Category: Economy

NY Fed Reports “Successful” Months-Long Digital Dollar Test

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Innovation Center has recently concluded a 12-week experiment in cahoots with banking behemoths such as Citigroup Inc. and Wells Fargo & Co. The study focused on regulated liability networks, with an aim to test the efficiency of digital dollars in the financial sector. Though the initial results showed some advantages in transaction speeds, critical questions regarding privacy and civil liberties remain glaringly unanswered and alarmingly relevant.

The study, as reported by Bloomberg, employed a permissioned private blockchain to simulate the issuance and settlement of digital currency, representing customer deposits. The very use of a private blockchain rings alarm bells, as it could allow the central bank, and potentially other financial entities, to have an unprecedented level of control and surveillance over individual transactions. This could be a perilous road leading towards an Orwellian financial system where citizens are stripped of financial privacy.

Per von Zelowitz, the director of the New York Innovation Center, seemed to gloss over these concerns in his statement emphasizing the functional benefits of central bank and commercial bank digital money operating together on a shared ledger. However, it raises the question – at what cost to individual privacy and freedom?

The experiment found that digital dollars could streamline dollar-denominated payments and expedite settlement processes. However, what this conclusion conveniently omits is an examination of how this digitization could allow a dystopian degree of oversight and control over personal and business transactions. Tony McLaughlin from Citigroup talked about the “prospect of a global, instant US dollar payment system,” but made no mention of the invasive potential it could hold for individual privacy.

As the research revealed no immediate legal impediments to the establishment of a digital dollar under existing US laws, it’s chilling that there has been no transparent discussion about the civil liberties at stake. With the advent of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), governments could have the power to track every transaction, big or small, of every citizen. This raises severe concerns not only about privacy but also about the potential misuse of personal data.

Moreover, the experiment’s exclusive reliance on a private blockchain – in stark contrast to the public blockchains which at least offer some level of anonymity – paints a haunting picture. Herein lies a thinly-veiled warning; financial efficiency should not and cannot be pursued at the expense of basic human rights and liberties.

The concept of CBDCs in the United States is nascent, but this should serve as an urgent call for rigorous public debate. Before we tread further down this slippery slope, it is imperative to consider the Pandora’s Box we might inadvertently open, trading our treasured privacy for marginal gains in transaction speed.

Breaking: McCarthy gets debt-ceiling deal — with work requirements.

Utterly predictable, although it still came about 24 hours later than I expected. On a holiday weekend when people are paying the least attention, Joe Biden finally cut a deal with Kevin McCarthy to raise the debt ceiling and end a game of chicken that Biden and Democrats lost months ago. House Republicans didn’t get everything they wanted, but Biden and the Democrats didn’t get anything they wanted except to limit the embarrassment:

President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Saturday reached an agreement in principle to raise the debt limit for two years while cutting and capping some government spending over the same period, a breakthrough after a marathon set of crisis talks that has brought the nation within days of its first default in history. …

The deal would raise the borrowing limit, which is currently $31.4 trillion, for two years — enough to get past the next presidential election.

According to a person familiar with the agreement, it also would impose new work requirements for some recipients of government aid, including food stamps and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.
It would place new limits on how long certain recipients of food stamps — people under the age of 54, who do not have children — could benefit from the program. But it also would expand food stamp access for veterans and the homeless, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the package.

The tentative deal also claws back some unspent money from a previous pandemic relief bill, and reduces by $10 billion — to $70 billion from $80 billion — new enforcement funding for the I.R.S. to crack down on tax cheats. It includes measures meant to speed environmental reviews of certain energy projects. And it includes an enforcement measure, meant to avert a government shutdown later this year, that would reduce funding caps for the military and veterans and Congress does not pass into law all 12 regularly scheduled appropriations bills by the end of the year.

The work requirements on safety-net programs will enrage Biden’s allies, not just on principle but also because it hands McCarthy a big win. Without it, McCarthy probably wouldn’t get more than a handful of his caucus to back him. As it is, the reductions in the cuts they already passed are not going to make the Republicans happy, even if they have to swallow it at the eleventh hour.

But come on … they won. Biden and Chuck Schumer lost this weeks ago, and now they just caved. It would not surprise me if the Democrats knew this was coming all along, and they merely waited for a holiday weekend to give them enough cover to pull the trigger.

