Republican National Committee (RNC) over the extremely inflated voter rolls, and other concerns regarding election integrity.

But Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D-Mich.) dismissed such concerns in a statement on Wednesday, claiming with no evidence that these lawsuits “lay the groundwork to overturn the results of the election if they don’t like them.”

“The RNC and its members are concerned that Defendants’ failure to comply with the NVRA’s voter-list maintenance obligations undermines the integrity of elections by increasing the opportunity for ineligible voters or voters intent on fraud to cast ballots,” the RNC’s lawsuit states.

A spokeswoman for Benson’s office, Angela Benander, even admitted that there are at least 606,800 inactive voters currently on the rolls, but they will not be purged until 2027. Voters who become ineligible include those who have moved to another state, those who have mail returned from their address as “undeliverable,” and voters who do not vote in two or more consecutive federal elections.

“The RNC relies on registration lists to estimate voter turnout, which informs the number of staff the RNC needs in a given jurisdiction, the number of volunteers needed to contact voters, and how much the RNC will spend on paid voter contacts,” the RNC’s lawsuit continued.

“If voter registration lists include names of voters who should no longer be on the list, the RNC may spend more resources on mailers, knocking on doors, and otherwise trying to contact voters, or it may misallocate its scarce resources among different jurisdictions.”

In total, 78 of Michigan’s 83 counties appear to have more registered voters than residents of voting age.

The largest county in the state, Wayne County – where the city of Detroit is located – has only 1.3 million residents of voting age, but 1.4 million registered voters, according to data from the U.S. Census.

Another example is Genessee County, with 351,000 registered voters but less than 300,000 residents.

Polaris shares fell in premarket trading after the company, known for selling ATVs, UTVs, jet skis, and snowmobiles, posted disappointing third-quarter earnings. The company also cut its full-year earnings per share and sales forecast, citing sagging demand for outdoor vehicles due to elevated interest rates. 

“As consumer confidence and retail demand remain challenging, we have maintained our focus on managing dealer inventory and delivering better operational efficiency,” Polaris CEO Mike Speetzen wrote in a press release. 

Polaris reported sales of $1.72 billion, down 23% YoY, missing the Bloomberg estimate of $1.77 billion. Sales were down modestly in off-road vehicles, motorcycles, and pontoons. 

Here’s a snapshot of third-quarter earnings (courtesy of Bloomberg):  

• Sales $1.72 billion, -23% y/y, estimate $1.77 billion (Bloomberg Consensus)

• Off Road sales $1.40 billion, -24% y/y, estimate $1.41 billion

• On Road sales $236.5 million, -13% y/y, estimate $241.6 million

• Marine sales $85.9 million, -36% y/y, estimate $133.7 million

• Gross profit margin 20.6% vs. 22.6% y/y, estimate 21%

• Cash and cash equivalents $291.3 million, -1.4% y/y, estimate $337.8 millio

• Adjusted EPS from continuing operations 73c, estimate 89c

Visualizing Polaris’ quarterly revenues… The cheap money era of Covid, plus folks moving out of cities to resort towns and or just rural America, sparked a massive demand for outdoor vehicles. As the Federal Reserve tightened monetary policy, which sent interest rates to the moon, affordability for these outdoor grown-up toys worsened, thus curbing demand.

As a result of a challenging market, one in which high interest rates have curbed consumer spending on jetskis, RZRs, and snowmobiles, Polaris had to lower its full-year earnings per share and sales guidance:

• Sees adjusted EPS -65%, saw -56% to -62%

• Sees sales -20%, saw -17% to -20%

Polaris explained more about its reasoning behind lowering its 2024 business outlook:

The company updated its 2024 sales outlook to be down approximately 20 percent relative to 2023 versus its previous outlook of down 17 to 20 percent relative to 2023. The company now expects adjusted diluted EPS attributed to Polaris Inc. common shareholders to be down approximately 65 percent relative to 2023 versus the prior outlook of down 56 to 62 percent.

In markets, Polaris shares in New York are down 7%. On the year, shares are down 15% (as of Monday’s close). Shares are hovering at levels last seen since right before the Covid crash. 

Also, watch MasterCraft Boat, MarineMax, Camping World, Brunswick, and Malibu Boats. 

Polaris is a proxy of consumer health. Certainly, high interest rates and elevated inflation have crimped demand for ATVs, UTVs, and jet skis. The broad theme here is that a consumer slowdown continues to worsen.