iftttwall

Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via the Brownstone Institute,

Brownstone Institute has been tracking a little-known federal agency for years. It is part of the Department of Homeland Security created after 9-11. It is called the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency or CISA. It was created in 2018 out of a 2017 executive order that seemed to make sense. It was a mandate to secure American digital infrastructure against foreign attack and infiltration. 

And yet during the Covid year, it assumed three huge jobs. It was the agency responsible for dividing the workforce between essential and nonessential. It led the way on censorship efforts. And it handled election security for 2020 and 2022, which, if you understand the implications of that, should make you spit out your coffee upon learning. 

More than any other agency, it became the operationally relevant government during this period. It was the agency that worked through third parties and packet-switching networking to take down your Facebook group. It worked through all kinds of intermediaries to keep a lid on Twitter. It managed LinkedIn, Instagram, and most of the other mainstream platforms in a way that made you feel like your opinions were too crazy to see the light of day. 

The most astonishing court document just came out. It was unearthed in the course of litigation undertaken by America First Legal. It has no redaction. It is a reverse chronicle of most of what they did from February 2020 until last year. It is 500 pages long. The version available now takes an age to download, so we shrunk it and put it on fast view so you can see the entire thing. 

What you discover is this. Everything that the intelligence agencies did not like during this period – doubting lockdowns, dismissing masking, questioning the vaccine, and so on – was targeted through a variety of cutouts among NGOs, universities, and private-sector fact-checkers. It was all labeled as Russian and Chinese propaganda so as to fit in with CISA’s mandate. Then it was throttled and taken down. It managed remarkable feats such as getting WhatsApp to stop allowing bulk sharing. 

It gets crazier. CISA documented that it deprecated the study of Jay Bhattacharya from May 2020 that showed that Covid was far more widespread and less dangerous than the CDC was claiming, thus driving down the Infection Fatality Rate within the range of a bad flu. This was at a time when it was widely assumed to be the black death. CISA weighed in to say that the study was faulty and tore down posts about it. 

The granularity of their work is shocking, naming Epoch Times, Unz.org, and a whole series of websites as disinformation, often with a crazy spin that identified them with Russian propaganda, white supremacy, terrorist activity, or some such. Reading through the document conjures up memories of Lenin and Stalin smearing the Kulaks or Hitler on the Jews. Everything that is contrary to government claims becomes foreign infiltration or insurrectionist or otherwise seditious. 

It’s a very strange world these people inhabit. Over time, of course, the agency ended up demonizing much authentic science plus a majority of public opinion. And yet they stayed at it, fully convinced of the rightness of their cause and the justness of their methods. It seems never to have occurred to this agency that we have a First Amendment that is part of our laws. It never enters the discussion at all. 

AFL summarizes the document as follows. 

• CISA’s Countering Foreign Influence Task Force (CFITF) relied on the Censorship Industrial Complex to inform its censorship of alleged foreign disinformation narratives regarding COVID-19.

• Unelected bureaucrats at CISA weaponized the homeland security apparatus, including FEMA, to monitor COVID-19 speech dissenting from “expert” medical guidance, including President Trump’s comments about taking Hydroxychloroquine in 2020. Many of these “false” narratives later turned out to be true, calling into question the government’s ability to identify “misinformation,” regardless of its authority to do so.

• To determine what was “foreign disinformation,” CISA relied on the Censorship Industrial Complex’s usual suspects (Atlantic Council DFR Lab, Media Matters, Stanford Internet Observatory) — even those discredited for erroneously attributing domestic content to foreign sources (Alliance for Securing Democracy). CISA even relied on foreign government authorities (EU vs. Disinfo) and foreign government-linked groups (CCDH, GDI) that advocated for the demonetization and deplatforming of individual Americans to monitor and target constitutionally protected speech by American citizens.

For years, this story of censorship has unfolded in shocking ways. This document among tens of thousands of pages is surely among the most incriminating. And discussing it is apparently still taboo because the Subcommittee report on Covid never once mentions CISA. Why might that be? 

In the strange world of D.C., CISA might be considered untouchable because it was staffed out of the National Security Agency which itself is a spinoff of the Central Intelligence Agency. Thus does its activities generally fall under the category of classified. And its many functioning assets in the civilian sector are legally bound to keep their relationships and connections private. 

Thank goodness at least one judge believed otherwise and forced the agency to cough it up.

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times,

Sheriffs will likely play a key role in helping federal agents secure the border and deport illegal immigrants under President-elect Donald Trump.

Trump made mass deportation of illegal immigrants a key part of his campaign to win a second term as almost 11 million people flooded into the country illegally since 2021.

The president-elect’s incoming border czar, Tom Homan, has signaled a new era of federal, state, and local cooperation when it comes to deporting illegal immigrants.

Homan, the former acting head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), indicated he will first target those who have criminal convictions or are wanted for crimes.

“The nation wants a safe country. We’ve had enough crime in this country,” Homan said during a stop at the Texas border in November.

Sheriffs in the nation’s 3,100 counties could play an essential role in helping ICE to identify and detain illegal immigrants, said Sam Bushman, CEO of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), a conservative organization that opposes “unconstitutional” government overreach.

As chief law enforcement officers in their counties, elected sheriffs have more latitude than appointed police chiefs. They have authority over criminal investigations, serving warrants, managing county jails, and providing court security within the county.

Bushman foresees cooperation between willing county, state, and federal authorities to deport illegal immigrants, possibly through the creation of a new coordination agency or command center.

“I think that we could create an organization that communicates with this trifecta, and that would be very effective,” he said.

Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff and founder of CSPOA, has been in contact with Homan and believes sheriffs will be an integral part of border security and deportation efforts because of their unique understanding of their jurisdictions.

“Who in this country knows their counties better than the sheriff?” he asked.

Because of their local knowledge, sheriffs are in a unique position to help make deportation safer and easier, Mack told The Epoch Times.

Regardless of politics, sheriffs must protect their constituents from crime and criminals, both tied to illegal immigration in terms of drug and human smuggling along with violent gang activity, he said.