As I said, utterly predictable. Just like the way we knew McCarthy would win, because — again — he won the moment he got the debt-ceiling hike through the House. He forced Biden and Schumer to negotiate on his terms, and he kept enough of them to matter. We’ll have more on the deal as it comes together, and as the media tries to spin it any other way.

Update: This is apparently what counts as a win for Biden:

Republicans had sought to repeal Biden’s efforts to waive $10,000 to $20,000 in debt for nearly all borrowers who took out student loans. But the provision was a nonstarter for Democrats. The budget agreement keeps Biden’s student loan relief in place, though the Supreme Court will have the ultimate say on the matter.

The Supreme Court is dominated 6-3 by conservatives, and those justices’ questions in oral arguments showed skepticism about the legality of Biden’s student loans plan. A decision is expected before the end of June.

That plan is going to die a very well-deserved death at the Supreme Court no matter what, on a number of grounds. McCarthy probably put it in the bid so that Biden could claim a concession from Republicans in the final deal.

Lysander Boomer

Given the threat to our economic and consequently political stability posed by the consequences of the curtailment of natural gas production, I would welcome a statement from the governors of producing states about what their intentions are in the future.

Assuming a second Biden term, it is probable that additional restrictions will be passed aimed at destroying domestic energy production. State governments must nullify such restrictions and ensure sufficient energy supplies.

I would encourage the formation of regional organizations between states to ensure that at a minimum, politically aligned states are not economically devastated by the policies of this administration. Joint litigation, joint resistance, joint production etc.
The lights must be kept on, the production of food must not be interfered with, the grid must be secured against sabotage, both physical and legislative in origin.

If we must have a constitutional crisis, let it be over keeping folks fed and living with proper amounts of air conditioning and electrical services. The feds will either yield or be displaced in such a circumstance.

Force the agenda out into the open. Use state power to the absolute maximum to ensure the prosperity of your state and confederate with other likeminded states to resist the inevitable federal repercussions. It may get ugly but it is a worthy fight.

Potentially consider passing legislation to allow for the recall of senators if they are judged to act against the interest of the state government. This will work to restore the intention of the senate as a battleground of the states.
State legislatures must wield their power strongly to defend against federal overreach. I can’t say it enough, the states must arm themselves (legally) against the federal government and prepare to fight with everything they’ve got.

Comment O’ The Day
As with electric cars, the environmental benefits of fake meat are more claimed than proven.

Eat Meat! (2)

In today’s developed world, average people can achieve a higher standard of living than has ever before been possible. In fact, the difference between an “elite” standard of living and that enjoyed by people of average, or a little more than average, means, has dwindled to near-insignificance. It is fair to say that today, an “elite” American has little more chance of living a satisfying and happy life than the average American.

Our “elites” consider this situation intolerable, a fact that explains much of our current political turmoil. Liberals are trying to drive down the standard of living for all Americans. True, their own standards will suffer slightly. But if you are a multi-millionaire, how much do you care if your electricity bill doubles? The salient fact is that a general decline in standards of living will increase the disparity between the “elite” and the rest of us. That, I think, is the goal of many liberal policies, and the main reason why most rich people are liberals.

Today, a person of ordinary means can toss some steaks on the grill on Memorial Day. That is a good thing, in most people’s opinion, but it galls “elite” leftists, who eat steak themselves but are annoyed that the rest of us can afford to do so, too. Hence the Left’s war on meat, the point of which is to drive up prices so that they can afford steak, pork chops, bacon, etc., but you can’t.

As always, “the environment,” in the form of CO2 emissions, is the excuse. But does that actually make any sense? One of the alternatives to cows, pigs and chickens is lab-grown meat, which has been touted as an environmentally-friendly substitute for the real thing. But a recent study casts doubt on that claim:

Lab-grown meat has been touted as a way to save the planet, but a new study suggests its green credentials are not as solid as many believe.

Researchers have revealed that lab-grown or ‘cultured’ meat, produced by cultivating animal cells, is up to 25 times worse for the climate than real beef.

Which is to say, it produces up to 25 times the CO2 emissions. What are we talking about here?

Lab-grown meat is different from plant-based ‘meat’, which is not meat at all but uses vegan ingredients such as vegetable protein to replicate the look and taste of real meat.

Lab-grown or ‘cultured’ meat is generally seen as more ethical than real meat because it requires a sample of body tissue rather than the death of the animal, although many vegans and vegetarians will not touch it because it is made of animal.

I won’t touch it either, but not for these reasons:

In the study, the scientists estimated the energy required for stages of lab-grown meat’s production, from the ingredients making up the growth medium and the energy required to power laboratories, and compared this with beef.

