Month: November 2024

Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

A top NATO military official said that NATO forces would have deployed to Ukraine to drive Russian soldiers from the country if Russia did not have nuclear weapons. 

Chair of the NATO Military Committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, explained to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Prague Defense Summit in the Czech Republic that Russia’s nuclear weapons are deterring a NATO deployment to Ukraine.

“I am absolutely sure if the Russians did not have nuclear weapons, we would have been in Ukraine, kicking them out,” he stated. 

Bauer said the challenge for the West is finding where Russia’s redlines on nuclear use are, noting that Washington mistakenly miscalculated that sending tanks and F-16s to Ukraine were the Kremlin’s redlines. 

Admiral Bauer was discussing the difference between the Ukraine conflict and other NATO wars such as the Afghanistan occupation. He stated the main difference between Moscow and Kabul is Russia’s nuclear stockpile.

In Afghanistan, American and NATO forces quickly forced the Taliban from Kabul in 2001. Then, the Western alliance engaged in a two-decade nation-building project while the Taliban fought using insurgent tactics. 

The top NATO official went on to say the Afghan War was not of strategic importance. “Afghanistan was never of strategic importance. If we’re really honest Afghanistan was not of strategic importance.”

He continued, “We spent 20 years there and we did a lot of things and people lost their lives but if you ask the question, ‘was it of strategic importance?’ In Afghanistan, the answer is no.”

Bauer argued that Ukraine is strategically important to NATO because the bloc is defending the “rules-based international order.” While the alliance has denounced Moscow for invading Ukraine, it has been silent as its core member has lavished Israel with arms as it conducts a genocide in Gaza and invades Lebanon.

* * *

Watch Adm. Rob Bauer’s full remarks below in “Sustaining the Long War: Money, Manpower and Public Support”:

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

What is evil? For the average person it’s a difficult concept to explain but most of us know it when we see it. Every once in a while there’s an event which strikes the collective consciousness in such a way that it becomes deeply symbolic. Sometimes these events symbolize ultimate good, and sometimes they symbolize ultimate evil. The public is affected by these things in ways they didn’t expect and might not even comprehend, but they are archetypal and profound nonetheless.

In the wake of Donald Trumps election victory and the jubilant celebration some people might overlook one of these recent events; the state assassination of a man’s pet squirrel and the national anger that followed.  Why does the death of a squirrel matter? It’s not only about the squirrel, it’s about the context and what it means for our civilization at large.

In a progressive controlled state (New York), Mark Longo ran a legal animal sanctuary for abandoned and injured animals. He promoted the sanctuary on social media with videos featuring his long time pet, Peanut the Squirrel. Longo rescued Peanut after his mother was killed in an accident and he raised the animal for seven years.

Peanut became internet famous as the mascot for “P’Nut’s Freedom Farm”, and he was clearly never a threat to anyone.  So, why after seven years does the New York Department of Environmental Conservation suddenly target Mark Longo for a criminal raid which resulted in the seizure of some of his animals (including Peanut) which were then immediately euthanized?

The State of NY indicates that SOMEONE made multiple reports against Longo, accusing him of violations including keeping animals with rabies. They also claimed Peanut had bitten people. No evidence has been presented to show these accusations to be true. And, as with all government bureaucracy, the state sent thugs to terrorize the poor man and his family instead of simply talking to him.

Whoever set Longo up did their homework, because accusations of rabies lead to the immediate death of an animal. The CDC requires that an animal be put down before samples can be sent for rabies testing. Peanut never had a chance.

So far there is no confirmed information on who actually lied and set up Longo for the raid. What we do know is that the person responsible for greenlighting the raid is State DEC officer Karen Przyklek (yes, an actual Karen).

Regardless of who swatted Longo and his animal sanctuary, it was the State of New York and the DEC that was responsible for handling the case and they did so in the worst way possible.

According to Longo they treated him like a drug dealer and then they killed his beloved pets without telling him and without due process. Longo and Peanut were guilty until proven innocent.

I have to say, when it comes to my pets I take a hard line position: They are a part of my family. Hurt my pets and I’ll hurt you. I don’t care what the law says. I don’t care about your rationale. Retribution is coming.

I think there’s a lot of people out there that agree with this sentiment and most of them are conservative. There is also clearly an element of government overreach here that made the death of Peanut a catalyst for political debate between conservatives and progressives over state power. Leftists love the state and defend it blindly. Conservatives are suspicious of the state and seek to contain it.

But there’s something more going on underneath the surface that I want to address, and that’s the emotional and spiritual side of injustice. Why target Longo? What was he doing to anyone? As far as I can tell he was bringing happiness to people while giving a home to animals in need. Why target a loved pet? What motivates certain people to do these things? What motivates the government to do these things?