Policy experts have suggested that the federal government could deputize local law enforcement under its 287(g) program to aid ICE because the agency likely doesn’t have the manpower to do so alone.

The 287(g) program currently provides a framework of cooperation wherein local jails work with ICE to identify illegal immigrants as they are booked for a crime. ICE and designated local law enforcement can then hold that inmate for up to an additional 48 hours so that ICE can take custody of the inmate.

Homan has touted the program as a safe deportation pipeline, as ICE officers can pick up deportees within the safety of a jail setting, rather than having to organize an operation out in the community.

ICE has about 20,000 employees, including support personnel. ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) has 6,100 deportation officers and more than 750 enforcement removal assistants who are assigned to 24 field offices, according to an agency website.

Former Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol Rodney Scott, who served under both Trump and Biden, said in a previous interview with The Epoch Times that Trump could expand the 287(g) program to help with deportations, as he did during his first term.

Scott was recently nominated by Trump to serve as the incoming Customs and Border Protection commissioner.

He said the 287(g) program also allows the creation of a task force and hybrid model that would enable local and state law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants.

In the blue state of Maryland, Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins, a longtime Republican, recalls when the task force model was operational in 2008.

Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins at a meeting about illegal immigration issues in Bethesda, Md., on Oct. 17, 2017. Benjamin Chasteen/The Epoch Times

“We had deputies on the street that could work at the direction of ICE and with ICE to take into custody people who had deportation warrants and so forth,” Jenkins told The Epoch Times.

Reinstating the task force model would help expedite the deportation of criminals in the country illegally, he said.

The Trump administration could also send representatives to local sheriff departments to recruit them to join the program, he said.

“ICE can’t do it alone, or certainly not enough,” Jenkins said. “We need to be a force multiplier for them.”

Tying federal grant money to sheriff department cooperation with ICE would likely convince many to come on board, he said.

Even if sheriffs don’t participate in arresting illegal immigrants, they could help in other ways, such as providing transportation and logistical support and workspace for ICE, he said.

Jenkins said Frederick County’s jail-based detainer program has been successful, resulting in the removal of about 2,000 illegal immigrant criminals in the county.

Under the 287(g) program, sheriff’s office employees are trained to file a detainer and prepare the paperwork under the supervision of ICE in an effort to streamline the process, he said.

Illegal immigrants stand along the U.S.-Mexico border as they await processing by the U.S. Border Patrol in Jacumba Hot Springs, Calif., on Dec. 1, 2023. Mario Tama/Getty Images

San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez, who serves in the nation’s fifth most populous county, has vowed to defy a new county policy to limit cooperation with federal deportation efforts.

Earlier this month, San Diego County supervisors voted to ban its sheriff department from working with ICE on the federal agency’s enforcement of civil immigration laws, including those that allow for deportations.

California law generally prohibits cooperation but makes exceptions for those convicted of certain violent crimes.

Martinez, whose office is nonpartisan but considers herself a Democrat, said she wouldn’t honor the new policy and that the county government doesn’t oversee her office.

“Current state law strikes the right balance between limiting local law enforcement’s cooperation with immigration authorities, ensuring public safety, and building community trust,” Martinez said.

In the blue state of Michigan, Barry County Sheriff Dar Lief said it is important to remove violent criminals from the streets.

“I’m on board with that,” he told The Epoch Times.

Lief echoed the belief of Trump and his surrogates during the presidential campaign that many of the illegal immigrants coming into the country were from prison systems or asylums.

“Nonetheless, our governor here asked residents to take in illegal immigrants,” he said. “Who are you opening up your house to?”

Lief said he warned the citizens of Barry County against taking in illegal immigrants, which Gov. Gretchen Whitmer called “new Americans,” because there was no guarantee they were properly vetted.

Not all blue states or city leaders are against Trump’s deportation plan to remove criminal illegal immigrants.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams met with Homan recently to discuss deporting illegal immigrants who commit violent crimes in the Democrat-run city.

“We will not be a safe haven for those who commit violent acts. We don’t do it for those who are citizens, and we’re not going to do it for those who are undocumented,” Adams said during a press conference.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams speaks at a media availability event after meeting with border czar Tom Homan in New York City, on Dec. 12, 2024. Oliver Mantyk/The Epoch Times

Adams said law-abiding illegal immigrants are welcome in the city. Still, it was a “terrible mistake” to allow those in the country unlawfully to commit violent crimes repeatedly, especially those associated with gangs.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said in November during a press conference that she supports “legal” immigrants, including asylum-seekers, but not criminals here illegally or those committing crimes.

“Someone breaks the law—I‘ll be the first one to call up ICE and say, ’Get them out of here,’” she said.

Homan said blue city officials don’t have to cooperate, but he has repeatedly warned them not to stand in his way.

Homan recently announced he would begin deportations in Chicago, criticizing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker for resisting the removal of criminal immigrants.

“If he impedes us, if he knowingly harbors and conceals an illegal alien, I will prosecute him,” Homan said of the Chicago mayor.

Tom Homan, tapped to be President-elect Donald Trump’s border czar, addressed Operation Lone Star members at the Texas border on Nov. 26, 2024. Darlene McCormick Sanchez/The Epoch Times

Texas Model

Homan said during a visit to the Texas border town of Eagle Pass before Thanksgiving that the state’s operation to stop illegal immigration could become a national model.

He praised Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star, a $10-billion border mission to string razor wire along the border, place buoy barriers in the Rio Grande, help build a border wall, and bus illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities.

The operation consists of Department of Public Safety law enforcement and Texas National Guard members.

The program also focuses on arresting illegal immigrants for trespassing on private ranchland along the border—offering a unique roadmap for how counties could help deport illegal immigrants.

Brent Smith, the county attorney for Kinney County, has plenty of experience dealing with illegal immigrants in his county, which sits along the Texas–Mexico border.

Kinney County has prosecuted the largest number of illegal immigrants for trespass and related misdemeanors under Operation Lone Star.

In 2019 and 2020, the small, rural county dealt with just 254 and 132 misdemeanor cases, respectively, mostly involving U.S. citizens.