They largely focused on the quantity of growth medium components, including glucose, amino acids, vitamins, growth factors, salts and minerals.

They found the global warming potential of lab-grown meat ranged from 246 to 1,508 kg of CO2 equivalent per kilogram of lab-grown meat, which is four to 25 times greater than the average global warming potential of retail beef.

Whatever. If it didn’t come from a cow, a pig, a sheep, or a fowl or fish, I don’t want to eat it.

And scientists are pushing back against the Left’s attack on meat:

[T]he war on meat is only just getting going – and it has some very powerful supporters. ESG (environmental, social and governance) rankings and corporate social responsibility checklists reward companies for creating vegan products, even if nobody buys them. Meat taxes are being considered to price it out of our reach. The Dutch government is spending €25bn (£22bn) to buy out its livestock farmers and close down their farms. But it’s all based on some very dubious pseudoscience.

Now the scientific establishment has begun to fight back. Last month, over 900 scientists signed the Dublin Declaration, a milestone in the defence of livestock farming. The declaration explains how ruminants, such as cows and sheep, rescue marginal land.

“Well-managed livestock systems applying agro-ecological principles can generate many other benefits, including carbon sequestration, improved soil health, biodiversity, watershed protection and the provision of important ecosystem services.” They add that a drastic reduction in animals “could actually incur environmental problems on a large scale”. It will also hurt three billion of the world’s poorest, who could use the iron and protein that comes from real meat.

Plus, meat is nutritious, and it tastes good. The author of the Telegraph piece explains the war on meat with a classical reference:

I wonder if even the most compelling rational arguments for meat will wilt when faced with such furious medieval zealotry. The motivation is not really saving the climate, or concerns about nitrogen – it’s simply that something so nutritious and delicious should be being enjoyed at all.

As Macauley wrote of the Puritans: they “hated bear-baiting not because it gave pain to the bear, but because it gave pleasure to the spectators.”

Exactly. The spectators here being ordinary people who can afford to buy meat. In the eyes of our “elites,” that can’t be allowed to continue.

Who turned the lights out? Joe Biden

Does the radical climate change agenda know no end? Earlier this year, it was gas stoves — and then lightbulbs.

Then, a few weeks ago, President Joe Biden’s administration announced much less gas cars after 2032. Even though about half of Americans say they don’t want an electric car and only 6% of drivers are buying them.

But that was child’s play compared to the latest Biden scheme to shut down as many as half our electric power plants across the country. These are the plants that charge those Tesla batteries and cellphones. They also keep the lights on in our factories, schools, hospitals, stores, and homes and power the internet. Further, they cook our food and keep us warm at night. No, that power doesn’t just come magically from the socket in the wall.

Most of the electric power supply in America and around the world comes from fossil fuels. Coal, gas and oil power plants account for more than 60% of the electric power we use in the United States today. Only about 20% comes from wind and solar power.

Hold that thought. Because the Biden administration has announced what The Washington Post calls a plan to “drastically reduce (power plant) greenhouse gas emissions.” These cuts are so stringent that most of our gas- and coal-fired plants would be technologically incapable of complying. But here’s what’s sinister: That’s the point of these rules — to wrench fossil fuels from our energy supply altogether.

Our electric grid system is already stressed to the limits. States that have tried to switch to green energy — California comes to mind — are having to undergo dangerous blackouts and brownouts. This is what happens in Third World countries. It isn’t supposed to happen here.

Where are we going to get the electric power to charge 150 million EVs every night? From windmills? Remember, these new Environmental Protection Agency rules come just weeks after Biden announced cars would soon no longer be fueled with gas, oil or diesel. Yet now, we are going to shut down more power plants?

The Biden administration says that coal and gas plants will have to pay for carbon offsets to make up for their carbon emissions. Who’s going to pay for that? We all will with much higher utility bills.

If you want to cripple an industrial economy like that of the U.S., a good way to do so is to dismantle its energy supply. Who is the president residing in the White House these days? Joe Biden or Dr. Evil?

No country has cleaned its air more than the U.S. has over the last many decades. The Institute for Energy Research reports that our air pollution emissions — including lead, sulfur, carbon monoxide and particulates — have fallen by a combined 74% over the past 50 years. We have the cleanest air in any of our lifetimes.

Even our carbon dioxide emissions have fallen in recent years more than any other country, thanks to natural gas production. We aren’t the problem. China is, and you can be sure they’re not doing anything to slow their economy.