I have pondered these questions for many years and like most people I first turned to innocuous explanations. Maybe these terrible situations are a result of simple misunderstandings? Maybe the complexity of bureaucracy leads to unintended consequences? Maybe the system is broken but the people within it generally have good intentions?

None of these things ultimately explain something like the killing of Peanut. Instead, I can only come to one conclusion: There are very evil people in the world and the state often colludes with those people to destroy good things.  Their goal is to seek out any and all goodness in the world and suffocate it. And this is what has so many people upset about a pet squirrel.

One of my favorite television shows of all time is a series from the 1990s called ‘Millennium’ starring Lance Henriksen. The show explores the idea of physical evil; not evil as an archetypal concept or a social disease, but evil as a tangible predatory entity and how it seeks to destroy mankind.

In that series one of my favorite episodes is called ‘A Room With No View’. A character by the name of Lucy Butler (Lucifer), kidnaps and imprisons promising children with unique qualities. She then psychologically tortures them until they agree to give up on their dreams. When they promise to turn to a life of mediocrity, she sets them free because they are no longer a threat to the machinations of evil.

For me this depiction of evil was a revelation. It wasn’t the usual cackling, mustache twirling devil of most popular media, trying to get people to commit a mass shooting or commit suicide or start a world war. Rather, this was a subtle and insidious evil that inspires people to simply give up trying to do good. This devil wasn’t a reactionary randomly attempting to create chaos today; he was planning generations ahead and making the future increasingly less hopeful.

It’s the kind of thing we see from narcissists and psychopaths all the time – That desire to extinguish positive motivation and leave the people around them in drudgery. That malicious drive to make good people stop doing good things and grinding them down to nothing over the course of years or decades. Evil is often subversive and it plays the long game.

When I hear progressives defend the state of NY and their actions against Longo, I can’t help but be reminded of the idea of evil as a subtle living force. I saw a lot of leftists on social media trying to diminish public concerns about the event by making false comparisons. They say conservatives “care more about a dead squirrel than they cared about the death of George Floyd.”

I say yes, we do, because Peanut the Squirrel was more valuable to the world than George Floyd.

Peanut was doing good. Even though he was just an animal he was doing far more good than the majority of leftists combined. We’re worse off without Peanut, we’re better off without career criminals like George Floyd. And I think it says a lot about a group that idolizes a man who robbed a pregnant woman at gunpoint while they simultaneously ignore government abuse of power when it’s inconvenient for their political agenda.

My feeling is that, for whatever reason, Mark Longo and Peanut caught the eye of evil people and those people saw a positive social effort that they immediately wanted to snuff out. And one thing I’ve noticed about evil people is that they gravitate to other evil people. They seem to find each other in a crowded room. They work together across great distances and help each other in the destruction of innocents.

(How else do you explain the rapid spread of trans indoctrination of children, for example?)

In other words, when you set out to do something positive for the world or enact legitimate solutions to real problems, just understand that you WILL eventually be targeted. You probably won’t know why. It probably won’t make any logical sense. And it will be people you’ve probably never met in your life or people that you barely know. Maybe they’re demons in disguise. Maybe they are possessed. Maybe they symbolize a twisted test to see if you’re truly dedicated to your cause.

When these challenges arrive and evil seeks you out, know that it will use whatever means at its disposal to sabotage you and that usually includes government. To confirm how evil your society truly is, all you have to do is determine who the government chooses to help and who the government chooses to hurt. If the government regularly comes to the aid of people with ill intent while stepping on the necks of those with pure hearts, then you know that your society is on the doorstep to hell.

*  *  *

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

It’s easy to laugh off people who constantly complain that the government is watching their every move and has hands in their wallets. Then, you stumble upon a story like Jeff Landry’s. 

When Landry set off for a camping trip with his family near Virginia’s Luray Caverns in early October, he expected to pay some tolls – especially because he had his RV.

Traveling from Falls Church with his wife and youngest child following in a minivan, they took I-66’s express lanes during peak hours, expecting to pay $30 or so each way in tolls. But to his surprise, when the EZ-Pass charges appeared days later, the bill totaled an eye-popping $569.50 for the roundtrip, according to MSN/MotorBiscuit.

At first, Jeff thought the bill was a mistake, but after checking the toll website, he realized it was accurate.

The MSN/MotorBiscuit writeup says that his three-axle RV was charged a premium due to its size, but $569.50 for a 22-mile round trip felt excessive to him. He hadn’t anticipated how much dynamic pricing could drive up tolls for larger vehicles during peak hours.

It turns out…the I-66 express lanes, managed by I-66 Express Mobility Partners, adjust toll rates based on traffic demand, charging drivers more to bypass congestion.