The U.S. citizen caseload has remained somewhat constant, but because of illegal immigration, the total number of misdemeanor cases shot up to 6,799 in 2022 and 5,826 in 2023, according to numbers obtained from the county attorney’s office.

Smith told The Epoch Times that trespassing arrests in Kinney County under Operation Lone Star offered valuable lessons on how to run a border security initiative.

At first, funding went to provide law enforcement, but Smith said it became clear that there needed to be more funding for the entire county justice system for prosecutors, public defenders, clerks, and judges to process illegal immigrants charged with trespassing.

“What I foresee is some very strong 287(g) agreements being entered into, and state and local law enforcement actually becoming an arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) immigration enforcement,” he said.

Law enforcement responds to a crash and fire of a suspected smuggling vehicle near Brackettville, Texas. Courtesy of Kinney County Sheriff’s Office

He said that after undergoing a DHS training program, local officers are considered immigration officers under the supervision of an ICE agent.

He pointed to former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was known for implementing the 287(g) task force successfully to arrest illegal immigrants in Arizona but came under fire during the Obama administration.

Maricopa County’s 287(g) program was canceled in 2011 after a Department of Justice investigation accused the sheriff of racial profiling.

In 2012, the Obama administration discontinued the task force and hybrid models of the program altogether.

Trump expanded the program in his first term to 150 agreements with local law enforcement and broadened the removal criteria to include misdemeanors.

Under the Biden administration, new 287(g) agreements were paused.

Smith said that once Trump ends the Biden administration’s catch-and-release policy, there will be more “gotaways,” which will require a shift in resources to focus on apprehension instead of processing those claiming asylum.

Money—or the lack of it—will be an essential tool in deportation and border security, he said.

On the state level, he has been discussing a bill with Texas lawmakers that would require sheriffs to apply for 287(g) agreements before receiving state grant funding.

The same principle could be applied to federal grant money for cities such as Chicago, he said.

“How much is your political leanings worth to you? Is it worth $1,000, or $100,000, or $2 million?” he said. “We’re going to find out.”

Via The Cradle

On Thursday, Syria’s de facto authorities appointed former Al-Qaeda commander and Nusra Front co-founder Anas Hassan Khattab as the head of the country’s general intelligence agency.

Khattab, also known as Abu Ahmed Hudood, was blacklisted as a “terrorist” by the UN Security Council in September 2014 for his close association with Al-Qaeda.

According to the listing, for several years, he was involved “in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing, or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf of, or in support of” and “otherwise supporting acts or activities of” the Nusra Front. This Al-Qaeda offshoot was rebranded as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in 2017.

Khattab served as the administrative emir of the Nusra Front as of early 2014 and was part of its shura council by mid-2013. He was also tasked with selecting personal bodyguards for HTS leader and Syria’s de facto ruler Abu Mohammad al-Julani, who dropped his nom de guerre earlier this month and now goes by his real name, Ahmad al-Sharaa.

In recent years, Khattab oversaw general security operations in Idlib. His involvement in intelligence gathering dates back to the period when HTS consolidated control over northern Syria with Turkish support; during this time, he managed surveillance of covert networks along the borders of HTS-controlled areas.

Syria’s new intel chief was sanctioned by the US Treasury Department in 2012 for his ties to Al-Qaeda.

Khattab is the latest HTS authority to be granted a top post in the so-called “transitional government” following the success of the Turkish and US-backed coup against the government of ousted Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

Last week, the General Command of the Armed Opposition Factions appointed Asaad Hassan al-Shibani, a founding member of Al-Qaeda in Syria, as the new caretaker foreign minister. This was followed by the appointment of Murhaf Abu Qasra, a top HTS leader known by his assumed name Abu Hassan 600, as defense minister.

It must have been a tense meeting yesterday in Damascus between HTS chief Jolani and the head of Iraqi intelligence. Especially for the Iraqi delegation a hard pill to swallow as Jolani before his time in Syria was in Iraq with Zarqawi blowing up Iraqis. pic.twitter.com/mojl2jTmEd

— Jenan Moussa (@jenanmoussa) December 27, 2024

As HTS continues to consolidate power with the full support of western nations, clashes have broken out in western Syria between the remnants of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and HTS-led extremists.

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

When Frank Capra’s “It’s a Wonderful Life” was being filmed in 1945, just as the Second World War was closing and a few years before the Cold War was heating up, the FBI investigated it for its supposed anti-capitalist themes. A memo said:

“With regard to the picture It’s a Wonderful Life, [redacted] stated in substance that the film represented rather obvious attempts to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as a ‘scrooge-type’ so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists. [In] addition, [redacted] stated that, in his opinion, this picture deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters.”

If it was a communist plot, it’s not a very good one. The film celebrates small-town life, family, hard work, faith, dedication to truth, and bottom-up prosperity, while villainizing theft (Mr. Potter effectively steals the money belonging to the small bank) and consolidation of finance.

Ask anyone what the message of the film is.

They will tell you: truth, decency, be happy with the opportunities you have, don’t be jealous or envious of others, count your blessings, remember how valuable you are as a person, rally around the life you have, serve your community, fight evil when necessary, and don’t ever take your good life for granted.

There’s nothing communist about that. As for the portrayal of the banker, Henry Potter in the film is a stand-in for ruling class power and the accumulation of unjust wealth and power, someone more akin to government than regular businesspeople.

In the nightmare sequence, Potter takes over the town and the place becomes a decadent and drunken place of squalor, crime, and sadness, fueled by credit schemes and power brokering.

Maybe that has a ring of truth to it?

Partisans of capitalism would not do their cause any favors by defending the big banker in this movie against the aspirations of the townsfolk. Rather than force-fitting this film into a Cold War narrative, the film can be more properly seen as part of a long line of Capra’s own populist impulses, most fully realized in his 1941 masterpiece “Meet John Doe.”

That film is actually better overall, in my view, the story of how a legitimate populist movement gets played by a wicked power broker who attempts to channel the people’s goodness into a fifth-column movement designed to subvert the Constitution. I have certain historical figures in mind (FDR perhaps?), but that’s for another time.