These new EPA regulations aren’t about breathing cleaner air or changing the temperature of the planet. They are a dangerous assault on the American free enterprise system and U.S. global leadership.

Biden thinks his legacy will be as the president who fought global warming.

Wrong. He will go down in history as the president who turned the lights out on the U.S. economy.

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation

REGULATORS SEIZE FIRST REPUBLIC IN SECOND LARGEST BANK FAILURE IN U.S. HISTORY:

Early on Monday, regulators seized the San Francisco-based First Republic Bank and agreed a deal to sell its deposits and most of its assets to JPMorgan Chase, preventing further spiral in the banking industry.

Three of the four largest-ever U.S. bank failures have occurred in the past two months. First Republic Bank, which as of April 13 had $229.1 billion in total assets and $103.9 billion in total deposits, is the second largest bank to go under in U.S. history, behind only Washington Mutual, which went down in 2008. First Republic has been struggling since the failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and New York-based Signature Bank in March.

Investors and depositors were growing increasingly worried the bank would not survive because of its high amount of uninsured deposits — that is, deposits over the FDIC-insured limit of $250,000. First Republic also had high exposure to low-interest loans. A focus on wealthy clients on both coasts allowed First Republic to grow into one of the biggest banks in America. Large deposits funded low-rate mortgages to wealthy home buyers.

The bank lost $100 billion in deposits in a March run following SVB’s collapse. First Republic struggled to cope with the declining situation until eleven of America’s biggest banks deposited $30 billion into its coffers. That gave the bank breathing room and it tried to turn itself around. First Republic planned to sell off unprofitable assets, including the low interest mortgages, and it also announced layoffs of a quarter of its workforce.

The quarterly report, however, sent investors into panic. With the stock price in freefall and the bank poised for further spiral, regulators considered intervention necessary.

“As part of the transaction, First Republic Bank’s 84 offices in eight states will reopen as branches of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, today during normal business hours. All depositors of First Republic Bank will become depositors of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, and will have full access to all of their deposits,” explained the FDIC in a statement Monday.

“The resolution of First Republic Bank involved a highly competitive bidding process and resulted in a transaction consistent with the least-cost requirements of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act,” the agency added, estimating the cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund to be about $13 billion. The agency is sharing losses on First Republic’s loans.

The FDIC seriously considered a bid from at least one smaller bank — namely, PNC Financial Services, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Both First Republic and Washington Mutual are now substantially owned by JPMorgan. Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon was instrumental in earlier efforts to rescue First Republic. JP Morgan was one of the eleven banks to intervene in March and Dimon was pushing for additional steps to be taken.

“Our government invited us and others to step up, and we did,” explained Dimon in a statement. “Our financial strength, capabilities and business model allowed us to develop a bid to execute the transaction in a way to minimize costs to the Deposit Insurance Fund.”

“This acquisition modestly benefits our company overall, it is accretive to shareholders, it helps further advance our wealth strategy, and it is complementary to our existing franchise,” Dimon added.

JPMorgan expects the addition of First Republic to add $500 million to its net income per year, not including the approximately $2.6 billion one-time post-tax gain or approximately $2 billion of post-tax restructuring costs expected over the course of 2023 and 2024.

Three huge problems with Biden’s new ‘equity’-based mortgage policy.

President Biden has repeatedly rejected the traditional American principles of meritocracy and opportunity in favor of the nebulous push for “equity,” aka equality of outcome. The latest incarnation of this shift comes via the Biden administration’s new rules for mortgage fees that will punish the responsible and reward the reckless.

Here’s what’s going down.

“A new rule will raise mortgage fees for borrowers with good credit to subsidize higher-risk borrowers,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “Under the rule, which goes into effect May 1, home buyers with a good credit score over 680 will pay about $40 more each month on a $400,000 loan, and upward depending on the size of the loan. Those who make down payments of 20% on their homes will pay the highest fees. Those payments will then be used to subsidize higher-risk borrowers through lower fees.”

This is a terrible idea, and here are 3 reasons why.

The housing market is already struggling

The real-estate market is already struggling right now, with home sales down significantly thanks to rising interest rates that are making buying a home much more expensive. That means it’s the worst time to add new rules that make it more expensive to buy a home. And it’s not just right-wing activists and conservative media saying this.