Larger vehicles, like Jeff’s 1997 Holiday Rambler RV, incur even higher tolls due to their size and road impact. According to a toll operator’s spokesperson, Jeff’s RV wouldn’t even qualify to use certain other toll lanes in Virginia, so the high charges are firm.

The writeup notes that drivers unfamiliar with toll pricing can easily misjudge costs, as Jeff did.

It says to avoid similar surprises, plan your trip to avoid peak hours, when toll rates are highest; traveling during off-peak times can significantly reduce toll charges. Additionally, check your vehicle’s toll classification, especially if you’re driving a larger, multi-axle vehicle, which typically incurs higher tolls. Lastly, explore alternative routes.

While non-express lanes may add some travel time, they can save large vehicle drivers hundreds of dollars. For Jeff, the express lane shaved only 20 minutes off his trip—an advantage that, in retrospect, didn’t justify the steep toll.

Or, maybe just stay home next time…

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

There are reasons to doubt WaPo’s report…

The Washington Post’s (WaPo) report alleging that Trump called Putin the Thursday after he won the election and told him not to escalate the conflict was contradicted by both the Kremlin and Kiev. The first called it “pure fiction” while the second said that it was “unaware” of the call despite allegedly being informed of it. The Trump team hasn’t commented on it at the time of writing. Nevertheless, the report’s timeframe raises questions about its credibility, which will now be elaborated on.

Putin participated in his traditional Q&A session that evening at the Valdai Club’s annual meeting, which lasted until around midnight. He claimed not to have talked to Trump by that time but said that he’d be interested in speaking with him if he calls.

If WaPo’s report is correct, then it means that Putin either talked to Trump before the aforesaid event but lied about it or that he talked to him sometime afterwards but before 8am Moscow time, which would be midnight of the next day at Mar-a-Lago.

It can only be speculated why Putin would lie about this if that’s indeed what happened, which is unlikely, and it’s also equally unlikely that he’d agree to have a detailed discussion with Trump between midnight and 8am in the morning after the prior evening’s long Q&A session. After all, these sorts of calls aren’t impromptu but are arranged ahead of time, and Putin could always have rescheduled. Therefore, WaPo’s report is probably fake news, thus making one wonder why it was published in the first place.

One possibility is that someone on his team was tasked with introducing the report’s two narratives, that Trump told Putin not to escalate but also informed Ukraine of the call too, into the discourse. This could have been done to test the water by gauging their reactions to what he might have planned to do. Another possibility is that subversive elements close to him wanted to undermine his planned call. And finally, the last possibility is that it was made up, whether by WaPo or whoever else for whatever reason.

In the order that they were shared, the first “trial run” theory would have shown that Russia is uncomfortable with being told what to do while Ukraine doesn’t want to be left out of the loop. As for the second, both might now know what to expect, but Trump could also switch it up to surprise them. Regarding the last one, it drove traffic to WaPo’s site and reaffirmed the perception of them as one of the preferred outlets for insiders to leak to, but it had no noticeable effect beyond that.

Looking forward, the first official Putin-Trump call (whenever it may be and assuming that WaPo’s report is fake news as was argued) will probably see the returning American leader sharing more details with his Russian counterpart about exactly what he has in mind for ending the Ukrainian Conflict. Readers can learn more about what that might look like here, here, and here. It’ll take more than one call to achieve this, most likely at least one in-person meeting too, but everything is moving in that direction.

Mike Huckabee, announced Tuesday as the incoming Trump administration’s designated US Ambassador to Israel, spoke to Israel’s Army Radio in a short interview Wednesday morning.

He issued some surprisingly bold statements, amid controversy from some corners of US Congress who are alarmed at the choice, given he has long been among the most staunch and hardline supporters of Israel. He spelled out that he is on board with a complete Israeli annexation of the occupied West Bank, if that’s what Trump policy leaders decide.

“I’m kind of in shock. It’s been an unusual and wonderful day all at the same time. And I’m just incredibly honored that the president would ask me to serve in this capacity,” Huckabee said at the start of the interview.

The Israeli Army show host probed and pressed him on what might be the most forward-looking changes that President-elect Donald Trump might bring to US-Israel relations.

Currently, there are a handful of hardline Israeli ministers who have gone so far as to call for declaring the West Bank as Israeli sovereign territory.

Among the most outspoken are Finance Minister Betzalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. Smotrich recently declared that “now is the time” to declare Israeli sovereignty over Palestinian territories, especially the West Bank.

Huckabee in the Wednesday morning interview, which appears to be his first since being tapped as Israeli ambassador, began with “I have been, as you know, a frequent visitor to Judea and Samaria.” His reference was to what is internationally known as the West Bank. Israel chooses to use the ancient biblical names of Judea and Samaria.