The most riveting scene in “It’s a Wonderful Life” concerns a run on the Building and Loan that is managed by George Bailey. Hearing of the other troubles in the industry, and a rumor spread by Henry Potter, the depositors panic and demand their money to be withdrawn immediately. There was nothing unfair or illicit about the demand. The people were worried about the viability of the institution in light of the rumors of missing funds.

At the same time, the whole idea of a Building and Loan is the pooling of resources to support home ownership in exchange for which depositors receive interest. They are nowhere promised a full and immediate return on all deposits on demand. The institution is built on trust—trust that the managers are not overleveraged, trust that its investments are wise, trust that the community is economically viable, trust that people will pay their mortgages.

Bailey gives an impassioned speech to the depositors that saves the institution. Here is what he said:

“Now listen to me. I beg of you not to do this thing. If Potter gets hold of this Building and Loan there’ll never be another decent house built in this town. He’s already got charge of the bank. He’s got the bus line. He’s got the department stores. And now he’s after us. Why? Well, it’s very simple. Because we’re cutting in on his business, that’s why. And because he wants to keep you living in his slums and paying the kind of rent he decides.

“Please, let me explain something to you. Your money’s in Joe’s house, right next to yours. And in the Kennedy house, and Mrs. Macklin’s house, and a hundred others. Why, you’re lending them the money to build, and then they’re going to pay it back to you as best they can. Now, what are you going to do? Foreclose on them?

“I’ve got $2,000 here. That’s what’s left of the Building and Loan. The rest is locked up in mortgages. Now, you’re not going to get your money tonight. But you’ve got my word that each one of you will get your money back as soon as we can possibly give it to you.”

Based on this speech, people calm down and decide to trust that something will work out. Bailey here proves himself to be a very good marketing manager of the institution, eloquently explaining how the system works here—or, rather, reminding them of how the institution functions as a matter of contract.

You can trace banking contracts through history to understand that there are many different types. Some institutions are purely for storage and safekeeping, essentially holding your resources in a safe deposit box or a grain elevator. The contract is a bailment: you get the whole of your deposit back on the asking. That is true for every depositor at any moment in time.

The Building and Loan is not set up to provide all depositors their money upon the asking. Its assets and liabilities balance, but its assets are in the nonliquid form of housing. There is nothing shady or noncontractual about this. Nor does this kind of leverage produce inflation. Its job is to put capital in the form of money to work in ways that pay returns over time.

In loan banking with clearing services, the situation is different. Your money is invested in other projects and the clearing services are free or depositors earn interest. It’s a straightforward business transaction.

By the 1940s, however, there was plenty shady about a bank of the type run by Potter, who is a stand-in for a long line of banking interests that become overleveraged and rely on its relationship with government and cartelized central bankers for bailouts when times get rough. We saw this in spades in 2008, when the Fed used its powers to recapitalize major banks and financial firms that had overleveraged in mortgage-backed securities.

In fact, the creation of the Federal Reserve itself in 1913 was advertised as a way to provide financial stability to the industry but it ended up centralizing it, creating a moral hazard, and subsidizing loan profligacy in a way that endangered the entire system.

After the Fed was tapped to provide liquidity for the Great War, the industry never really righted itself toward financial soundness. The bank runs of the early 1930s that ended with mandated bank holidays and devaluation make the point.

That’s not a failure of “fractional reserve banking” as such but simply a failure of signaling systems, clear contracts, transparent audits, and honest risk assessments. Central banking itself is the source of the problem. Nor did government-provided deposit insurance (started in 1933) work as a stabilizer, it only incentivized more risk-taking than the market would otherwise allow.

To be sure, there is a role for institutions that provide 100 percent backing for deposits. Even now, people are reluctant to keep more than $250,000 in a single bank account because this is the amount of government-provided deposit insurance. They are essentially seeking perfect liquidity on their accounts. The other option is to hold one’s money in financial firms that keep money invested in stocks and bonds that pay returns based on depositor risk assessment.

The case of Bitcoin is a good test case for what markets demand of banking. Most exchanges claim to offer 1:1 holdings of assets with zero leverage, though others market themselves as institutions for pooling resources and giving returns to depositors based on risk. This experiment has been fascinating because there is no deposit insurance and no Bitcoin central bank. Some exchanges have gone belly up precisely because not all promises have been kept.

As the industry matures, which we can hope will happen without government backing or intervention, it will become a complex mixture of self-custody (after all, becoming your own bank was the whole pitch of Bitcoin), full custody exchanges, loan operations, and leveraged services of various risk profiles. This is how a free market in money and banking should work.

In an ideal world, banking would work like any other business in a free market. It would bear all the risk for the investments it undertakes. It would have free entry and exit. There would be innovation driven by the entrepreneurial spirit. Government would have nothing to do with it. In some ways, that was the Building and Loan that George Bailey saved through his efforts.

The popularity of “It’s a Wonderful Life” owes so much to its messaging, and also to the perception for decades that the film was in the public domain, which permitted it to be widely aired on television, causing generations to regard it as the American classic it truly is. It is also a tribute to the enterprising spirit and its connection to family, community, and the values that make for the good life. The FBI was simply wrong and the film’s popularity to this day proves it.

*  *  *

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

Authored by Connor O’Keefe via The Mises Institute,

At the end of every year, as we make our way through the holidays, you’ll hear no shortage of complaints about the rampant hyper-consumerism at the heart of modern American society. And these complaints aren’t without merit. Flip on the TV or walk through any city’s commercial district before Christmas, and it’s easy to get the impression that the entire American concept of familial love rests on how much stuff we buy for each other.

Beyond Christmas, there’s no question that purchasing and acquiring stuff is a central part of American life.

Many consider their social status to be reflected by how much they can and do spend on luxurious goods and experiences. And, each year, billions of dollars of marketing goes into convincing us that we are one purchase away from permanent bliss.

There’s no question that modern America is a very “consumerist” society.

But before condemning that as a “moral failure” of the American people, it’s important to understand that this is the sought-after result of our government’s policies.