“This confusing approach won’t work and more importantly couldn’t come at a worse time for an industry struggling to get back on its feet after these past 12 months,” said former Obama administration housing official David Stevens. “To do this at the onset of the spring market is almost offensive to the market, consumers, and lenders.”

This rule makes responsible people pay for irresponsible people

Biden’s new rule is fundamentally unfair. If you’ve made responsible decisions and have a good credit score, you will now be punished—to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars over the lifetime of your mortgage—to bail other people out of the consequences of their poor decision making that’s led them to have a poor credit score. That’s an insult to hardworking Americans and a boon to those who don’t deserve it.

Further encourages people to buy houses they can’t afford

We need look no further than the 2008 financial crisis to see what happens when you make it easier for people to get a mortgage who can’t actually afford to buy a house or be trusted to pay back a mortgage. That’s exactly what this fee system does, however. As the Journal notes, “This is the socialization of risk, and it flies against every rational economic model, while encouraging housing market dysfunction and putting taxpayers at risk for higher default rates.”

All in all, it’s a terrible idea. And, unfortunately, it’s part of a broader pattern. On everything from so-called student debt “cancellation” to Affirmative Action, the Biden administration is siding against American meritocracy and endorsing radical redistributionism.

Hint: ‘Cash is still King’
(and $500 won’t go as far as you might think it does)

SO, SHOPPING AT THE FRESH MARKET TONIGHT, we were among the very few to buy groceries, because their computer network was down and they couldn’t process credit or debit cards.
They couldn’t even accept checks because those are run through an ACH payment system rather than deposited in the old way.
We, however, were able to pay and get out, something only a couple of other customers could do.
One older guy, and a couple of teenaged girls who said “we rock it old school with cash,” which I thought was hilarious.
Most people didn’t carry enough cash for groceries.

2 lessons:
(1) The “cashless society” is less robust than cash; and
(2) Always carry enough cash to buy groceries, a meal out, and a tank of gas. Just in case.
–Glenn Reynolds

Biden to hike payments for good-credit homebuyers to subsidize high-risk mortgages

Homebuyers with good credit scores will soon encounter a costly surprise: a new federal rule forcing them to pay higher mortgage rates and fees to subsidize people with riskier credit ratings who are also in the market to buy houses.

The fee changes will go into effect May 1 as part of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s push for affordable housing, and they will affect mortgages originating at private banks across the country. The federally backed home mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will enact the loan-level price adjustments, or LLPAs.

Mortgage industry specialists say homebuyers with credit scores of 680 or higher will pay, for example, about $40 per month more on a home loan of $400,000. Homebuyers who make down payments of 15% to 20% will get socked with the largest fees.

The new fees will apply only to Americans buying houses or refinancing after May 1.

Lenders and real estate agents say the changes will frustrate homebuyers with high credit scores and homeowners seeking to refinance because the rule punishes them for their relatively strong financial positions.

Continue reading “”

Digital Money Plus Electric Cars Equals Fascist America.

The administrative state is moving faster to cement its totalitarian rule over the United States of America than we can to keep pace.
They are doing this because they realize the majority of our people oppose their wishes, but if they are able to impose them by fiat before that opposition forms and reacts, most people will eventually go along. Unfortunately, it’s human nature for many.
This Passover, I had a telling reminder when I learned for the first time that only an estimated 20 percent of the Jews left Egypt during the Exodus. The other 80 percent chose to remain in the comfort of what they knew—slavery. (These figures come from the medieval French rabbi Rashi, one of the most revered Talmudic scholars.)
Our slavery comes in an electric form. Only a few days ago, the following was announced in The New York Times (which we today learned has become a reality):
“The Biden administration is planning some of the most stringent auto pollution limits in the world, designed to ensure that all-electric cars make up as much 67 percent of new passenger vehicles sold in the country by 2032, according to two people familiar with the matter.”
Currently, the same article reports, they are around 5.8 percent.
This information basically coincides with the announcement by the Federal Reserve Bank of the new FedNow payments system to debut in July. As CNBC explains it, “The system will allow bill payments, money transfers, and other consumer activities to move more rapidly and at lower cost.”
Oh, good. They add: “Some Fed officials say the program even could supplant the need for a central bank digital currency.”
Note the use of the word “could.” More likely, this really is a big step toward a central bank digital currency.
Apparently, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, erroneously in the network’s view, alleged that digital currency would enable the government to block the purchase of a rifle  or “too much gas.”
Of course, it could. But NBC gives away the real story—most likely inadvertently—in one sentence:
“The Fed is exploring the idea to keep up with countries that have moved to implement their own digital currencies, such as China.”
“Such as,” indeed. I guess it’s okay for U. S. government agencies to emulate the Chinese Communist Party these days. We have to compete, after all, even if that competition leads us into being communists ourselves.