“I also very much believe that the people of Israel deserve a secure and safe country, and anything I can do that will help accommodate that is going to be a great privilege for me,” he added.

But that’s when Army Radio’s Yanir Kozin – sensing that Huckabee was choosing his words and response very carefully, again pressed Huckabee. The former Arkansas governor was asked what his true opinion on the matter of Israel taking over the West Bank, and he responded as follows:

“Well, of course. And you know, I won’t make the policy. I will carry out the policy of the president. But he has already demonstrated in his first term that there’s never been an American president that has been more helpful in securing, uh, an understanding of the sovereignty of Israel from the moving of the embassy, recognition of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem as the capital. No one has done more than President Trump. And I fully expect that will continue,” said Huckabee.

As for the question of recognition of any future settlements in the Gaza Strip, where the army is in the midst of a more than year-long anti-Hamas operation, Huckabee explained, “Well, I haven’t had time to process that…As I say, today has been a pretty intense day of just fielding hundreds, literally hundreds of calls, emails, text messages.”

He continued, “So, you know, I don’t want to make any comments about policy because those won’t be mine to make. That’ll be the president’s. And it will be my job to carry out the policy that he prescribes.”

Interestingly and controversially, some Israeli officials have hinted at Tel Aviv’s potential pursuit of a ‘Greater Israel’ project – something which has been talked about openly since the 1980s. American neocon policy officials have also talked about this possibility since the 1990s.

A French language documentary recently got Smotrich on record as strongly suggesting he would like to eventually see Israel’s border expand to Damascus: 

Smotrich stated that “it is written that the future of Jerusalem is to expand to Damascus,” adding ominously “only Jerusalem, until Damascus.”

Such rhetoric from top-ranking Israeli officials is sure to only perpetuate the war. Israel is not only at war in Gaza, but is conducting a ground and aerial offensive in southern Lebanon, with strikes extending even into the north and central of the country, with heavy strikes on Beirut. The last week has also witnessed at least four significant air raids of Syria as well, mostly focused on the Damascus suburbs, where Israel says Iran’s military has a presence.

Authored by Peter Schiff via SchiffSovereign.com,

Well, inflation is up again. You’re probably not surprised, and neither are we.

Over the past few months, in fact, we’ve repeated again and again that inflation will keep rising, and even identified some strange reasons why.

Remember back during the early days of the pandemic when used car prices went through the roof? Supply chain dysfunction and stay-at-home orders prevented the big auto manufacturers from producing too many new cars. So, demand for used cars surged… and used car prices shot to the moon.

But used car prices eventually started to fall back to earth. And throughout this year, the government inflation reports showed steep drops in used car prices– like 10 to 12% year-over-year declines.

We made two key points about this:

1) The big drop in used car prices was essentially dragging down the inflation average. Other prices, like housing, medical care, etc. were still rising by 5% or more. But after averaging in the negative 10% used car price declines, the overall inflation rate seemed to be falling.

2) We also said this would be temporary. Used cars could only fall for so long before they reached ‘normal’ levels. And once that happened, inflation would start to rise again.

This appears to have now happened.

During the summer, for example, used car prices fell 10.9% year-over-year in the month of July. Then in August, the year-over-year decline decelerated to -10.4%. Then the following month to -5.1%. Well, the October data was released just this morning, and used cars index fell 3.4%.

In other words, we’re almost at the end of the ‘used car deflation’ benefit that dragged down the government’s inflation report. So, it’s no coincidence that we also see inflation once again rising, from 2.3% in September to now 2.6% in October.

And there are plenty of categories that are WAY more that 2.6%, especially the things that people buy on a regular basis. Health insurance is up 6.8%. Car insurance is up 14%. Airfare is up 4.1%. Housing costs are up 5.2%. Daycare is up 6%.

Sure, there are obviously categories where prices have fallen. And congratulations if you were in the market for a men’s sport coat last month– you paid 5.9% less. Plus, the all-important “dishes and flatware” category plunged 7.4%.

But these hardly make up for the big price hikes in the key categories that are essential to most people.

This is what makes the Fed’s policy actions so bizarre.

Last week they cut rates, again, for the second time this cycle… which is the OPPOSITE of what a central bank would normally do in the face of rising inflation.

In the same way that they pretended inflation was “transitory” throughout 2021, they are now asserting with equal vigor that the inflation beast has been tamed.

They’re so full of self-congratulatory hubris, in fact, that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell stated that he will refuse to step down if Donald Trump demands his resignation.

Bear in mind, Powell is the guy who totally missed inflation in 2021. I mean, he was MISTER Transitory. He failed to act in a timely manner and waited until mid-2022 to start hiking rates in earnest. He then failed to predict any negative consequences from the rate hikes– including the meltdown in the US banking system.