Consumption is an essential part of life. We obviously need food, water, clothing, and shelter to survive. And, as human civilization has grown beyond Malthusian hunter-gatherer conditions, the goods and services available to consume have made life safer, more comfortable, and more fulfilling than our early ancestors could have dreamed of.

But all that progress rests on one thing above all: our ancestor’s willingness to forgo consumption, save the fruits of their labor, and invest it in the production of more valued goods and services.

Forgoing consumption is not easy, but it is incredibly important. Because saving in order to invest is quite literally the engine of civilization.

But saving itself is also an important aspect of a healthy society. Our world is unstable and uncertain. Saving money protects us from future difficulties we cannot foresee. And further, it allows us to pass on wealth to our descendants—improving the starting point and overall well-being of future generations.

So, if the well-being of all of our society requires we invest in more valued lines of production, our personal well-being requires we consume, and the well-being of our future selves and descendants requires we save, what determines which action we choose? We can’t do all three at the same time, after all.

Like anything, it comes down to our preferences. More specifically, in this case, because we’re comparing the satisfaction of our wants in different time periods, it comes down to what economists call time preference—the extent to which we value present satisfaction over that exact same satisfaction in the future.

For some—mainly children—immediate gratification is highly preferred to delayed gratification, even when that delayed gratification is much larger. These people are said to have a high time preference.

Typically, as we become adults, we come to recognize the benefits of withholding some of our consumption in order to save and/or invest in productive pursuits. Although it is by no means easy, we start to improve our lives dramatically if we can find the discipline to act in the interest of our future selves. Those who forgo a lot of instant gratification through consumption to pursue the delayed—but often greater—gratification that comes from being frugal or productive are said to have a low time preference.

Essentially, all of human history is one long story of societies successfully working to lower their time preference, investing in the well-being of future generations, and leaving the world better off than it had been before. While it is always more comfortable in the moment to satisfy our immediate wants, the consistency of falling time preferences across most of the globe suggests that humans naturally gravitate toward sacrificing their own material comforts to bring about a better future for themselves and their children. That is a beautiful thing, and it’s the reason our species has achieved so much. But over the last century or so, this glorious, multi-thousand-year trend has come under attack.

In the past, some economists mistakenly came to view savings as economic waste. Money saved, they thought, was money “leaking” out of the economy. This idea, which came to be known as “the paradox of thrift,” was then used by political officials to help justify the government’s takeover of the monetary system.

Today, with full control over the supply and value of money, the United States government has settled on a policy that aims to bring about permanent price inflation. They do this by printing money and injecting it into the economy through the credit markets. Doing so transfers a lot of wealth to the political class and creates the recurring nightmarish cycle of economic booms and recessions. But it also has profound effects on the public’s behavior.

Because permanent price inflation punishes people for saving. Money loses its value over time, meaning—in a reversal of how it’s worked for almost all of human history—money saved today will not be able to purchase as much in the future.

With what is, in effect, a tax on savings, the government encourages people to adopt more child-like, high time preference behaviors by saving less and consuming more. Living paycheck-to-paycheck to fund more GDP-bloating consumption is a good thing, in this backward economic view, as is going into debt to fund even more consumption.

This government-induced rise in time preference also has incredibly damaging impacts on our culture as the consumption of stuff takes priority over the production of resources and the cultivation of community. And the prioritization of immediate gratification spreads beyond economic decisions to encompass all aspects of life.

The American political class may really believe that savings are economically damaging and that they should be discouraged. Or they may just see that argument as another useful justification for a monetary system that is making them very rich. But regardless, the kind of hyper-consumerist, living paycheck-to-paycheck, buried-in-debt lifestyle that is used to chastise Americans—especially around Christmas—is precisely what the American monetary system is built to encourage.

Finding the hyper-fixation on buying stuff around the holidays off-putting is appropriate. But make sure you place the blame on the right people.

Canadian businessman and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary appeared on Fox Business Thursday, voicing his dissatisfaction over Liberal Party Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s imploding leadership. O’Leary suggested that under President-elect Donald Trump’s second term, the United States and Canadian economies should unite to create an economic powerhouse.

“This could be the beginning of an economic union,” O’Leary said, noting, “Think about the power of combining two economies, erasing the border between Canada and the United States and putting all that resource up to the northern borders where China and Russia are knocking on the doors. Give a common currency, figure out taxes, and get everything trading both ways.”

He added: “I like this idea and at least half of Canadians are interested.” 

NEW: Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary, a Canadian, says he likes the idea of combining the US and Canadian economies, says he is heading to Mar-a-Lago to start the talks.

O’Leary said half of Canadians are interested in Trump’s proposal.

“[Canadians] want to hear more… what this… pic.twitter.com/ss2sjIADBC

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) December 26, 2024

In recent weeks, Trump said it would be “a great idea” for Canada to become the 51st US state in an unfolding tariff dispute in North America. This prompted Trudeau to visit Trump’s Mar-a-Lago in South Florida. 

On Christmas Day, Trump wrote on Truth Social: “No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year? Makes no sense!”

He continued, “Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!”

Trump also made tariff threats against Canada to secure its border amid the expansion of fentanyl superlab production across Canada—much of which is destined for the US.

To O’Leary’s point, Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on Canada—highly integrated with the US economy, accounting for 60% of US crude oil imports and 85% of US electricity imports—could spark turmoil for its northern neighbor. To resolve this and ensure North America remains an economic powerhouse throughout this century, deeper economic integration and cooperation might be necessary.

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found mutations in samples taken from a man infected with the first severe case of avian influenza in the United States, mutations that were not present in specimens collected from his infected backyard flock.

The agency began analyzing the samples after the patient—a resident of southwestern Louisiana, aged over 65—was confirmed last week as the first person in the United States with a severe case of H5N1 bird flu.

In a Dec. 18 statement, the CDC said the man was infected with the D1.1 genotype of the virus that was recently detected in wild birds and poultry in the United States, and in human cases in British Columbia, Canada, and Washington state.

The strain differs from the B3.13 genotype detected in dairy cows, human cases, and some poultry across the United States.

According to a Dec. 26 update from the agency, an analysis of two respiratory specimens collected from the man showed low-frequency mutations in the hemagglutinin (HA) gene, the part of the virus that plays a key role in its binding to host cells.