Continue reading “”

Three Huge Reasons Why Electric Vehicles Will Never Dominate American Roads

Here’s the most important fact about plug-in electric vehicles (EV), courtesy of the liberal content-creators at Wikipedia in the opening sentence of their post on “Government Incentives for Plug-in Electric Vehicles:”

Such incentives “have been established around the world to support policy-driven adoption of plug-in electric vehicles. These incentives mainly take the form of purchase rebates, tax exemptions and tax credits, and additional perks that range from access to bus lanes to waivers on fees (charging, parking, tolls, etc.).” [Emphasis added]

The campaign by the Western elite in the U.S. and Europe to force everybody else to stop driving cars and trucks powered by fossil-fueled internal combustion engines and adopt EVs instead is a product of the elite’s policy choices, not ours.

No matter that hundreds of millions of Americans own and depend upon their cars and trucks to earn their livings, go where they can purchase the basic necessities of life, and visit any place they choose to go to in this vast land.

President Biden has made a regulatory policy decision that half of all vehicles sold in America will be EVs by 2030. He is spending billions of tax dollars to install half a million EV charging stations around the country to serve the anticipated explosion in demand for electric “refills.”

And federal tax credits are available to help obscure the fact that EVs remain extremely costly for consumers and offer unproven maintenance and reliability records. No wonder that, despite the immense pressure being put upon consumers to buy EVs, they still only make up about seven percent of all new-vehicle purchases.

The fact that Ford, GM, Toyota, Honda, and the rest of the world’s automakers are rushing to offer EVs throughout their model lineups is a response to the government, not consumers.

In other words, the elites in government, media, academia, woke corporations, entertainment, and non-profit advocacy communities are doing everything they can to sell EVs, but the vast majority of Americans aren’t buying. That’s the first of three huge reasons EVs will never dominate American roads.

The second reason is seen in a recent analysis by John Eichberger, executive director of the Fuels Institute, a research group backed by a coalition of energy and transportation firms.

Continue reading “”

Tucker Carlson Outlines the Ramification of Trillions in U.S. Treasury Bonds No Longer Needed as Global Securities

For his opening monologue and first interview tonight, Fox News host Tucker Carlson outlined the ramification of non-western nations now trading in alternative currencies to the U.S. dollar.  As the dollar diminishes in value, and as an outcome of Biden using U.S. treasury bonds as part of the sanction regime against Russia, various non-western nations now perceive holding dollars as exposing themselves to risk.

Carlson is joined by Luke Gromen who accurately notes the dollar as a global trade currency may continue, but foreign nations holding U.S. treasury bonds as an asset will likely start contracting.  The result of U.S. treasury bonds returning after maturity with no repurchase, would be an inability of the U.S. to borrow against their sale. This could, perhaps likely will, severely diminish the amount of money the U.S. congress can spend.

None of this should come as a surprise to those who have paid attention. Factually, in March of last year, one month after the Russian sanctions were announced, the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Deputy Managing Director said the sanctions against Russia are likely to undermine the US dollar’s global dominance as a trade currency.  Everyone could see this coming.

Continue reading “”

Janet Yellen, WH During Grilling on US Economy

Things are not good on the Biden team. As we reported, one reason is that Joe Biden is allegedly disappointed in Kamala Harris.

The word is that the powers that be at the White House are unhappy with her ability to do her job. Astonishing—did they finally just discover that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about? How long was she talking about “transitory” inflation before she had to admit it was real?

Charlie Gasparino had some scoop on that.

As we have reported, the political types in the White House — the people that craft messaging and give input on cabinet choices — have been increasingly wary of Yellen’s ability to do the job despite her expansive resume and years running the Fed, people with direct knowledge tell the Post.

They grew sour over her bungled response to inflation (recall how she said it was transitory as it was exploding). It’s why they floated possible replacements last year, including Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, and Brian Moynihan, the CEO of Bank of America. Both are seen as policy heavyweights. Unlike Yellen, they have real-world business experience (Yellen’s been in academia and government throughout her career).

Yet she survived that attempt to get her removed because her ultimate boss, the president, didn’t want to fire a woman in such a high-profile post, these people say.

White House advisors are upset over her flip-flops when it comes to whether the government will guarantee deposits of banks if they fail. That sounds like bailouts.

But the problem? They’re not sure they have anyone with any better answers to replace her with.

“On one hand they’re kind of stuck with her; it would be bad to get rid of a Treasury Secretary during a banking crisis,” said one of my sources, who works at a large DC-based think-tank and has heard the griping firsthand. “On the other hand, they know they don’t have anyone good to be their face in terms of a response.”

The problem is that the fish stinks from the head down. That’s Biden (and the folks pulling his levers behind the scenes). So, even if they get rid of her, the policies are all still horrific.

The embarrassing grilling that she had this week in Congress shows how much at sea Yellen is. But, it also revealed just how much they intend to tax us. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) asked Yellen whether it was true that Joe Biden’s budget proposes $4.7 trillion in new taxes.

Yellen looked embarrassed — as she should be — and Kennedy had to push her a little to answer, but she acknowledges yes, it was something like that number. Anyone who thinks they intend to get this amount in taxes just by going after the folks over $400,000 hasn’t been paying attention.

That answer was bad enough, but the clueless stare when Kennedy asks about the debt, and just how much is sustainable, is something else. This is just next-level bad.

She thinks 109 percent is sustainable. This is going to do us in, and maybe that’s what they’re trying to do here. It certainly seems so, with these kinds of actions.

Then in response to Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV), Yellen said that people don’t like the IRS because they haven’t been given enough resources. Yes, she said that.

This was after admitting previously, as I reported, that 90 percent of the new IRS audits would be on people making under $400,000.

These wild remarks this week were after her astonishing testimony in the prior week, talking about the bank collapses and admitting they’re essentially picking winners and losers to save. The result of this action, as Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said, would have people leaving community banks for the bigger banks or the “winners” that are being chosen. This type of response could crater the community banks.

This is where this administration has brought us, to absolutely insane approaches.

But don’t worry, because Janet Yellen says our economy is “performing very well.”

Instead of one huge nuke installation, taking decades to license and build, consider the idea of multiple sites providing power to several subdivisions.
Scrap all these forest of windmills.

Britain backs Rolls-Royce effort to develop micro-reactor to power moon base.

Britain's space agency on Friday announced $3.5 million in funding for Rolls-Royce research into how nuclear power can be used to power a moon base. Image courtesy Rolls Royce

March 17 (UPI) — Britain is pinning its hopes on nuclear power becoming the energy source that will fuel the next phase of human exploration of the moon, the country’s space agency said Friday.

Announcing $3.5 million funding for Rolls-Royce research into how nuclear could be used to power a manned base on the moon, the U.K. Space Agency said the technology would provide the power for humans to live and work on the lunar surface, dramatically increasing the duration of missions.

The agency said the funding was for Rolls-Royce to deliver an initial demonstration of a lunar modular nuclear reactor based around the company’s existing Micro Reactor technology, with a working reactor ready to send to moon by 2029.

“All space missions depend on a power source, to support systems for communications, life-support and science experiments. Nuclear power has the potential to dramatically increase the duration of future lunar missions and their scientific value,” it added.

Rolls-Royce said the latest funding round was highly significant for its Micro-Reactor which, compact and lightweight compared with other power systems, is capable of generating continuous power regardless of location, available sunlight, and environmental conditions.

“We’re proud to work collaboratively with the U.K. Space Agency and the many U.K. academic institutions to showcase the best of U.K. innovation and knowledge in space,” said Rolls Royce Director of Future Programs Abi Clayton.

“This funding will bring us further down the road in making the Micro-Reactor a reality, with the technology bringing immense benefits for both space and Earth. The technology will deliver the capability to support commercial and defense use cases alongside providing a solution to decarbonize industry and provide clean, safe and reliable energy.”

Science, Innovation and Technology Minister George Freeman said nuclear space power was anticipated to create new skilled jobs across the Britain that would support its fledgling space economy.

“Space exploration is the ultimate laboratory for so many of the transformational technologies we need on Earth: from materials to robotics, nutrition, cleantech and much more,” said Freeman.

The partnership with Rolls-Royce comes two weeks after the agency announced $62 million of funding for British companies to develop communication and navigation services for missions to the moon, as part of the European Space Agency’s Moonlight program.

Moonlight aims to launch a constellation of satellites into orbit around the moon.

The satellites will allow astronauts, rovers, science experiments and other equipment to communicate, share large data streams including high-definition video, and navigate safely on the surface of the moon.

Quote O’ The Day
Social Justice is bad enough by itself, but it’s also a marker for those incapable of thinking clearly enough to focus clearly on their main jobs.

More On How SVB Screwed The Pooch.

I wasn’t planning on writing more about the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, but too much info has been coming down the pike to ignore. Plus, I found the video below, and felt I had to share it.

First up: Silicon Valley Bank donated nearly $74 million to #BlackLivesMatter and associated causes.

A newly published database from the Claremont Institute has revealed that the since-collapsed Silicon Valley Bank donated or pledged to donate nearly $74 million to the Black Lives Matter movement and related causes.

In an August 2020 Diversity, Equity & Inclusion report, SVB declared “we are on a journey committed to increasing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in our workplace, with our partners and across the innovation economy.”

The bank revealed that they had donated $1.6 million to “causes supporting gender parity in innovation,” as well as $1.2 million to support “opportunities for diverse, emerging talent in innovation.”

In SVB’s 2021 Proxy Statement, the bank wrote in relation to racial and social equity that “the calls to end systemic racial and social inequities following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020 had a profound global impact.”

“We responded by expanding opportunities for dialogue, including hosting over 40 small group ‘Conversation Circles’ in which over two thirds of our employees participated in discussions about racial equity issues.”

The statement continued to say that the bank’s “DEI-focused ‘town hall’ meetings for employees were in response to our recognition of the need for greater transparency and dialogue around the racial representation of our workforce and the innovation ecosystem.”

In addition, the bank, provided “opportunities for action, mobilizing our employees and clients to join in community service through Tech Gives Back, a week of volunteer events focused in part on racial equity, social justice and access to the innovation economy,” and partnered with “Act One Ventures to launch The Diversity Term Sheet Rider for Representation at the Cap Table initiative, which advocates for venture capital firms to include in all of their term sheets a pledge to bring members of underrepresented groups into deals as co-investors.”

A 2020 letter from CEO Greg Becker stated, “In recent months, we’ve expanded our philanthropic giving through corporate donations and employee matching programs. These programs focus on pandemic response, social justice, sustainability and supporting women, Black and Latinx emerging talent and other underrepresented groups. You’ll find examples of these programs in this report, ranging from workforce development to affordable housing.”

In 2020, the bank launched its Missions program, “a software platform designed to engage employees to act in support of the causes they care about most such as voter education and racial justice and equity,” which saw employees donate $400,000 for “justice and equity for Black Americans.”

According to the Claremont Institute, an additional $250,000 was allocated by the SVB Foundation to support grants for social justice organizations including the NAACP, ACLU, and National Urban League.

SVB additionally partnered with 44 organizations focused on furthering DEI in innovation and invested in relationships with historically black colleges and universities, and hosted internships and provided tuition assistance for students from “underserved communities.”

In a Corporate Responsibility Report from 2021, SVB pledged to donate $50M in its diversity and inclusion programs and partnerships, “with a focus on women, Black and Latinx individuals.”

In May of 2021, SVB announced a proposed five-year, $11.2 billion community benefits plan in collaboration with The Greenlining Institute, an M4BL, or Movement For Black Lives, member. The Claremont Institute wrote that “that plan includes $75M in unspecified charitable contributions (also not included in our total).”

Social Justice is bad enough by itself, but it’s also a marker for those incapable of thinking clearly enough to focus clearly on their main jobs.

And now this video, which slams “Stupid Valley Bank” for its egregious stupidity and slams It’s Pat, which is these days is almost like a Hispster move (“It’s a pretty obscure bad movie, you’ve probably never heard of it”).

He also thinks the crisis is just beginning…

‘THAT’S A LIE:’ Janet Yellen Faces Grilling Before Senate Finance Committee.

Salient point

Biden’s refusal to work with lawmakers was brought up again by Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) on the issue of protecting the solvency of Social Security. Yellen tried to insist that Biden “cares very deeply” about the program, but couldn’t explain any of his actions to back up that claim. Instead, Yellen insisted Biden “stands ready to work with Congress.”

“That’s a lie,” Cassidy pointed out, as lawmakers have tried to meet with Biden on the subject to no avail.

It’s unsurprising that Biden doesn’t have a plan to address Social Security or negotiate a debt ceiling increase, considering his previous failures. From the Afghanistan withdrawal to declaring “independence” from COVID in 2021, Biden’s plans, when he does have them, don’t end any better.