Powell even testified before Congress– just TWO DAYS before Silicon Valley Bank went bust last year– that he saw “nothing in the data” to suggest there were any risks to the Fed’s monetary policy decisions.

I would also point out that during Powell’s chairmanship, two of the most senior Fed officials were found to have been personally profiting from their monetary policy decisions through questionably timed stock trades. It was almost as if Nancy Pelosi was running the joint.

So, Powell– who has been consistently wrong in the most remarkable ways– now insists that he will NOT step down. Apparently, HE and HE ALONE can lead the Federal Reserve. And we’ve seen that arrogance before from Joe Biden, Tony Fauci, etc. It’s not a good look and doesn’t bode well for the Fed.

All that aside, it’s pretty clear that the Fed is in a bind. Inflation is rising, so they should realistically hike rates. But interest rates– even at current levels– are killing the federal government.

The US spent an unbelievable $1.1 trillion in the last fiscal year paying interest on the national debt. That will almost certainly increase for this current fiscal year. And if rates stay where they are now, the total interest bill will exceed $2 trillion in a few years.

That’s a pretty bad situation considering that interest rates are still relatively cheap on a historical basis.

But it’s not just the federal government. Current interest rates are also bad for banks.

Remember that banks across the United States bought mountains of Treasury bonds during the pandemic– at a time when interest rates were at record lows, and those bonds yielded as little as 5 basis points (i.e. 0.05%).

Thanks to the Fed’s interest rate hikes, those banks’ bond portfolios have tanked in value. (When interest rates go up, bonds lose value.) In fact, across the entire US banking system, the total unrealized bond losses exceed $500 BILLION. That’s about 20% of the total capital in the US banking system.

Naturally banks don’t want to take that hit. And the only way to unwind those losses is for interest rates to fall, i.e. the bonds once again increase in value. So, yeah, banks desperately want rate cuts too.

But the most important one is the Fed itself.

Just like banks across the country bought US government bonds during the pandemic, the Federal Reserve bought literally TRILLIONS of dollars of bonds. And their interest rate hikes have caused unbelievable losses to the Fed’s own bond portfolio.

How big are their losses? Roughly ONE TRILLION dollars.

In other words, the Fed is wildly, woefully insolvent. And at this point, they’re just out for self-preservation. Cutting rates is the only way to reduce those unrealized losses and prop up their solvency, even if that means more inflation… or even stagflation that could be worse than the 1970s.

That is especially significant since, during his last press conference, Powell admitted that the Fed has no contingency plan for stagflation. They’re not even thinking about the risk. They’re just focused on saving themselves at your expense.

President-elect Donald Trump made public safety and national security a central element of his campaign, ensuring the American people that illegal aliens would be deported. 

On Monday, incoming “border czar,” Tom Homan, told “Fox & Friends” hosts, “Public safety threats and national security threats will be the priority…they pose the most danger to this country.” 

Homan said, “Where do we find most victims of sex trafficking and forced labor trafficking? At worksites…” 

Homan’s comment about the potential for large-scale worksite raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents next year reminded us of a note we shared with readers in March titled “How Shadowy Network Of NGOs Supplies Mega-Corporations With Migrants To Exploit Cheap Labor.”

Earlier this year, Bloomberg paraded Turkish billionaire businessman and founder of the Chobani yogurt empire, Hamdi Ulukaya, a top Kamala Harris supporter, who, according to public records data, is one of the officers of the Tent Partnership for Refugees, an advisory nonprofit that companies use to work with resettlement agencies, staffing agencies, and other nonprofits, to source cheap migrant labor. 

In March, Ulukaya explained to Bloomberg that “employing refugees and committing to their successful onboarding is what’s driving Chobani’s success” and allowed it to double its earnings in the first nine months of 2023. 

A separate Bloomberg note showed that Tyson Foods partnered with Ulukaya’s Tent for cheap labor. As of March, Tyson employed a whopping 42,000 immigrants among its 120,000 US workforce. 

“We would like to employ another 42,000 if we could find them,” Garrett Dolan, who leads Tyson’s efforts to eliminate employment barriers, said in March. 

What’s very clear is that migrants did not aimlessly walk across the wide-open southern border and then find instant job placements that displaced and replaced blue-collar native-born workers. There is a massive NGO network, internationally and domestically, that channels unvetted migrants from foreign lands into US factories.

Suppose the Trump administration wants to learn more about potential worksites that have hired migrants over the years.

In that case, Tent boasts a massive network of 400 companies hiring migrants.

Here’s the partial list…

Homan’s team will have a field day with Tent’s list. 

America can no longer afford to have ten-plus million unvetted illegal aliens running around the nation.

Mega-corporations that have displaced US workers with migrants over the years are likely to face significant labor challenges next year if worksite raids are conducted by ICE. Perhaps it’s time to consider hiring American workers again.

We just saw the ‘success’ of the Biden administration not allowing M&A in the airline industry when Spirit, once slated to merge with jetBlue, instead filed for bankruptcy this week. “That’s the miracle of Bidenomics!”

And they aren’t the only carrier under distress, it appears. 

Southwest Airlines, based in Dallas, is addressing overstaffing issues at select airports by offering voluntary separation to ground operations, cargo, and provisioning employee, according to SimpleFlying. 

In a memo distributed on Friday, the airline noted that overstaffing—largely due to aircraft delivery delays—affects nearly 20 airports where Southwest has a significant presence, though the issue is not universal across all locations. Certain positions at Southwest’s headquarters are also eligible for the voluntary separation program.

Aviation analyst JonNYC first reported that Southwest Airlines is offering a voluntary separation program to address overstaffing at specific airports.

Southwest “Saw this floating around the airline groups on FB. Looks like ATL and LAX stations taking some big hits.” pic.twitter.com/AgP6M6Ovcm

— JonNYC (@xJonNYC) November 9, 2024

In a memo to staff, Chris Johnson, Vice President of Ground Operations, along with Cole McGuire and Wally Devereaux, both vice presidents overseeing operations, outlined that the voluntary separations aim to align staffing levels with Southwest’s revised capacity plans, impacted by aircraft delivery delays.

The SimpleFlying report notes that the 2024 Voluntary Separation Program (VSP 24) is open to contracted and non-contracted employees, including customer service agents, ramp agents, cargo agents, and provisioning agents.

Eligible positions also extend to operations agents, supervisors, assistant managers, and operations managers. Employees at 18 airports, including Atlanta, Dallas Love Field, Los Angeles, and Tampa, will receive information about the VSP 24 package soon. Select employees at Southwest’s Dallas headquarters will also be eligible.

The program is particularly targeted at employees nearing retirement, or those interested in pursuing personal interests such as returning to school or spending more time with family. These employees will have several weeks to review the resources and determine if the VSP 24 aligns with their goals.

For those opting for voluntary separation, the resignation date is set for December 30, 2024.

This initiative coincides with a planned reduction in Southwest’s Atlanta operations, where over 300 pilot and flight attendant positions will be cut by April. The airline, under shareholder pressure from Elliott Investment Management, is focusing on revenue growth and has also reduced hiring rates to prevent further overstaffing.

A Southwest spokesperson confirmed the program, noting that aircraft delivery delays have limited fleet capacity, prompting adjustments in staffing. The voluntary separation, combined with a hiring slowdown, is intended to prevent workforce excesses at impacted locations.

It remains unclear what actions Southwest will take for employees who choose not to participate in the VSP 24.

Via InternationalMan.com,

International Man: What are your overall thoughts on Trump’s second term?

How do you expect it to differ from his first term?

Doug Casey: Thank heavens Kamala lost. If she’d won, the Jacobins would have cemented their hold on the country, and it would have been “game over.” We would have seen an acceleration of cultural decline, vastly higher taxes and regulations, and a serious push to shut down free speech.

It feels like morning in America again. But unfortunately, morning only lasts six hours. You’ve got to remember that roughly half the country voted for Kamala, despite her total lack of any qualifications and her extreme commitment to socialist/statist values. Half the country believes in these things; they’re unhappy and not going away.

In other words, it ain’t over till it’s over. And it ain’t over yet.

Regarding Trump’s next four years, I hope that he shows better judgment than he did in his first term when he surrounded himself with all kinds of spineless toadies, deep-staters, and political hacks. But I’m optimistic. For instance, he’s announced that Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley—horrible people—are out.

Better yet, he’s putting RFK Jr. in a position of power over the FDA. He’s tasked Elon Musk with trying to cut Federal spending by $2 trillion. They’re talking about putting Ron Paul in a position to weigh in on monetary policy. And they’ve apparently offered Joel Salatin a position in the Department of Agriculture.

While Trump doesn’t have a philosophical core, flies by the seat of his pants, is not terribly knowledgeable, and demonstrated horrible judgment about people the last time around, this time, he’s doing a much better job picking the people who are going to actually make things happen.

What scares me most? There have been two assassination attempts, and there might be a third or a fourth before he’s inaugurated. He has become a totem for cultural conservatism. And the Jacobins who control the US government, academia, the entertainment industry, the corporate world, and all of the power centers of America don’t want to see him in office. They’re presently in disarray, but they’re capable of any knavery.

International Man: How do you see Trump’s policies in a second term impacting the federal debt, inflation, and the broader US economy?

Is there any realistic path to reversing the current trajectory?

Doug Casey: First, let me reemphasize how important it is that Kamala and the Democrats lost.

The Democrats would’ve gone hog wild toward the socialization of America. I’m extremely grateful for their defeat. And very happy Trump seems angry enough to meet out some justice.

On the downside, though, Trump has always called himself a “low-interest rate guy” and the “king of debt.” Remember that he was a big spender during his first term and ran up huge deficits. They were relatively and absolutely bigger than those of the baby Bush or Obama. And even bigger than Biden’s over the last four years. I expect that since he has no real grip on economics, he’ll encourage printing money to “help” the economy. Not that he has any choice; they have to keep printing, or the debt bubble will implode.

Going back to the bright side, he wants to massively deregulate the economy. That’s a huge plus. And he wants to reduce taxes. That’s wonderful. But the bad news is that he clearly doesn’t understand that there is no such thing as lowering taxes unless you lower government spending. Especially now, when a third of all government spending is funded by selling debt to the Federal Reserve, which amounts to printing money. There’s going to be more of that. Retail prices will go up for sure. But perhaps the stock market—overpriced as it is—will go even higher with the flood of money.

Is there any realistic path to reversing the current trajectory? No.

It’s wonderful that Elon Musk wants to cut the budget by $2 trillion per year, roughly the amount of the deficit. But I’d say the chances of that are close to zero. Things like Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, interest payments, and the military budget are sacrosanct—and over 90% of the budget.

On the downside, Trump has indicated unwavering support towards Israel. The US might become Israel’s proxy for a hot war with Iran, which would be a disaster. Israel isn’t our 51st state. Despite the fact Trump wants to avoid war, he might yet involve us in a nuclear dust-up with the Middle East version of the Hatfields versus the McCoys.

On the bright side, again, he says he can end the war in the Ukraine because he thinks that he has a good personal relationship with both Zelensky and Putin. Say what you want about Putin, but Zelensky is even more dangerous, responsible for looting scores of billions from the US to prolong a pointless border war. The only winners are Ukrainian bureaucrats and equally corrupt military “defense” companies.

Let’s hope Trump doesn’t try to back the Russians into an impossible corner because he likes to put forward an image of being “tough.” A propaganda-driven hysteria has been created in the US. Americans believe that Russia is evil, and the terminally corrupt Zelensky regime is good. As happened in World War 1, US intervention would likely be catastrophic.

So we’re not out of the woods in foreign policy or domestic affairs. I’m afraid that morning in America, like all mornings, will only last six hours.

International Man: Trump has promised to end citizenship-based taxation for American expats.

What would be the broader implications of this change, and do you think he’ll deliver on this promise?

Doug Casey: It’s a wonderful idea because the US is the only country in the world, other than Eritrea, that taxes its expats.

If Americans leave the country, they’re still taxed as residents for as long as they live. It’s an insane policy. Of course, he should try to change it.

Will he be able to change it?

I’d say the chances of that are slim and none, and Slim’s out of town. With the US government on the way to bankruptcy, Congress won’t want to cut off that source of revenue. If it does, scores of thousands of rich Americans would leave the country to escape its onerous tax and regulatory burdens.

In addition to that, the entire world is going the other direction. Among other places, France and Canada are talking seriously about taxing their expat citizens.

I hope it happens, but don’t count on it. A US passport will remain a huge liability for anyone with assets.

International Man: What geopolitical and foreign policy shifts do you foresee under a second Trump administration?

Doug Casey: The US relationship with the BRICS is becoming important. It’s all about the declining US dollar. Most of the rest of the world wants to stop using dollars. They know that it’s the unsecured liability of a bankrupt government. They’ve seen how it can be weaponized. The $30 or $40 trillion outside the US are hot potatoes and Old Maid cards, even while new dollars are being created like confetti.

Of course, the BRICS are trying to create their own currency and their own SWIFT system equivalent so people don’t have to use the dollar.

Rather than trying to make the dollar once again “as good as gold’, Trump is resorting to threats. He’s said, “Well, you don’t have to use the dollar. But if you don’t use our currency, we’ll charge 100% duties when you try to export to the US.”

He doesn’t seem to realize that the US no longer exports much. We don’t produce nearly what we consume. Our major export since the 1980s has been dollars, not Boeings or soybeans.

If Trump puts heavy duties on imports, there’s an excellent chance that he could destroy the world’s economy, which is vastly more dependent on international trade than it was in 1929, when Hoover did that with the Smoot–Hawley tariffs. High tariffs would, in effect, put the US under a self-imposed trade embargo.

There’s only one way to solve the government’s fiscal problems: Radically cutting spending. That’s unlikely to happen under Trump, despite the best efforts of Elon Musk’s efficiency efforts.

International Man: How are you personally positioning your portfolio for a second Trump term?

What specific sectors or investment strategies do you believe will thrive in this environment?

Doug Casey: I continue to be long gold because they’re going to continue destroying the dollar; its fate is sealed—even if we have a wholesale credit collapse, which is a real possibility.

I continue to think oil, and especially natural gas, are going higher. Even though Trump has said that he will encourage more production—which is wonderful. The world runs on hydrocarbons. I especially like coal. Until the world goes nuclear, it’s the only feasible answer to generating more electricity.

What specific investment strategies will work in the Trump years?

For a while, it will continue to be stocks because money drives the market, and the Trump regime will definitely create lots more money and credit. That said, I’m still not interested in stocks, even though they may become even more overpriced. I have better places to be.

Although the Donald says that he’s a low-interest rate guy, there’s nothing he can do to control long-term interest rates, which are headed higher. I suspect they’re headed back to, and beyond, the levels we saw in the early ’80s. Bonds are a disaster in the making.

As important as knowing what to do, however, is knowing what not to do. You don’t want to lose your capital by putting your money in dangerous places. And that includes bonds, most stocks, and failing to diversify politically.

Don’t forget that—as important as this election was—it can’t immediately undo decades of economic and cultural debauchery.

*  *  *

The truth is, we’re on the cusp of an economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. And most people won’t be prepared for what’s coming. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. Click here to download the PDF now.

Tech companies focused on chatbot development, like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic, have faced significant near-term headwinds in advancing large language models. Despite tens of billions of dollars in investments, these tech firms are experiencing diminishing returns in advancing more sophisticated LLMs.

Sources told Bloomberg that OpenAI’s new Orion LLM has experienced performance limitations. This means the new LLM would outperform the firm’s existing models, but it does not mean there will be a significant leap in development, like that of GPT-3 to GPT-4. 

As of late summer, for example, Orion fell short when trying to answer coding questions that it hadn’t been trained on, the people said. Overall, Orion is so far not considered to be as big a step up from OpenAI’s existing models as GPT-4 was from GPT-3.5, the system that originally powered the company’s flagship chatbot, the people said. -BBG

The breakneck pace of developing more sophisticated LLMs appears to have also hit a proverbial brick wall at Google, in which its Gemini software has not lived up to expectations, according to sources, adding Anthropic also faces challenges with its long-awaited Claude model called 3.5 Opus. 

Bloomberg noted one of the top obstacles these tech firms have encountered has been “finding new, untapped sources of high-quality, human-made training data that can be used to build more advanced AI systems.” 

Sources said Orion’s dismal coding performance was due to the lack of sufficient coding data to train the LLM. They added that even though the model has improvements compared to legacy ones, it has become increasingly challenging to justify the massive costs of building and operating new models. 

The setbacks may reveal an inconvenient truth for the tech industry plowing tens of billions of dollars into AI data centers and infrastructure, and the feasibility of reaching artificial general intelligence in the near future might be a pipedream. 

John Schulman, cofounder and research scientist at OpenAI who recently left, said AGI could be achieved within a few years. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, believes it could be achieved by 2026. 

However, Margaret Mitchell, the chief ethics scientist at AI startup Hugging Face, pointed out, “The AGI bubble is bursting a little bit,” adding that “different training approaches” may be needed for progress. 

In a recent interview with Lex Fridman, Anthropic’s Amodei said there are “lots of things” that could “derail” the AI progression, including the possibility that “we could run out of data.” However, he was optimistic that AI researchers would overcome any hurdles.  

Scaling efforts are slowing… 

“It is less about quantity and more about quality and diversity of data,” said Lila Tretikov, head of AI strategy at New Enterprise Associates and former deputy CTO at Microsoft.

Tretikov said, “We can generate quantity synthetically, yet we struggle to get unique, high-quality datasets without human guidance, especially when it comes to language.”

Moving forward, Noah Giansiracusa, an associate professor of mathematics at Bentley University in Waltham, Massachusetts, said AI models will continue to improve, but the hypergrowth in recent years is unsustainable:

“We got very excited for a brief period of very fast progress. That just wasn’t sustainable.”

If tech firms are struggling to advance LLM performance, this raises serious doubts about whether large investments can continue to be made in AI infrastructure. 

“The infrastructure build for AI is the bubble. The AI 2.0 companies that can actually figure out a way to monetize it are the investments years from now. Might as well light a match to this fund. The infrastructure build like the telecom infrastructure during the dotcom boom will be oversupplied and pricing will collapse,” Edward Dowd recently noted on X.

Well Nvidia has soared to new highs. 

AI companies struggling to develop more advanced LLMs is undoubtedly an ominous sign for the AI bubble.