The mutations were not found in poultry samples collected on the patient’s property, suggesting the changes emerged in the patient after he became infected, the CDC said.

According to the CDC, the mutations seen in the samples may result in increased virus binding to cell receptors found in the upper respiratory tract of humans.

“Although concerning, and a reminder that A(H5N1) viruses can develop changes during the clinical course of a human infection, these changes would be more concerning if found in animal hosts or in early stages of infection (e.g., within a few days of symptom onset) when these changes might be more likely to facilitate spread to close contacts,” the CDC stated. “Notably, in this case, no transmission from the patient in Louisiana to other persons has been identified.”

Risk to Public Remains Low: CDC

While the mutations are rare, they have been reported in some cases in other countries and most often during severe infections.

One of the mutations was also identified in another severe human case in British Columbia, suggesting it emerged as the virus replicated in the patient, the agency said.

Despite the discovery of the mutations, the CDC said the risk to the general public remains low.

The detection of a severe human case of bird flu with genetic changes in a clinical specimen “underscores the importance of ongoing genomic surveillance in people and animals,” the agency said.

It also highlights the importance of containing bid flu outbreaks among dairy cattle and poultry and implementing prevention measures among people exposed to infected animals or environments, the CDC said.

A total of 65 human cases of H5 bird flu have been reported in the United States since April 2024, according to the CDC.

To help prevent exposure, health officials have urged people to avoid direct contact with sick or dead animals, particularly wild birds and poultry, and to wear personal protective equipment if contact is unavoidable.

The agency also advises people not to touch surfaces or materials contaminated with the saliva, mucous, or animal feces of wild or domestic birds or other animals that may be infected with the virus.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Since the rapid collapse of the Assad government and the takeover of Damascus by US-designated terror group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) on December 8, Syrians by the hundreds or even thousands have been filmed in city streets celebrating, expressing hope for a new era.

But for every scene of hundreds gathered in a city square in front of Al Jazeera or CNN cameras, the reality is that there are many tens of thousands more families holed up in their homes, deeply fearful of venturing outside, with the more fortunate ones having stocked up on supplies just prior to Abu Mohammad al-Jolani’s army of mujahideen fighters entering the capital.

With the basically overnight and shock collapse of a state system earlier this month which had been in place for over a half-century, Syrians whether in Aleppo, Hama, Homs, Latakia, or Damascus have no clue which armed factions might be patrolling the neighborhoods just around the corner from their apartments.

A big looming dark fear is the possibility of “reprisal” killings meted out by the jihadists against any community, especially along religious lines, merely perceived as ‘loyalist’ or at least which never came out openly against the Assad government. We and others have been documenting that this is already taking place.

Political alignment aside, all communities of the capital have historically been “Syria first”—that is, the common populace tends to frame identity foremost along nationalistic lines. The ideology of the conquerors, in their own words and patches/symbols on their tactical vests, are without doubt Takfirism, Salafism, and Wahhabism. This has been exhaustively documented over many, many years of the tragic proxy war in Syria – yet now suddenly Western leaders and media lackeys have ‘forgotten’ it all. Non-Sunni Muslims are especially being targeted, for nothing else other than religion and identity

Mainstream media cameras in Damascus have been carefully trying to hide or at least downplay this reality. They present the euphoria of those few on the streets praising the ‘revolution’ and downfall of Assad while ignoring the many more who are bracing for a sectarian bloodbath at the hands of the jihadists.

American correspondents have even been caught ‘coaching’ bearded militants waring ISIS patches on how to improve their image in front of an international audience… Watch: Syrian ‘Moderate Rebel’ Removes ISIS Patch At Prompting Of American Journalist.

HTS goons open fire on demonstrators protesting extrajudicial revenge killings and the destruction of Alawite shrines just days after Jolani received friendly delegations of US and UK diplomats and journos pic.twitter.com/nVWA49wNgK

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) December 25, 2024

This fear of being targeted for ethno-religious genocide is perhaps greatest among Christians, Alawites, and Druze. Dread or anxiety at what tomorrow will bring is also a reality among some business-oriented Sunnis of Aleppo and Damascus.

Major urban centers in Syria had always had a definite secular and pluralist public vibe—with liquor stores and nightclubs a common sight in central areas—and women in the Islamic veil a little bit more of a rarity. Some liquor stores especially in Aleppo and the north have already been smashed and destroyed.

Now, for the first time in Syria’s modern history, women who dare to venture out in the city center of Damascus are being asked their sectarian affiliation: Are you Sunni, Shia, Christian, Druze? Or else they are being told to put on the Islamic veil, by bearded militants from outside cities or villages, or worse who are from other countries. Latakia, as well as parts of the countryside, are already witnessing armed jihadist gangs conducting summary executions.

Syria: “When we build the Islamic caliphate, Christians will pay Jizya under Islamic Sharia.” – Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, HTS Islamist leader and new ruler of Syria

Forcing Christians to become second-class citizens and be extorted through a protection tax is not moderate. pic.twitter.com/BGvnvM8w3C

— Christian Emergency Alliance (@ChristianEmerg1) December 17, 2024

Gruesome videos (too horrific to link to) are filling up social media platforms like X and Telegram, in some instances with unidentified victims being dragged to death behind vehicles.

Others show HTS-linked factions or else foreign jihadist groups cleansing entire villages of ‘Nusayris’—a derogatory term for Alawites, which is ethno-religious background of the Assad family. Jolani’s officials have recently tried to urge for militants to not film their atrocities or upload them to the internet.

* * *

Rania Khalek is an independent journalist who has long reported from the region. Her contacts across Syria are telling her that the jihadists are killing civilians in various places far away from CNN or Al-Jazeera cameras. Below is a report she posted to X [emphasis ZH]…

Some concerning developments in Syria that were being largely ignored or dismissed until horrific videos of sectarian violence and executions began emerging in recent days…

In some mixed Syrian towns and villages as well as minority neighborhoods around Homs, Hama and on the coast, security was breaking down and people felt scared to speak about it, according to multiple contacts. The Hama-Homs highway had decapitated bodies strewn about, according to one contact. He wanted to take pictures of the bodies on the highway but he didn’t dare out of fear.

At one roadblock they forced him to open his phone and they went through it. He said they spoke Arabic but it was a hybrid fusha accent he could barely understand. A contact reported being stopped by HTS at a barricade. He then had to wait for his business partner who is Sunni to come and vouch for him. Not a good sign.

Flyers have been disbursed in multiple areas informing women how they should dress and act. Minorities in mixed villages have been subjected to robberies, killings, kidnappings, etc. Some have responded by organizing armed men to protect their neighborhoods from raids. This is not everyone’s experience of course. But these sorts of incidents were increasing. And they reached a fever pitch after the video of the destruction of an Alawite shrine surfaced.

While the random violence and score settling speaks to the chaos that comes with a regime change like this, the sectarian violence is much more concerning. There are militias HTS either has no control over because they’re spread too thin or they don’t care to stop them. Some expressed that they suspect HTS is secretly calling the shots and then playing dumb.

Whatever the case, there is deep distrust of HTS in many minority communities due to their past violence combined with recent events. “I don’t trust them at all, the fact that they are so insistent on collecting guns from people is so worrying, they even want licensed guns, and this is actually scary. They are always trying to appear as nice people talking about peace, but yet every day someone gets killed and they do nothing about it,” said one contact in Latakia.

The sectarian violence is reminiscent of post 2011 days when the regime would be kicked out of an area and extremist militias would quickly take over and then chaos and sectarian violence would ensue. The pro-HTS side is framing any pushback or measure of self defense in vulnerable communities as Iranian-provoked or Assadist, which isn’t helpful and exacerbates the sectarianism. As the gun battles heat up, it’s hard to ignore the signs of potential civil unrest to come with violent zones of state collapse. I hope stability wins the day but it doesn’t look good.

Authored by Aaron Gifford via The Epoch Times,

For millions of American college students, things can go from bad to worse in a hurry, as they take on long-term debt to finance higher education and earn a degree that, based on labor market demands, isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

Data analyzed by a group of state lawmakers across the country indicates that significant changes are needed to the U.S. higher education system—still viewed as the envy of the world—if a college degree is going to remain the best path for long-term financial stability.

“The public discourse on higher education … is filled with anxiety over a host of issues,” stated a recent report from the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) Task Force on Higher Education.

“The affordability of higher education tops the list.”

The report was written by 29 legislators and four legislative aids across 32 states. The two-year project, completed in October, provides suggestions to college and university leaders and state and federal lawmakers for making college affordable and worthwhile.

Task force chairs state Sens. Michael Dembrow from Oregon and Ann Millner from Utah discussed the report during a Dec. 20 virtual town hall event and pledged to lobby the federal government and universities to consider its recommendations in the years ahead.

“It also cuts through some of the myths of higher education,” said Dembrow, a Democrat, while applauding the bipartisan effort. “It’s focused on what we can agree on first. I was surprised at how much we agreed.”

Collective student debt in the United States is nearly $1.8 trillion, three times that in 2006, according to the report. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found that student debt is also the second-largest form of debt in the nation behind mortgages. One-third of borrowers have debt but no degree, reported the U.S. Department of Education.

The population of undergraduate students declined by 2.4 million students between 2012 and 2022, and the vast majority of students attend public four-year institutions as many community colleges and private schools struggle to stay afloat, according to the report.

Even though tuition and college costs have increased faster than the rate of inflation, the maximum federal Pell Grant award for eligible students has only increased by 10 percent since 2003, to $7,395 this year. And yet, the federal government spends more than $37,000 per student, or 2.5 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product, compared to about $15,500 per K-12 student, the report says.

The report found state education departments can expand dual-enrollment programs so students can earn more college credits while in high school and lessen the amount of time and money needed to complete a degree program after they earn their diploma. Higher education institutions, public and private, can help out with this initiative by being more transparent about what credits earned in high school will be counted toward program completion.

The federal government, meanwhile, should require students to attend annual loan counseling sessions “and know their uptake on aid limits,” the report said.

The report said colleges and universities could be more transparent by sharing their entire operating budgets to note how much employees are paid and why, and to spell out for students the total costs to attend their institutions full-time, not just the “net” total or average price students pay. The total for housing, meal plans, student services, and other items collectively totals far more than tuition.

“Clearly communicate the real price students pay,” it said.

“Assess program costs and prices against enrolled students’ income and career earning potential.”

The report also suggests that federal block grants are available for states that are in a better position to invest in college and university programs that are more closely aligned with local and state workforce needs. Employers should be involved in writing courses of study and federally funded work-study programs that make students career-ready.

The report said tuition costs should be reasonable and relative to the college or university’s program cost as well as the students’ incomes, career pathways, and earning potential.

“The federal government, too, has a strong responsibility to enhance the value of degrees,” it said.

Millner, a Republican, encouraged lawmakers in all states to read the report and meet with higher education leaders to discuss changes.

“It builds a foundation to make a plan for higher education to thrive in states,” she said.

Billionaire investor and Donald Trump adviser Marc Andreessen thinks corporate culture is about to undergo a radical change. Speaking with Erik Torenberg on the Moment of Zen podcast, Andreessen said that the reign of extreme wokeness, particularly in corporate America and the media, is rapidly coming to an end.

The catalyst? A combination of rising legal risks, the deflation of wokeness as a cultural force, and a change in leadership at the Department of Justice. Andreessen highlighted that with the appointment of Harmeet Dhillon to head the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, the federal government may soon begin to challenge and reverse many of the DEI-driven policies that have dominated corporations, universities, and other large institutions over the past decade.

This shift, he argues, could trigger a major pullback in DEI initiatives across the private sector, as companies scramble to comply with the law and distance themselves from policies that may now be seen as legally and culturally untenable.

.@pmarca to @eriktorenberg: ‘Every Signal is Being Sent’ Trump DOJ Civil Rights Head Will Target Corporate DEI Policies

“If you wanted to pick the most extreme possible attorney to put in charge of the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department to reverse DEI, it would be… pic.twitter.com/NNH2uTWn1t

— CAPITAL (@capitalnewshq) December 27, 2024

Erik Torenberg: You’re optimistic now that this reign of soft authoritarianism, aka extreme wokeness, is over. There’s a question of will it just come back again in four years? Now that Trump will take power, will they sort of summon the resistance antibodies again? Talk a little bit about your perspective.

Marc Andreessen: I think that “wokeness is over” is a little bit too glib, and the main reason why that’s the case I think, you know, maybe is self-evident, which is basically the bureaucracies of corporate America and of the government and of nonprofits, foundations, schools, universities, the media companies, the press — basically, the big bureaucracies, what we refer to as sort of the managerial class. The cathedral, Curtis’ term, or James Burnham’s term, the managerial class, the managers who sort of run everything — and by everything being like basically all of the large incumbent institutions — like, wokeness has become standard policy, right? And in like every large organization in the country, like the mandate number one is be compliant, right? Whatever is required to be compliant is like holy, right? It’s like the thing that cannot be — you must be compliant. You must check off all the compliance boxes. Whether you win or not in the market is kind of optional, but you must be compliant. Whether you actually teach students anything is optional, but you must be compliant.

Wokeness has become part of the compliance regime, also what they refer to wonderfully in great Orwellian terms as the ‘risk management regime,’ the ‘trust and safety regime.’ Yeah, you know, just take all these words and reverse them. This stuff has gotten wired very deeply, and then it’s been well-documented at this point that the foundation for a lot of what we call wokeness is actually baked deeply into the law. And a whole bunch of people have done great work, like Richard Hanania, Christopher Caldwell, and Wesley [Yang], who have all done great work in documenting kind of how deep this stuff is sort of embedded in the law, which is a whole other topic.

There’s an institutionalization that took place that’s going to take optimistically 30 years to get out or something like that. And by the way, maybe never. Having said that, there’s that. But then there’s what we’ve been dealing with for the last decade, which is beyond that — which is sort of the idea of wokeness being like the cultural vanguard, yeah, and basically being the thing that’s like the coolest, highest-status, highest-fashion thing you can possibly be, and the thing that you have to be if you want to aspire to rise in the hierarchy and among the managerial class and run things. And then, if you want to get like really good press coverage, and if you want people to think that you’re a moral person—that whole thing.

Then there’s the power component of it. I use the Tolkien metaphor here, the ‘ring of power,’ which is the ability to call somebody a bad name under the wokeness regime and like instantly vaporize them and blow them out of their job and take their job. Like those second parts are like, I think, fading very fast. And in a lot of ways, it’s sort of inevitable that would happen, because it’s just like in fashion, whatever is cool and trending now looks dated five or ten years later. And you wonder how people possibly could have worn bell bottoms or whatever. Like, you know, it’s that kind of phenomenon. And there’s no question, the election basically punched a giant hole in the side of that balloon, and it’s deflating incredibly quickly. And by the way, you see it in the reaction. You see it in the reaction to the election itself, which is the polar opposite reaction to 2016, which is just like complete deflation taking place. And I think wokeness is losing altitude quickly. But let’s come back to the legal part, because that’s also — there are very interesting things that might happen there that we could also talk about.”

Erik Torenberg: Say more about this.

Marc Andreessen: If you wanted to pick the most extreme possible attorney to put in charge of the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department to reverse DEI, it would be this lawyer named Harmeet Dhillon. She’s been a California lawyer and has been the scourge of woke corporations for the last decade. As it happens, she has just been appointed to run the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department. For those who don’t track this, the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department is the federal government’s prosecutorial arm that basically enforces wokeness. They’re the ones who have made sure that, for the last decade, these companies have had all these crazy policies under the penalty of being investigated, subpoenaed, and ultimately prosecuted.

There have been lots of prosecutions and court cases. The most famous case that the current head of the Civil Rights division brought was the case against SpaceX for not hiring enough refugees—despite the fact that SpaceX is a military contractor and is not permitted to hire non-American citizens under a separate law.The person running that division has been a true activist, as you’d expect from this administration. And then Dhillon, who, by the way, I don’t know but I’ve been following for years, and is clearly brilliant, she is the exact opposite of that. Every signal is being sent that they’re going to do a 180 on all these things, and they’re going to begin prosecuting companies for violations of civil rights laws in the form of reverse discrimination—discrimination against white people, Asians, Jews, and other unprotected classes.

So, signals are being sent by these appointments that there is going to be an assault to reverse the assault that companies and universities have been under. And then, of course, the Supreme Court ruled not that long ago that private universities are not allowed to do race-based admissions. It’s actually really funny because there’s some question as to whether the demographic shift of admissions in the last year was starkly different than the year before, as these institutions claim they’re coming into compliance with the Supreme Court. There’s some question as to whether discovery will show they’re actually in compliance or whether they’re still playing games. That’s another thing we may find out.

There’s also an open question as to whether this decision has essentially already been made or will be made for private companies as well. And there’s a lot of private companies that have been trying to figure out quietly how to distance themselves from DEI, both for legal reasons and for cultural reasons. Now, there’s another very interesting thing kicking in. I think there are a lot of large companies that were already done with DEI to start with. They were done with DEI for their own reasons because it’s backfired in many spectacular ways. But now, any large company that wants to distance itself from DEI has the best reason in the world: compliance. It’s illegal.

Let me just say for the record… I think every major corporation in the country is just in flagrant violation of actual civil rights law. You cannot have these hard quotas and racially, ethnically, and religiously biased hiring practices. It’s flat-out illegal. These companies have gone so extreme on this that they’ve ended up in what I think is clearly mass illegality. So, as Dhillon steps into her job, she’s not going to lack for a shortage of targets. If you don’t want to be a target, it’s a great ‘get out of jail free’ card to just voluntarily shut all this stuff down.

My guess is that starting pretty quickly, we’re already starting to see it. Boeing and a bunch of other companies have already put a bullet in their programs. Even the University of Michigan, which went completely overboard with this stuff, has actually shut their whole thing down. I think we’re going to see, my guess is, a run of companies that will take dramatic action here.

Watch the entire exchange here: