newswars--2020-05-06--Hollywood Wants Pandemic To Create ‘Radical Transformation’ Of America

Over 200 Hollywood celebrities and scientists published an editorial on French newspaper Le Monde on Wednesday demanding that society accept a new “ radical transformation ” of America brought on by the coronavirus pandemic .
Among the celebrities were the usual far-left activists like Robert De Niro , Madonna , Barbra Streisand , and Jane Fonda , along with singers , directors , and Nobel Prize-winning elitists , using the coronavirus crisis to spout their usual climate change talking points .
“ The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis : the massive extinction of life on Earth is no longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a direct existential threat .
Unlike a pandemic , however severe , a global ecological collapse will have immeasurable consequences , ” the statement said .
“ The pursuit of consumerism and an obsession with productivity have led us to deny the value of life itself : that of plants , that of animals , and that of a great number of human beings .
Pollution , climate change , and the destruction of our remaining natural zones have brought the world to a breaking point.
” “ The radical transformation we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boldness and courage .
It will not happen without a massive and determined commitment .
We must act now .
It is as much a matter of survival as one of dignity and coherence , ” the statement concluded .
As Joe Saunders of The Western Journal noted , the virtue-signaling Hollywood elites frequently push the left ’ s socialist agenda no matter what crisis is taking place .
“ Whether it ’ s preaching about open borders from behind gated properties or attacking the right of self-defense while being protected by armed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world rarely pass up an opportunity to signal their superiority to the masses below them , ” he wrote .
For anyone slightly aware of the actual truth behind the Chinese SARS devastation .
Hollywood has revealed themselves as they truly are .
Arrogant misinformed spoiled a # $ holes who would rather support a foreign power that is responsible for sending the United States over a cliff than support the efforts of their own Republic .

Over 200 Hollywood celebrities and scientists published an editorial on French newspaper Le Monde on Wednesday demanding that society accept a new “radical transformation” of America brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.
Among the celebrities were the usual far-left activists like Robert De Niro, Madonna, Barbra Streisand, and Jane Fonda, along with singers, directors, and Nobel Prize-winning elitists, using the coronavirus crisis to spout their usual climate change talking points.
“The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis: the massive extinction of life on Earth is no longer in doubt, and all indicators point to a direct existential threat. Unlike a pandemic, however severe, a global ecological collapse will have immeasurable consequences,” the statement said.
“The pursuit of consumerism and an obsession with productivity have led us to deny the value of life itself: that of plants, that of animals, and that of a great number of human beings. Pollution, climate change, and the destruction of our remaining natural zones have brought the world to a breaking point.”
“The radical transformation we need – at all levels – demands boldness and courage. It will not happen without a massive and determined commitment. We must act now. It is as much a matter of survival as one of dignity and coherence,” the statement concluded.
As Joe Saunders of The Western Journal noted, the virtue-signaling Hollywood elites frequently push the left’s socialist agenda no matter what crisis is taking place.
“Whether it’s preaching about open borders from behind gated properties or attacking the right of self-defense while being protected by armed guards, the leftists of the entertainment world rarely pass up an opportunity to signal their superiority to the masses below them,” he wrote.
Are the celebrities giving away their wealth ?
Will we all live in mansions? — Stavros (@ubipages) May 6, 2020
Twitter: Follow @WhiteIsTheFury
Gab: https://gab.com/WhiteIsTheFury
Minds: https://www.minds.com/whiteisthefury
For anyone slightly aware of the actual truth behind the Chinese SARS devastation. Hollywood has revealed themselves as they truly are. Arrogant misinformed spoiled a#$holes who would rather support a foreign power that is responsible for sending the United States over a cliff than support the efforts of their own Republic.


newswars--2020-05-06--Watch: US Space Force Releases First Ad

Watch: US Space Force Releases First Ad

The sixth branch of the US military released its first official advertisement Wednesday seeking recruits to join its ranks .
In the recruitment ad debuted on social media , a narrator says the Space Force aims to have an answer for “ people who look to the stars and ask ‘ What if ?
’ ” “ We have to imagine what would be imagined ; plan for what ’ s possible , while it ’ s still impossible , ” the ad states .
“ Maybe you weren ’ t put here just to ask the questions ; maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer .
Maybe your purpose on this planet isn ’ t on this planet.
” When he signed the national defense budget late last December , President Trump gave a preview of what Space Force will represent : “ Amid grave threats to our national security , American superiority in space is absolutely vital .
And we ’ re leading , but we ’ re not leading by enough .
But very shortly we ’ ll be leading by a lot.
” Todd Harrison , the Director of the the Aerospace Security Project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Studies , elaborated on Space Force ’ s mission .
“ It ’ s about , you know , all the different types of missions our military already does in space — just making sure that we ’ re doing them more effectively , more efficiently , ” Harrison told NPR .
“ It will create a centralized , unified chain of command that is responsible for space , because ultimately when responsibility is fragmented , no one ’ s responsible.
” Did you catch President Trump ’ s New Years resolution or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media ?
In the background of all the political drama , Space Force has been very silent , and very busy .

The sixth branch of the US military released its first official advertisement Wednesday seeking recruits to join its ranks.
In the recruitment ad debuted on social media, a narrator says the Space Force aims to have an answer for “people who look to the stars and ask ‘What if?’”
“We have to imagine what would be imagined; plan for what’s possible, while it’s still impossible,” the ad states.
“Maybe you weren’t put here just to ask the questions; maybe you were put here to be the answer. Maybe your purpose on this planet isn’t on this planet.”
When he signed the national defense budget late last December, President Trump gave a preview of what Space Force will represent:
“Amid grave threats to our national security, American superiority in space is absolutely vital. And we’re leading, but we’re not leading by enough. But very shortly we’ll be leading by a lot.”
Todd Harrison, the Director of the the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, elaborated on Space Force’s mission.
“It’s about, you know, all the different types of missions our military already does in space — just making sure that we’re doing them more effectively, more efficiently,” Harrison told NPR.
“It will create a centralized, unified chain of command that is responsible for space, because ultimately when responsibility is fragmented, no one’s responsible.”
Did you catch President Trump’s New Years resolution or were you distracted by the fake news media? In the background of all the political drama, Space Force has been very silent, and very busy.


newswars--2020-05-06--German scientists find antibodies that BLOCK coronavirus from spreading further

Scientists have detected an antibody that blocks the coronavirus from entering cells , providing a much-needed shield for severely ill patients .
While not a cure or vaccine , it is still a significant development .
“ This is clearly a breakthrough that shows that we are on the right track for the development of a drug against Covid-19 , ” said virologist Professor Luka Cicin-Sain .
“ In repeated experiments , we were able to show that this result is sustainable.
” Cicin-Sain and his team analyzed 6,000 different human antibodies and found more than 750 that dock with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further in already infected patients .
The antibodies are currently undergoing additional testing on cell cultures to whittle their number down to find the most effective at blocking the infection .
“ I am extremely happy about this great success of the research institutes in Lower Saxony , which gives hope for better healing results with Covid-19 , ” said Lower Saxony ’ s Minister of Science Bjorn Thumler .
To be clear , the researchers are neither producing a vaccine nor a cure , but instead a potentially highly effective treatment for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the principle of “ so-called passive immunization , ” according to Stefan Dübel from the Technical University of Braunschweig , who added that “ The effect is immediate : the antibodies take the potential away from the virus.
” The team , who worked in collaboration with biotech company Yumab , is hoping to begin clinical trials in the autumn .
Meanwhile , the broad-spectrum antiviral medication Remdesivir – originally developed to treat the Ebola and Marburg viruses – is being used in trials with coronavirus patients , despite its apparent ineffectiveness in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the drug shortened coronavirus infection recovery times .

Scientists have detected an antibody that blocks the coronavirus from entering cells, providing a much-needed shield for severely ill patients. While not a cure or vaccine, it is still a significant development.
“This is clearly a breakthrough that shows that we are on the right track for the development of a drug against Covid-19,” said virologist Professor Luka Cicin-Sain.
“In repeated experiments, we were able to show that this result is sustainable.”
Cicin-Sain and his team analyzed 6,000 different human antibodies and found more than 750 that dock with the coronavirus and prevent it from spreading further in already infected patients. The antibodies are currently undergoing additional testing on cell cultures to whittle their number down to find the most effective at blocking the infection.
“I am extremely happy about this great success of the research institutes in Lower Saxony, which gives hope for better healing results with Covid-19,” said Lower Saxony’s Minister of Science Bjorn Thumler.
To be clear, the researchers are neither producing a vaccine nor a cure, but instead a potentially highly effective treatment for severely ill coronavirus patients which operates on the principle of “so-called passive immunization,” according to Stefan Dübel from the Technical University of Braunschweig, who added that “The effect is immediate: the antibodies take the potential away from the virus.”
The team, who worked in collaboration with biotech company Yumab, is hoping to begin clinical trials in the autumn.
Meanwhile, the broad-spectrum antiviral medication Remdesivir – originally developed to treat the Ebola and Marburg viruses – is being used in trials with coronavirus patients, despite its apparent ineffectiveness in follow-up tests, after one study found the drug shortened coronavirus infection recovery times.


newswars--2020-05-06--Twitter Will Now Warn You If You Are About to Post Wrongthink

Are you about to post a tweet containing “ harmful ” language ?
Don ’ t worry — Twitter is @ @ @ @ @ will warn you ahead of time , so you don ’ t accidentally infect any @ @ @ @ @ “ When things get heated , you may say things you don ’ t mean @ @ @ @ @ s official support account in a tweet yesterday .
“ To let you rethink a @ @ @ @ @ running a limited experiment on iOS with a prompt that gives you the option to @ @ @ @ @ ’ s published if it uses language that could be harmful.
” It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ ” in the 2002 Tom Cruise film Minority Report .
Twitter will notice when you @ @ @ @ @ a bad word , giving you the chance to avoid a rule violation and save @ @ @ @ @ gulag .

Are you about to post a tweet containing “harmful” language? Don’t worry — Twitter is experimenting with a feature that will warn you ahead of time, so you don’t accidentally infect any users with your wrongthink.
“When things get heated, you may say things you don’t mean,” wrote Twitter’s official support account in a tweet yesterday.
“To let you rethink a reply, we’re running a limited experiment on iOS with a prompt that gives you the option to revise your reply before it’s published if it uses language that could be harmful.”
It’s a bit like “precrime” in the 2002 Tom Cruise film Minority Report. Twitter will notice when you’re about to use a bad word, giving you the chance to avoid a rule violation and save your account from the digital gulag.
Read More


newswars--2020-05-06--Watch: UK Jets Strike Terrorist Hideouts in Iraq

A spokesperson for the United Kingdom ’ s Ministry of Defence said that the strike has assisted in the removal of more fighters of the Daesh [ ISIS ] terrorist group from the battlefield and has further downgraded the capabilities of the militants .
The UK Ministry of Defence on Tuesday tweeted video featuring an air strike conducted by Royal Air Force Typhoon jets on caves inhabited by Daesh combatants northeast of the city of Bayji in northern Iraq .
The ministry said in a Tuesday press release that the strike was carried out on the night of Tuesday 28 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a Voyager aerial refuelling tanker along with another aircraft belonging to the US-led international coalition battling Daesh in Iraq .
According to the ministry , six caves were targeted after confirmation that a group of Daesh terrorists was hiding there .
“ Following a thorough check of the surrounding area for any signs of non-combatants , the aircraft used Paveway IV precision-guided bombs to strike all six of the caves , ” the press release read .
“ Surveillance confirmed all the weapons struck their targets successfully , removing more Daesh fighters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terrorist movement ” .
The press release highlighted that the RAF fighter jets conduct daily armed flights over Iraq and eastern Syria as part of the coalition against the terrorist group .
“ The strikes continue because the Daesh threat is relentless and so will we be , ” UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said in a statement .
On 10 April , RAF Typhoons conducted a similar strike on a group of fortified buildings in an isolated location west of Tuz Khurma claimed to be occupied by Daesh terrorists .
Most people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 90 % of the medicine they use comes from China !

A spokesperson for the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence said that the strike has assisted in the removal of more fighters of the Daesh [ISIS] terrorist group from the battlefield and has further downgraded the capabilities of the militants.
The UK Ministry of Defence on Tuesday tweeted video featuring an air strike conducted by Royal Air Force Typhoon jets on caves inhabited by Daesh combatants northeast of the city of Bayji in northern Iraq.
The ministry said in a Tuesday press release that the strike was carried out on the night of Tuesday 28 April by two RAF Typhoon jets supported by a Voyager aerial refuelling tanker along with another aircraft belonging to the US-led international coalition battling Daesh in Iraq.
According to the ministry, six caves were targeted after confirmation that a group of Daesh terrorists was hiding there.
“Following a thorough check of the surrounding area for any signs of non-combatants, the aircraft used Paveway IV precision-guided bombs to strike all six of the caves,” the press release read. “Surveillance confirmed all the weapons struck their targets successfully, removing more Daesh fighters from the battlefield and further downgrading the terrorist movement”.
The press release highlighted that the RAF fighter jets conduct daily armed flights over Iraq and eastern Syria as part of the coalition against the terrorist group.
“The strikes continue because the Daesh threat is relentless and so will we be,” UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said in a statement.
On 10 April, RAF Typhoons conducted a similar strike on a group of fortified buildings in an isolated location west of Tuz Khurma claimed to be occupied by Daesh terrorists.
Most people don’t realize that as much as 90% of the medicine they use comes from China!


newswars--2020-05-06--Veritas Bombshell: CBS News Stages Fake COVID-19 Testing Line In Michigan

An insider came forward to Project Veritas with hidden camera recordings revealing how CBS News organized a fake coronavirus testing line using “ fake patients ” to make the crisis look worse .
Project Veritas founder James O ’ Keefe asked the insider : “ You ’ re telling me you ’ re a hundred percent certain that CBS News , CBS News Corporation–national , staged a fake event .
They faked the news .
They faked the reality and broadcasted that to all of their audience last Friday on “ CBS This Morning.
” The insider caught several Grand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undercover video candidly talking about how the CBS News crew tasked them with inflating the testing lines before they began filming .
“ Apparently the news crew wanted more people in the line because they knew it was scheduled , ” said Nick Ross , a corporate cleaning site supervisor at the Cherry Health facility .
A nurse caught on hidden cam admitted they weren ’ t administering real tests and made the line longer for CBS News crews to film .
“ We pretended .
There were a couple of real patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said nurse Alison Mauro .
Another nurse said she was surprised CBS News wanted to set up a fake report .
“ We knew they were coming .
We had no clue that we ’ re going to have to , like , do fake patients , ” she said .
“ They probably just wanted to make it look busy is my guess.
” CBS has issued a statement in response to Project Veritas ’ report : CBS News did not stage anything at the Cherry Health facility .
Any suggestion to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These allegations are alarming .
We reached out to Cherry Health to address them immediately .
They informed us for the first time that one of their chief officers told at least one staffer to get in the testing line along with real patients .
No one from CBS News had any knowledge of this before tonight .
They also said that their actions did not prevent any actual patients from being tested .
We take the accuracy of our reporting very seriously and we are removing the Cherry Health portion from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that hospitals are overrun as reports claim they are emptier than they have ever been .

An insider came forward to Project Veritas with hidden camera recordings revealing how CBS News organized a fake coronavirus testing line using “fake patients” to make the crisis look worse.
Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe asked the insider: “You’re telling me you’re a hundred percent certain that CBS News, CBS News Corporation–national, staged a fake event. They faked the news. They faked the reality and broadcasted that to all of their audience last Friday on “CBS This Morning.”
The insider replied: “A hundred percent. Absolutely.”
The insider caught several Grand Rapids, Michigan health center workers on undercover video candidly talking about how the CBS News crew tasked them with inflating the testing lines before they began filming.
“Apparently the news crew wanted more people in the line because they knew it was scheduled,” said Nick Ross, a corporate cleaning site supervisor at the Cherry Health facility.
A nurse caught on hidden cam admitted they weren’t administering real tests and made the line longer for CBS News crews to film.
“We pretended. There were a couple of real patients, which made it worse,” said nurse Alison Mauro.
Another nurse said she was surprised CBS News wanted to set up a fake report.
“We knew they were coming. We had no clue that we’re going to have to, like, do fake patients,” she said. “They probably just wanted to make it look busy is my guess.”
CBS has issued a statement in response to Project Veritas’ report:
CBS News did not stage anything at the Cherry Health facility. Any suggestion to the contrary is 100% false. These allegations are alarming. We reached out to Cherry Health to address them immediately. They informed us for the first time that one of their chief officers told at least one staffer to get in the testing line along with real patients. No one from CBS News had any knowledge of this before tonight. They also said that their actions did not prevent any actual patients from being tested. We take the accuracy of our reporting very seriously and we are removing the Cherry Health portion from the piece.
Alex Jones exposes the hoax that hospitals are overrun as reports claim they are emptier than they have ever been.


newswars--2020-05-06--How All That Extra Stimulus Money Could Lead to Price Inflation

In an effort to “ fight ” the consequences of the politically orchestrated “ lockdown , ” the Fed pumps vast amounts of money into the economy .
It injects base money into the banking system .
It also monetizes outstanding debt and finances the US administration ’ s deficit spending policy by issuing new money .
This not only increases “ excess reserves ” in the banking system , but also ramps up the money stock in the hands of firms and consumers .
The goal is to keep people liquid , to make up for lost profits and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creation policy is already showing its first effects .
In late April 2020 , the money stock M1 grew 26 percent year-on-year , while the money stock M2 was up 15.9 percent against last year .
The central bank is heavily increasing the quantity of money while economic output contracts—Isn ’ t that inflationary ?
It sure is , and it would be false to think otherwise .
In this context , it is key to understand what inflation really is .
Most people these days think that inflation is a rise in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent per year—a result of what mainstream economics has been teaching generations of students all around the world .
However , equating inflation with changes in consumer goods prices is inadequate and highly deceptive for various reasons .
Inflation of consumer goods prices ignores the price inflation of many other goods , most notably assets .
If and when the prices of , say , stocks , bonds , and real estate go up , and if and when these price increases are not accompanied by the decline of other goods prices , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is what has happened in the last decades : consumer goods prices have remained relatively tame while asset prices have inflated .
Those holding assets were on the winning side when the prices rose , while those holding money and fixed claims denominated in money lost out .
The former got richer at the expense of the latter .
This became possible , as central banks , in close cooperation with commercial banks , were allowed a monetary policy of churning out ever greater amounts of credit and money , provided at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth is that it is the increase in the quantity of money that deserves to be termed inflation .
Changes in goods prices are just a possible symptom of an increase in the quantity of money .
What an increase in the quantity of money really does is to bring about a redistribution of income and wealth among people .
Some will gain at the expense of others .
And this does not even have to go hand in hand with goods price increases !
Consider a case in which the economy contracts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prices are under downward pressure .
In an effort to prevent prices from falling , the central bank increases the quantity of money in the hands of firms and consumers .
Let us assume that it succeeds in returning demand to its original level , with goods prices remaining unchanged .
At first glance , it appears that there is no inflationary impact , because prices have remained constant .
However , what has happened is that the increase in the money supply kept the prices of goods from falling .
As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goods , who are protected from losses in the form of declining goods prices .
This is detrimental for everyone who wishes to buy goods—the holders of money—as they are stripped of the opportunity to purchase goods at a lower price .
But that ’ s not all .
At the same time , not all people will obtain an equal share in the increased quantity of money .
In fact , some will get more than others .
The former are the beneficiaries ; the latter miss out .
Under the current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and other financial intermediaries ( hedge funds , insurance companies , etc . )
receive big money , while at the same time small businesses and employees are fobbed off with a much smaller amount .
What is more , some get the new money earlier than others .
The first receivers of the new money are the winners : they can purchase goods at current prices .
As the new money moves from hand to hand , thereby increasing goods prices , the late receivers are the losers in the game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ higher prices .
That said , a policy of expanding the quantity of money undeniably causes income and wealth inequality .
In the current environment , there is mass unemployment in the US , which should put wages under downward pressure .
What is more , commodity prices have fallen sharply , in particular oil prices , dampening measures of consumer goods price inflation .
However , the quantity of money has increased sharply , largely due to the fact that the Fed is effectively sending newly created money to bank-held deposits .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ effects outlined earlier—no doubt about that .
An interesting question is , however , whether or not goods prices will increase .
Of course , if we assume that firms and consumers will hold on to their new money balances rather than spending them ( meaning a decline in the velocity of money ) , price inflation may not occur , and even goods price deflation might be the result .
However , for many people the new money compensates for lost wage income , so the likelihood that the new money will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ etc .
is relatively high .
In other words , the new money is likely to find its way into the demand for goods and services .
In view of a reduced goods supply , there is good reason to fear that consumer goods price inflation is about to accelerate—despite the latest oil price crash .
All the more so if and when the lockdown comes to an end sooner rather than later , letting the economy to return to “ normal.
” In such an environment the “ monetary overhang ” created @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money can almost definitely be expected to drive up consumer and producer goods prices—if and when firms and consumers return toward their original spending behavior .
One thing , however , appears to the very likely—that the Fed ’ s monetary expansion will drive up asset prices : the prices of stocks , real estate , etc .
The latest comovement of the Fed ’ s balance sheet expansion and the S & P 500 stock market index suggests exactly that : the inflation policy is alive and kicking , as created by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this time to an unprecedented extent .
The lesson to learn for any investor is this : it is very likely that the US dollar , as well as all other unbacked paper currencies around the world , will continue to suffer .
The currencies ’ purchasing power is the first victim of central banks ’ “ rescue policies.
” The debasement will come either through asset price inflation and/or consumer price inflation , or a combination of both .
As things stand , it is difficult to imagine that this scenario will @ @ @

In an effort to “fight” the consequences of the politically orchestrated “lockdown,” the Fed pumps vast amounts of money into the economy.
It injects base money into the banking system. It also monetizes outstanding debt and finances the US administration’s deficit spending policy by issuing new money. This not only increases “excess reserves” in the banking system, but also ramps up the money stock in the hands of firms and consumers.
The goal is to keep people liquid, to make up for lost profits and incomes. The Fed’s money creation policy is already showing its first effects. In late April 2020, the money stock M1 grew 26 percent year-on-year, while the money stock M2 was up 15.9 percent against last year. The central bank is heavily increasing the quantity of money while economic output contracts—Isn’t that inflationary? It sure is, and it would be false to think otherwise.
In this context, it is key to understand what inflation really is. Most people these days think that inflation is a rise in consumer goods prices of more than 2 percent per year—a result of what mainstream economics has been teaching generations of students all around the world. However, equating inflation with changes in consumer goods prices is inadequate and highly deceptive for various reasons.
Inflation of consumer goods prices ignores the price inflation of many other goods, most notably assets. If and when the prices of, say, stocks, bonds, and real estate go up, and if and when these price increases are not accompanied by the decline of other goods prices, the purchasing power of money falls. This is what has happened in the last decades: consumer goods prices have remained relatively tame while asset prices have inflated.
Those holding assets were on the winning side when the prices rose, while those holding money and fixed claims denominated in money lost out. The former got richer at the expense of the latter. This became possible, as central banks, in close cooperation with commercial banks, were allowed a monetary policy of churning out ever greater amounts of credit and money, provided at ever lower interest rates.
The economic truth is that it is the increase in the quantity of money that deserves to be termed inflation. Changes in goods prices are just a possible symptom of an increase in the quantity of money. What an increase in the quantity of money really does is to bring about a redistribution of income and wealth among people. Some will gain at the expense of others. And this does not even have to go hand in hand with goods price increases!
Consider a case in which the economy contracts heavily. As demand falls, goods prices are under downward pressure. In an effort to prevent prices from falling, the central bank increases the quantity of money in the hands of firms and consumers. Let us assume that it succeeds in returning demand to its original level, with goods prices remaining unchanged. At first glance, it appears that there is no inflationary impact, because prices have remained constant.
However, what has happened is that the increase in the money supply kept the prices of goods from falling. As a result, it benefits the owners of goods, who are protected from losses in the form of declining goods prices. This is detrimental for everyone who wishes to buy goods—the holders of money—as they are stripped of the opportunity to purchase goods at a lower price. But that’s not all.
At the same time, not all people will obtain an equal share in the increased quantity of money. In fact, some will get more than others. The former are the beneficiaries; the latter miss out. Under the current circumstances, big banks, big companies, and other financial intermediaries (hedge funds, insurance companies, etc.) receive big money, while at the same time small businesses and employees are fobbed off with a much smaller amount.
What is more, some get the new money earlier than others. The first receivers of the new money are the winners: they can purchase goods at current prices. As the new money moves from hand to hand, thereby increasing goods prices, the late receivers are the losers in the game: they can only purchase goods at higher prices. That said, a policy of expanding the quantity of money undeniably causes income and wealth inequality.
In the current environment, there is mass unemployment in the US, which should put wages under downward pressure. What is more, commodity prices have fallen sharply, in particular oil prices, dampening measures of consumer goods price inflation. However, the quantity of money has increased sharply, largely due to the fact that the Fed is effectively sending newly created money to bank-held deposits.
This development is accompanied by all the effects outlined earlier—no doubt about that. An interesting question is, however, whether or not goods prices will increase. Of course, if we assume that firms and consumers will hold on to their new money balances rather than spending them (meaning a decline in the velocity of money), price inflation may not occur, and even goods price deflation might be the result.
However, for many people the new money compensates for lost wage income, so the likelihood that the new money will be spent on food, clothes, etc. is relatively high. In other words, the new money is likely to find its way into the demand for goods and services. In view of a reduced goods supply, there is good reason to fear that consumer goods price inflation is about to accelerate—despite the latest oil price crash.
All the more so if and when the lockdown comes to an end sooner rather than later, letting the economy to return to “normal.” In such an environment the “monetary overhang” created by the increase in the quantity of money can almost definitely be expected to drive up consumer and producer goods prices—if and when firms and consumers return toward their original spending behavior.
One thing, however, appears to the very likely—that the Fed’s monetary expansion will drive up asset prices: the prices of stocks, real estate, etc. The latest comovement of the Fed’s balance sheet expansion and the S&P 500 stock market index suggests exactly that: the inflation policy is alive and kicking, as created by the Fed in the past, but this time to an unprecedented extent.
The lesson to learn for any investor is this: it is very likely that the US dollar, as well as all other unbacked paper currencies around the world, will continue to suffer. The currencies’ purchasing power is the first victim of central banks’ “rescue policies.” The debasement will come either through asset price inflation and/or consumer price inflation, or a combination of both. As things stand, it is difficult to imagine that this scenario will not occur.


newswars--2020-05-06--Money Creation—Not Low Interest Rates—Is Behind the Boom-Bust Cycle

In a recent article entitled “ Where Are All the Austrian Scholars ’ Yachts ?
” John Tamny has criticized Austrian economists , and Mark Thornton in particular , for their skepticism regarding the relatively “ ebullient stock market ” in the midst of the pandemic .
Mark Thornton responded to Tamny ’ s main argument in an earlier post .
In this post , I will address two serious errors that underlie Tamny ’ s argument .
The first error involves a common misinterpretation of Austrian business cycle theory ( henceforth ABCT ) .
Tamny represents Austrian cycle theorists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bubbles are caused by the central bank arbitrarily reducing interest rates .
But this is a misunderstanding .
According to ABCT , it is not the arbitrary lowering of interest rates per se that causes an inflationary boom , asset bubbles , and a subsequent recession .
Rather , it is the issue of “ fiduciary media , ” or bank deposits unbacked by reserves , that are created via new business loans that actuate the boom-bust cycle .
The decline of interest rates on loans is merely one of the results of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not essential to the process .
On the one hand , banks could arbitrarily lower the interest rate on loans and this would not initiate an inflationary boom ; on the other hand , banks could leave the interest rate unchanged but lend out newly-created bank reserves by lowering credit standards , which would ignite a boom and asset price inflation .
Mises emphasized this point in 1949 ( Human Action , p. 789n5 ) : If a bank does not expand circulation credit by issuing additional fiduciary media…it can not generate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount of interest charged below the rate of the unhampered market….The inference to be drawn from the [ Austrian ] monetary cycle theory by those who want to prevent the recurrence of booms and of the subsequent depressions is not that the banks should not lower the rate of interest , but that they should abstain from credit expansion .
Tamny completely misses this point when he writes : As Thornton sees it , the main driver of modern stock-market health has been the Fed .
Supposedly the Fed ’ s artificially low @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s estimation , Fed rate cuts equal artificial equity rallies .
To then presume that the Fed , merely by decreeing “ cheap credit , ” can make it cheap is not something one would expect Thornton to take seriously .
.
.
.
Furthermore , if zero or low rates were the path to soaring stock markets as Thornton et al assume , Japan ’ s stock market would have outperformed all other global equity markets by many miles when it ’ s remembered that the BOJ [ Bank of Japan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near zero since the 1990s .
Except that the Nikkei is still well off of highs last experienced in 1989 .
In this passage , Tamny ’ s misrepresentation of ABCT is on full display .
First , neither Thornton nor any other Austrian economist , past or present , has ever proposed that the Fed lowers interest rates “ merely by decreeing ‘ cheap credit.
’ ” The fact that Tamny maintains this indicates that he is innocent of any knowledge of the crucial role of money and credit expansion in ABCT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quotation from Mises , what engenders the boom and perpetuates it is the injection of fiduciary media into credit markets regardless of the movements of interest rates , especially short rates .
As I have argued elsewhere , a higher ( lower ) growth rate of the money supply is perfectly consistent with increases ( decreases ) in the fed funds rate .
This is illustrated in the graph , which over the period 1990-2020 displays no systematic relationship between the monetary growth rate and the fed funds rate .
Tamny ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is starkly revealed by his contention that the Nikkei Index is still below its 1989 peak despite the fact that the BOJ has maintained its targeted interest rate near zero since the 1990s .
As the graph below shows , the average year-over-year growth rate of the Japanese monetary aggregate M2 in the 1980s was more than twice as high as it was from 1990 to 2020 .
For Austrians it is the money supply and not manipulations of a short-term interest rate that affects asset prices .
That a fine economic journalist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technical point of business cycle theory is understandable .
Many prominent economists have failed to comprehend the causal significance of fiduciary media in ABCT .
This includes Gottfried Haberler , a former follower of Mises and an expert on business cycle theory .
Unfortunately , Tamny can not be so easily excused for the second error in his article , which appears to be based on ignorance of the nature and function of money .
Thus Tamny opines , Now it appears to me that Tamny is here claiming that , even when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Fed is unable to commandeer for itself or the immediate recipients of its largesse control over “ real resources.
” The reason , Tamny asserts , is that market participants are smart enough not to accept the depreciating dollars for their labor services and other real stuff they have to sell .
Examined closely , this claim is breath-taking in its theoretical and historical obtuseness .
For it implies that no one will ever accept a depreciating currency in exchange , even though it has a positive purchasing power .
But this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a fiat currency does have a purchasing power—a power to command real goods in exchange—means that it is already being traded for goods and services in the market place .
Let us examine this point in a little more depth .
At any given moment the dollar has a given purchasing power , which is reflected in the array of dollar prices for the various goods currently being exchanged in the economy .
When the Fed creates new dollars for banks to lend , these dollars have exactly the same purchasing power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ readily accepted in exchange for real goods .
The first recipients of the new dollars—be they business borrowers or the US Treasury—are able to trade them at approximately their current purchasing power thereby “ summoning real resources , ” because prices have not yet begun to rise in response to the expanded money supply .
However , as these dollars are spent and re-spent in subsequent periods on a widening array of goods , prices begin to increase throughout the economy and the dollar begins to depreciate or lose purchasing power .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet received the new dollars are thus forced to cede command over some of the real goods that their nominal incomes had previously exchanged for .
Nonetheless , contrary to Tamny , once all prices have risen , sellers continue to trade “ real market goods ” for these depreciated dollars not because they are “ dense , ” but because the higher prices they are receiving offset the loss of purchasing power of the individual dollar .
And , of course , the sellers require these greater quantities of depreciated dollars in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the goods that they demand .
As episodes of aggressive and persistent inflation , e.g.
, the Great Inflation of the 1970s in the US , have amply demonstrated , this process of rational people continuing to trade real goods for an ever depreciating currency can go on for many years with the economy thus absorbing greater and greater quantities of depreciating monetary units printed by the central bank .
In fact , this is precisely what has been occurring in the US economy over the past three decades .
As the graph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Fed appeared to “ aggressively print money , ” increasing the M2 aggregate from $ 4.653 trillion to $ 16.871 trillion or by 270 percent .
This near quadrupling of the money supply resulted in a continually depreciating dollar , as the price level as measured by the headline CPI index more than doubled and the dollar in 2020 retained only $ .49 of purchasing power compared to the 1990 dollar .
And yet , contrary to Tamny ’ s assertion , there continue to be “ takers ” for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimate of last quarter ’ s ( annualized ) GDP of $ 21.51 trillion—albeit forcibly shrunken by government restrictions of economic activity—can readily attest .

In a recent article entitled “Where Are All the Austrian Scholars’ Yachts?” John Tamny has criticized Austrian economists, and Mark Thornton in particular, for their skepticism regarding the relatively “ebullient stock market” in the midst of the pandemic.
Mark Thornton responded to Tamny’s main argument in an earlier post. In this post, I will address two serious errors that underlie Tamny’s argument.
The first error involves a common misinterpretation of Austrian business cycle theory (henceforth ABCT). Tamny represents Austrian cycle theorists as claiming that stock market booms and bubbles are caused by the central bank arbitrarily reducing interest rates. But this is a misunderstanding. According to ABCT, it is not the arbitrary lowering of interest rates per se that causes an inflationary boom, asset bubbles, and a subsequent recession. Rather, it is the issue of “fiduciary media,” or bank deposits unbacked by reserves, that are created via new business loans that actuate the boom-bust cycle. The decline of interest rates on loans is merely one of the results of this expansion of money and credit and is not essential to the process. On the one hand, banks could arbitrarily lower the interest rate on loans and this would not initiate an inflationary boom; on the other hand, banks could leave the interest rate unchanged but lend out newly-created bank reserves by lowering credit standards, which would ignite a boom and asset price inflation. Mises emphasized this point in 1949 (Human Action, p. 789n5):
If a bank does not expand circulation credit by issuing additional fiduciary media…it cannot generate a boom even if it lowers the amount of interest charged below the rate of the unhampered market….The inference to be drawn from the [Austrian] monetary cycle theory by those who want to prevent the recurrence of booms and of the subsequent depressions is not that the banks should not lower the rate of interest, but that they should abstain from credit expansion.
Tamny completely misses this point when he writes:
As Thornton sees it, the main driver of modern stock-market health has been the Fed. Supposedly the Fed’s artificially low rates boosted equity prices. In Thornton’s estimation, Fed rate cuts equal artificial equity rallies. To then presume that the Fed, merely by decreeing “cheap credit,” can make it cheap is not something one would expect Thornton to take seriously. . . . Furthermore, if zero or low rates were the path to soaring stock markets as Thornton et al assume, Japan’s stock market would have outperformed all other global equity markets by many miles when it’s remembered that the BOJ [Bank of Japan] has kept the rate it targets near zero since the 1990s. Except that the Nikkei is still well off of highs last experienced in 1989.
In this passage, Tamny’s misrepresentation of ABCT is on full display. First, neither Thornton nor any other Austrian economist, past or present, has ever proposed that the Fed lowers interest rates “merely by decreeing ‘cheap credit.’” The fact that Tamny maintains this indicates that he is innocent of any knowledge of the crucial role of money and credit expansion in ABCT. As pointed out above in the quotation from Mises, what engenders the boom and perpetuates it is the injection of fiduciary media into credit markets regardless of the movements of interest rates, especially short rates. As I have argued elsewhere, a higher (lower) growth rate of the money supply is perfectly consistent with increases (decreases) in the fed funds rate. This is illustrated in the graph, which over the period 1990-2020 displays no systematic relationship between the monetary growth rate and the fed funds rate.
sal
Tamny’s failure to grasp the essence of ABCT is starkly revealed by his contention that the Nikkei Index is still below its 1989 peak despite the fact that the BOJ has maintained its targeted interest rate near zero since the 1990s. As the graph below shows, the average year-over-year growth rate of the Japanese monetary aggregate M2 in the 1980s was more than twice as high as it was from 1990 to 2020. For Austrians it is the money supply and not manipulations of a short-term interest rate that affects asset prices.
That a fine economic journalist such as Tamny should err on a technical point of business cycle theory is understandable. Many prominent economists have failed to comprehend the causal significance of fiduciary media in ABCT. This includes Gottfried Haberler, a former follower of Mises and an expert on business cycle theory. Unfortunately, Tamny cannot be so easily excused for the second error in his article, which appears to be based on ignorance of the nature and function of money. Thus Tamny opines,
Thornton and other Austrians will say the Fed can create dollars, but that’s not the same as creating credit. If so, every central bank in the world would aggressively print money as a way of summoning real resources. Except that there would be no takers; unless Thornton thinks market actors are so dense as to readily exchange real market goods for paper, and without regard to what the paper will subsequently command in the marketplace. Not very likely.
Now it appears to me that Tamny is here claiming that, even when “aggressively” creating new money, the Fed is unable to commandeer for itself or the immediate recipients of its largesse control over “real resources.” The reason, Tamny asserts, is that market participants are smart enough not to accept the depreciating dollars for their labor services and other real stuff they have to sell. Examined closely, this claim is breath-taking in its theoretical and historical obtuseness. For it implies that no one will ever accept a depreciating currency in exchange, even though it has a positive purchasing power. But this is a logical contradiction. The fact that a fiat currency does have a purchasing power—a power to command real goods in exchange—means that it is already being traded for goods and services in the market place.
Let us examine this point in a little more depth. At any given moment the dollar has a given purchasing power, which is reflected in the array of dollar prices for the various goods currently being exchanged in the economy. When the Fed creates new dollars for banks to lend, these dollars have exactly the same purchasing power as those already in circulation and being readily accepted in exchange for real goods. The first recipients of the new dollars—be they business borrowers or the US Treasury—are able to trade them at approximately their current purchasing power thereby “summoning real resources,” because prices have not yet begun to rise in response to the expanded money supply. However, as these dollars are spent and re-spent in subsequent periods on a widening array of goods, prices begin to increase throughout the economy and the dollar begins to depreciate or lose purchasing power. At this point, those who have not yet received the new dollars are thus forced to cede command over some of the real goods that their nominal incomes had previously exchanged for. Nonetheless, contrary to Tamny, once all prices have risen, sellers continue to trade “real market goods” for these depreciated dollars not because they are “dense,” but because the higher prices they are receiving offset the loss of purchasing power of the individual dollar. And, of course, the sellers require these greater quantities of depreciated dollars in order to pay the higher prices of the goods that they demand. As episodes of aggressive and persistent inflation, e.g., the Great Inflation of the 1970s in the US, have amply demonstrated, this process of rational people continuing to trade real goods for an ever depreciating currency can go on for many years with the economy thus absorbing greater and greater quantities of depreciating monetary units printed by the central bank.
In fact, this is precisely what has been occurring in the US economy over the past three decades. As the graph below shows, from 1990 to 2020, the Fed appeared to “aggressively print money,” increasing the M2 aggregate from $4.653 trillion to $16.871 trillion or by 270 percent. This near quadrupling of the money supply resulted in a continually depreciating dollar, as the price level as measured by the headline CPI index more than doubled and the dollar in 2020 retained only $.49 of purchasing power compared to the 1990 dollar. And yet, contrary to Tamny’s assertion, there continue to be “takers” for the depreciating US dollar, as the advance estimate of last quarter’s (annualized) GDP of $21.51 trillion—albeit forcibly shrunken by government restrictions of economic activity—can readily attest.


newswars--2020-05-06--How Governments Broke the Oil Market

How Governments Broke the Oil Market

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries ( OPEC ) and its partners have been cutting production since September 2016 .
Between September and November 2016 they cut production by more than 1.7 million barrels a day , a historical cut that was wrongly prolonged throughout the expansionary phase of the global economy .
In December 2018 they cut production again .
OPEC ’ s was trying to artificially inflate the price of oil .
But no oil-producing country lost money at the 2016 price ; the only thing they could not afford was to pay huge subsidies , civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OPEC members finance with export earnings .
This strategic error led to two negative effects for producing countries : On the one hand , supply diversification and technological substitution accelerated ; customers responded .
On the other hand , the market share of OPEC fell to almost a decade low .
The subsequent fiscal and monetary effects turned a strategic error into a disaster .
The vast majority of these countries entered into significant fiscal and trade deficits ( twin deficits ) and , in the absence of local and international demand for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increased their US dollar–denominated debt .
With falling exports and dollar revenues , now they face a massive dollar shortage in the middle of a demand collapse .
Those production cuts , moreover , worked as an unintended subsidy to United States producers .
The short-term rise in the price of oil due to the supply cuts meant an unprecedented capital injection for the North American oil industry , which was going through very dire financial times .
OPEC bailed out shale and lost market share .
This led to the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saudi Arabia and Russia in daily production .
Additionally , between 2015 and 2019 we witnessed an expansion of credit and historical levels of the global money supply .
From China to the European Union , credit expansion was encouraged in such a way that investments of dubious profitability were financed at historically low rates , excess capacity and questionable oil investments were kept zombified , and the companies that should have gone bust were kept alive through constant refinancing and issuing high-risk debt at increasingly lower yields .
A tsunami of idle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ production cuts .
New debt issued by the oil sector to finance investments and operations reached $ 200 billion a year according to the Wall Street Journal .
And with very low yields .
The oil industry became one of the main areas of malinvestment in the years of massive liquidity and low yields .
This perpetuated excess capacity and kept inefficient companies unnecessarily alive .
OPEC cuts added another layer of support that ultimately came back to bite producer nations .
Before COVID-19 , there were dangerous signs of a slowdown in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Agency ( IEA ) had already lowered demand growth estimates in 2019 and warned of the pace of weakening .
In June 2019 , the Oil Market Report lowered demand growth expectations to 1.2 million barrels a day , a cut in estimates that it had also made in May and April of the same year .
Global oil inventories were comfortably at the average of the previous five years and oil stored on the sea was beginning to rise worryingly for a world that was apparently growing steadily .
America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the COVID-19 crisis .
The United States has a historic problem with the storage and evacuation of oil .
Storage issues had surfaced already in 2007 .
Back in 2007 , a price crash on West Texas Intermediate ( WTI ) occurred when a Valero refinery in Texas was temporarily closed .
Storage filled up quickly and the reference price of crude oil collapsed .
The United States has 91 million barrels of crude oil storage capacity in Oklahoma , but most refineries are a long distance away or in other states , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not solved when some major pipeline projects were halted by government and judicial decisions .
The oil market was showing a small backwardation curve in mid-2019 , reflecting a reasonably positive environment for the sector , yet idle capacity and weakening demand growth were already evident .
Then , COVID-19 arrived , and with it the forced closure of the economy .
All of these factors have been key to the perfect storm , which was generated in April 2020 , when the May WTI crude oil contract price came to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slumping demand , which in March and April fell in the United States to the lowest levels seen since 1995 .
According to Bloomberg , oil demand in the United States would drop more than 9 million barrels a day in April 2020 , erasing all the consumption growth of the decade .
The collapse of the price of crude oil led to monster “ margin calls ” and an urgent fire sale when nobody wanted to buy and those who could execute the contract had no place to store crude .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the situation is similar but not as dramatic .
The price has plummeted more than 70 percent in 2020 .
Crude oil stored in tanks has soared in 2020 to 3.2 billion barrels , and to this must be added hundreds of ships floating in the world ’ s seas laden with crude oil—at least 160 million barrels in ports from Singapore to Suffolk .
Worldwide , there is an idle capacity of around 1.4 billion barrels for the storage of crude oil .
This is not much considering the speed at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point has been reached where many producers have to continue delivering barrels because shutting down production is more expensive than maintaining it and others need to generate any possible cash .
Demand , according to the IEA , may drop by 9.3 million barrels a day in all of 2020 , with a slump of 29 million barrels a day in April .
In 2020 , supply will likely be cut by about 12 million barrels a day , but it is not enough to mitigate the destruction of demand or the lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are wrong when they think that bankruptcies in the oil sector will balance the market and limit supply .
When a company goes bankrupt , the assets are absorbed by another more efficient and debt-free business .
Governments all over the world are going to bail out their so-called strategic sectors , and the energy complex stands at the forefront of these actions .
Betting on creative destruction to curb overcapacity will be a mistake .
Governments and central banks will bail out the entire malinvestment binge of the past decade and , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through massive stimuli , liquidity injections , and negative rates .
The oil market was already weak in 2019 .
Now it faces a cataclysm .
Producers will have to adapt , as always , by adjusting costs .
Cutting production only disguises the problem in the short term and creates more problems later , as we explain in The Energy World Is Flat ( Wiley ) .
The reason why the oil market is broken is that it was not a free market .
It benefited from direct and indirect subsidies to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become a consequence of the excess in monetary and fiscal policies .
The energy sector has become the clearest example of a “ too-big-to-fail ” mistake .
Unfortunately , malinvestment will—again—be rewarded , and the oil market is likely to remain as inefficient and bloated as the coal and aluminum ones .
There will be volatility .
But the long-term value destruction of the sector , both from state-owned and private entities , will remain .

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its partners have been cutting production since September 2016.
Between September and November 2016 they cut production by more than 1.7 million barrels a day, a historical cut that was wrongly prolonged throughout the expansionary phase of the global economy. In December 2018 they cut production again.
OPEC’s was trying to artificially inflate the price of oil. But no oil-producing country lost money at the 2016 price; the only thing they could not afford was to pay huge subsidies, civil servants, and non-oil expenses that many OPEC members finance with export earnings.
This strategic error led to two negative effects for producing countries: On the one hand, supply diversification and technological substitution accelerated; customers responded. On the other hand, the market share of OPEC fell to almost a decade low. The subsequent fiscal and monetary effects turned a strategic error into a disaster. The vast majority of these countries entered into significant fiscal and trade deficits (twin deficits) and, in the absence of local and international demand for their domestic currency, the vast majority increased their US dollar–denominated debt. With falling exports and dollar revenues, now they face a massive dollar shortage in the middle of a demand collapse.
Those production cuts, moreover, worked as an unintended subsidy to United States producers. The short-term rise in the price of oil due to the supply cuts meant an unprecedented capital injection for the North American oil industry, which was going through very dire financial times. OPEC bailed out shale and lost market share. This led to the United States reaching an all-time production record, beating Saudi Arabia and Russia in daily production.
Additionally, between 2015 and 2019 we witnessed an expansion of credit and historical levels of the global money supply. From China to the European Union, credit expansion was encouraged in such a way that investments of dubious profitability were financed at historically low rates, excess capacity and questionable oil investments were kept zombified, and the companies that should have gone bust were kept alive through constant refinancing and issuing high-risk debt at increasingly lower yields. A tsunami of idle capacity was brewing despite the previously mentioned production cuts. New debt issued by the oil sector to finance investments and operations reached $200 billion a year according to the Wall Street Journal. And with very low yields.
The oil industry became one of the main areas of malinvestment in the years of massive liquidity and low yields. This perpetuated excess capacity and kept inefficient companies unnecessarily alive. OPEC cuts added another layer of support that ultimately came back to bite producer nations.
Before COVID-19, there were dangerous signs of a slowdown in the energy world. The International Energy Agency (IEA) had already lowered demand growth estimates in 2019 and warned of the pace of weakening. In June 2019, the Oil Market Report lowered demand growth expectations to 1.2 million barrels a day, a cut in estimates that it had also made in May and April of the same year. Global oil inventories were comfortably at the average of the previous five years and oil stored on the sea was beginning to rise worryingly for a world that was apparently growing steadily.
America’s storage problems were already evident years before the COVID-19 crisis. The United States has a historic problem with the storage and evacuation of oil. Storage issues had surfaced already in 2007. Back in 2007, a price crash on West Texas Intermediate (WTI) occurred when a Valero refinery in Texas was temporarily closed. Storage filled up quickly and the reference price of crude oil collapsed. The United States has 91 million barrels of crude oil storage capacity in Oklahoma, but most refineries are a long distance away or in other states, and there is an evacuation problem that was not solved when some major pipeline projects were halted by government and judicial decisions.
The oil market was showing a small backwardation curve in mid-2019, reflecting a reasonably positive environment for the sector, yet idle capacity and weakening demand growth were already evident. Then, COVID-19 arrived, and with it the forced closure of the economy.
All of these factors have been key to the perfect storm, which was generated in April 2020, when the May WTI crude oil contract price came to a negative price. Storage capacity collapsed with slumping demand, which in March and April fell in the United States to the lowest levels seen since 1995. According to Bloomberg, oil demand in the United States would drop more than 9 million barrels a day in April 2020, erasing all the consumption growth of the decade. The collapse of the price of crude oil led to monster “margin calls” and an urgent fire sale when nobody wanted to buy and those who could execute the contract had no place to store crude.
In Brent, the most international benchmark crude, the situation is similar but not as dramatic. The price has plummeted more than 70 percent in 2020.
Crude oil stored in tanks has soared in 2020 to 3.2 billion barrels, and to this must be added hundreds of ships floating in the world’s seas laden with crude oil—at least 160 million barrels in ports from Singapore to Suffolk.
Worldwide, there is an idle capacity of around 1.4 billion barrels for the storage of crude oil. This is not much considering the speed at which demand is destroyed, and a point has been reached where many producers have to continue delivering barrels because shutting down production is more expensive than maintaining it and others need to generate any possible cash. Demand, according to the IEA, may drop by 9.3 million barrels a day in all of 2020, with a slump of 29 million barrels a day in April.
In 2020, supply will likely be cut by about 12 million barrels a day, but it is not enough to mitigate the destruction of demand or the lack of storage capacity.
Many market participants are wrong when they think that bankruptcies in the oil sector will balance the market and limit supply. When a company goes bankrupt, the assets are absorbed by another more efficient and debt-free business.
Governments all over the world are going to bail out their so-called strategic sectors, and the energy complex stands at the forefront of these actions. Betting on creative destruction to curb overcapacity will be a mistake. Governments and central banks will bail out the entire malinvestment binge of the past decade and, more importantly, incentivize even more overcapacity through massive stimuli, liquidity injections, and negative rates.
The oil market was already weak in 2019. Now it faces a cataclysm. Producers will have to adapt, as always, by adjusting costs. Cutting production only disguises the problem in the short term and creates more problems later, as we explain in The Energy World Is Flat (Wiley).
The reason why the oil market is broken is that it was not a free market. It benefited from direct and indirect subsidies to create overcapacity and excess supply and has become a consequence of the excess in monetary and fiscal policies. The energy sector has become the clearest example of a “too-big-to-fail” mistake. Unfortunately, malinvestment will—again—be rewarded, and the oil market is likely to remain as inefficient and bloated as the coal and aluminum ones.
There will be volatility. But the long-term value destruction of the sector, both from state-owned and private entities, will remain.


newswars--2020-05-06--Virus Lockdown Accelerating 5G Surveillance Grid

UK Ministry of Defense 2010 : “ Choosing to be disconnected may be considered suspicious.
” Brigadier General Robert S. Spalding said in a 2019 interview that humans will not be able to opt out of the pervasive 5G system : 12 years ago Old-Thinker News asked the question : “ Could dissidents potentially be electronically blacklisted and denied access to cashless payment systems and transit systems as if they were a banned web page in the ‘ internet of things ‘ ” ?
A sobering reality has emerged since this report was published .
The infrastructure for this system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5G network will enable the rollout of a vast command and control grid that will monitor people , places and things wirelessly in real-time .
Humans will not have the ability to opt out and live a normal life .
The Internet of Things ( IoT ) infrastructure will be organized by the 5G network .
Trillions of objects made “ smart ” by embedded computer chips will be “ alive ” in the grid .
In 2012 , CIA Director David Petraeus said that the technology will be “ transformational… particularly to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Petraeus explained : “ Items of interest will be located , identified , monitored , and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification , sensor networks , tiny embedded servers , and energy harvesters – all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant , low-cost , and high-power computing.
” The UK Ministry of Defense said in a 2010 report that a vast surveillance network would overtake the planet : “ The virtual networks will consist of communications servers linking individuals and objects , many of which will be networked through individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ultimately , as stated in the paper , it may become difficult to “ turn the outside world off , ” and “ …Even amongst those who make an explicit life-style choice to remain detached , choosing to be disconnected may be considered suspicious behaviour.
” As Coronavirus accelerates trends toward automation through robotics and artificial intelligence , rapid adoption of 5G can be expected as well .
The monumental shift to this anti-human system will not happen without resistance .
Most people don ’ t realize that as much as 90 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China !

UK Ministry of Defense 2010: “Choosing to be disconnected may be considered suspicious.”
Brigadier General Robert S. Spalding said in a 2019 interview that humans will not be able to opt out of the pervasive 5G system:
12 years ago Old-Thinker News asked the question: “Could dissidents potentially be electronically blacklisted and denied access to cashless payment systems and transit systems as if they were a banned web page in the ‘internet of things‘”?
A sobering reality has emerged since this report was published. The infrastructure for this system of control has been built.
The 5G network will enable the rollout of a vast command and control grid that will monitor people, places and things wirelessly in real-time. Humans will not have the ability to opt out and live a normal life.
The Internet of Things (IoT) infrastructure will be organized by the 5G network. Trillions of objects made “smart” by embedded computer chips will be “alive” in the grid.
In 2012, CIA Director David Petraeus said that the technology will be “transformational… particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft“. Petraeus explained:
“Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters – all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing.”
The UK Ministry of Defense said in a 2010 report that a vast surveillance network would overtake the planet:
“The virtual networks will consist of communications servers linking individuals and objects, many of which will be networked through individual Internet Protocol (IP) addresses.”
Ultimately, as stated in the paper, it may become difficult to “turn the outside world off,” and “…Even amongst those who make an explicit life-style choice to remain detached, choosing to be disconnected may be considered suspicious behaviour.”
As Coronavirus accelerates trends toward automation through robotics and artificial intelligence, rapid adoption of 5G can be expected as well.
The monumental shift to this anti-human system will not happen without resistance.
Most people don’t realize that as much as 90% of the medicine they use comes from China!


newswars--2020-05-07--Professor: Economic Impact of Lockdown Will Cause More Deaths than Coronavirus

Peter Nilsson , a professor of internal medicine and epidemiology at Lund University , warns that the economic devastation caused by lockdowns will cause more deaths than the coronavirus itself .
Nilsson was commenting on Sweden ’ s approach to coronavirus , which unlike virtually every other western country in the world didn ’ t impose a lockdown to fight COVID-19 .
The tactic appears to have worked , with Sweden ’ s ‘ R ’ rate of infection being roughly the same as the UK ’ s , a country which did impose a lockdown .
The country also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and didn ’ t sacrifice its economy , meaning deaths from poverty will be reduced .
Opining that he thinks this will “ prove to be a good strategy in the long run , ” Professor Nilsson said the approach had succeeded in preventing a spike in unemployment .
“ It ’ s so important to understand that the deaths of COVID-19 will be far less than the deaths caused by societal lockdown when the economy is ruined , ” said Nilsson .
“ Why ?
Because of unemployment and all the social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will hurt and kill people in the future.
” Mikael Rostila , professor at the Department of Public Health Sciences at the Stockholm University , echoed Nilsson ’ s sentiments in arguing that Sweden is now in a much better position than other countries .
“ Sweden could reach heard immunity earlier than other countries which means that the spread of the virus and the number of deaths will decrease since a majority of the population will be immune , ” said Rostila .
“ Other countries that start to reopen now may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So it might be that they have just postponed a severe outbreak.
” As we previously highlighted , a data analyst consortium in South Africa found that the economic consequences of the country ’ s lockdown will lead to 29 times more people dying than the coronavirus itself .
Meanwhile , people across the United Kingdom are demanding their own lockdown be continued indefinitely , with the hashtag # KeepTheLockdown trending number one on Twitter .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

Peter Nilsson, a professor of internal medicine and epidemiology at Lund University, warns that the economic devastation caused by lockdowns will cause more deaths than the coronavirus itself.
Nilsson was commenting on Sweden’s approach to coronavirus, which unlike virtually every other western country in the world didn’t impose a lockdown to fight COVID-19.
The tactic appears to have worked, with Sweden’s ‘R’ rate of infection being roughly the same as the UK’s, a country which did impose a lockdown. The country also now has much more widespread herd immunity and didn’t sacrifice its economy, meaning deaths from poverty will be reduced.
Opining that he thinks this will “prove to be a good strategy in the long run,” Professor Nilsson said the approach had succeeded in preventing a spike in unemployment.
“It’s so important to understand that the deaths of COVID-19 will be far less than the deaths caused by societal lockdown when the economy is ruined,” said Nilsson.
“Why? Because of unemployment and all the social problems with it. A bad economy will hurt and kill people in the future.”
Mikael Rostila, professor at the Department of Public Health Sciences at the Stockholm University, echoed Nilsson’s sentiments in arguing that Sweden is now in a much better position than other countries.
“Sweden could reach heard immunity earlier than other countries which means that the spread of the virus and the number of deaths will decrease since a majority of the population will be immune,” said Rostila.
“Other countries that start to reopen now may experience a second wave of the virus. So it might be that they have just postponed a severe outbreak.”
As we previously highlighted, a data analyst consortium in South Africa found that the economic consequences of the country’s lockdown will lead to 29 times more people dying than the coronavirus itself.
Meanwhile, people across the United Kingdom are demanding their own lockdown be continued indefinitely, with the hashtag #KeepTheLockdown trending number one on Twitter.
Why not #KeepTheLockdown until 2030? Another 10 years should do it. I mean, there’ll be no economy, the outside world will be a Mad Max hellscape, we’ll all end up having to survive on squirrels, half the population will starve. But at least there’ll be fewer COVID deaths! — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) May 7, 2020
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-05-07--According To A Shocking New Survey, 52% Of Small Businesses “Expect To Be Out Of Business Within Six

According To A Shocking New Survey, 52% Of Small Businesses “Expect To Be Out Of Business Within Six Months”

Anyone that was hoping for a “ quick recovery ” for the U.S. economy can forget about that right now .
Yes , many states are attempting to “ reopen ” , but in most cases it will be a multi-stage process that takes many months to complete .
Meanwhile , fear of COVID-19 is going to keep many Americans from conducting business as usual even after all of the restrictions have been finally lifted .
Even now , many of the stores , restaurants and movie theaters that have reopened are seeing very , very few customers .
Unfortunately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be able to survive in such a depressed economic environment for very long .
Barnes digs into the seen and unseen effects of a Shutdown that shouldn ’ t have happened In America today , the rules of the game are slanted very heavily in favor of huge corporations and are slanted very heavily against small businesses .
It has been this way for years , but millions of small business owners just kept soldiering on because they wanted to work for themselves and not some corporate behemoth .
But for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ easy .
For most of them , it is usually such a struggle to try to eke out a very meager profit at the end of the month after covering expenses and payroll .
But now COVID-19 has come along , and many small businesses haven ’ t had any revenue for weeks .
The good news is that the lockdowns are starting to end , but the bad news is that many small business owners are facing a “ new normal ” in which their monthly revenues will be down by 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more ) .
All of a sudden many small businesses that were once barely profitable have been transformed into businesses that are bleeding a lot of cash each month , and many of them simply are not going to make it .
It was always obvious that this pandemic would kill a lot of those businesses , but the true scope of the problem wasn ’ t apparent until now .
According to Bloomberg , a survey that was just conducted found that 52 percent of U.S. small business owners “ expect to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” … Yes , the big corporate giants dominate our society today , but there are still lots and lots of small businesses out there .
Ultimately , we are talking about millions upon millions of businesses that are about to be destroyed… Around the country , governors can choose to end the lockdowns , but they can ’ t order customers to go out and spend money .
And considering the fact that more than 30 million Americans have lost their jobs over the last six weeks , a lot of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyway .
But even if everyone was still working , there is a large segment of the population that will simply be afraid to venture into public places as long as this pandemic is going on .
If you doubt this , just consider what we are witnessing in Texas .
Reuters sent a reporter to one of the most popular malls in Austin , and what that reporter discovered is quite sobering… If even 20 percent of customers stay away for the foreseeable future , that is going to be enough to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the truth is that we are facing a major national crisis .
A while back , Congress passed a bill that was supposed to help small businesses survive the lockdowns , but as I mentioned in a previous article it looks like that program has been a massive failure… We really are caught in a downward spiral now .
We desperately need to get Americans back to work so that they can start earning paychecks again , but with so few customers right now , businesses will continue to lay off even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile , the cost of living is actually going up .
Thanks to the ongoing meat shortages , fresh meat prices are escalating quite rapidly… The economic collapse that so many have been warning about is here , and it is going to continue whether there are lockdowns or not .
Yes , there will be ups and down ahead , and there will be moments of legitimate optimism .
But nobody is going to be able to stop the process that has now begun , and economic conditions will ultimately become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to imagine .

Anyone that was hoping for a “quick recovery” for the U.S. economy can forget about that right now.
Yes, many states are attempting to “reopen”, but in most cases it will be a multi-stage process that takes many months to complete. Meanwhile, fear of COVID-19 is going to keep many Americans from conducting business as usual even after all of the restrictions have been finally lifted.
Even now, many of the stores, restaurants and movie theaters that have reopened are seeing very, very few customers.
Unfortunately, millions of small businesses are not going to be able to survive in such a depressed economic environment for very long.
Barnes digs into the seen and unseen effects of a Shutdown that shouldn’t have happened
In America today, the rules of the game are slanted very heavily in favor of huge corporations and are slanted very heavily against small businesses.
It has been this way for years, but millions of small business owners just kept soldiering on because they wanted to work for themselves and not some corporate behemoth.
But for most small businesses things have never been easy. For most of them, it is usually such a struggle to try to eke out a very meager profit at the end of the month after covering expenses and payroll. But now COVID-19 has come along, and many small businesses haven’t had any revenue for weeks.
The good news is that the lockdowns are starting to end, but the bad news is that many small business owners are facing a “new normal” in which their monthly revenues will be down by 30, 40 or 50 percent (or more). All of a sudden many small businesses that were once barely profitable have been transformed into businesses that are bleeding a lot of cash each month, and many of them simply are not going to make it.
It was always obvious that this pandemic would kill a lot of those businesses, but the true scope of the problem wasn’t apparent until now. According to Bloomberg, a survey that was just conducted found that 52 percent of U.S. small business owners “expect to be out of business within six months”…
COVID-19 could shutter most American small businesses. That’s according to a new survey from the Society for Human Resource Management which found that 52% expect to be out of business within six months. The survey of 375 firms was conducted between April 15-21 and doesn’t account for improved business conditions as some U.S. states reopen this month.
Yes, the big corporate giants dominate our society today, but there are still lots and lots of small businesses out there.
Ultimately, we are talking about millions upon millions of businesses that are about to be destroyed…
“SHRM has tracked Covid-19’s impact on work, workers, and the workplace for months,” said SHRM Chief Executive Officer Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., “but these might be the most alarming findings to date. Small business is truly the backbone of our economy. So, when half say they’re worried about being wiped out, let’s remember: We’re talking about roughly 14 million businesses.”
Around the country, governors can choose to end the lockdowns, but they can’t order customers to go out and spend money.
And considering the fact that more than 30 million Americans have lost their jobs over the last six weeks, a lot of them don’t have money to spend anyway.
But even if everyone was still working, there is a large segment of the population that will simply be afraid to venture into public places as long as this pandemic is going on.
If you doubt this, just consider what we are witnessing in Texas. Reuters sent a reporter to one of the most popular malls in Austin, and what that reporter discovered is quite sobering…
A dozen or so people were strolling about the sprawling open-air shopping center Monday afternoon, with three seated on the patio of a Tex-Mex restaurant. Only one shopper wore a mask, and the loudest noises were from songbirds perched in the live oak trees along the deserted pedestrian thoroughfares. “I’ve seen one customer today – they didn’t buy anything,” said Taylor Jund, who was keeping watch over an empty Chaser clothing store. “There’s absolutely no one coming around here.”
If even 20 percent of customers stay away for the foreseeable future, that is going to be enough to kill millions of small businesses.
So the truth is that we are facing a major national crisis.
A while back, Congress passed a bill that was supposed to help small businesses survive the lockdowns, but as I mentioned in a previous article it looks like that program has been a massive failure…
According to the CNBC/SurveyMonkey Small Business Survey released Monday, which surveyed 2,200 small business owners across America, while the $660 billion Paycheck Protection Program was instituted to give them a lifeline through the coronavirus and economic shutdown, only 13% of the 45% who applied for the PPP were approved.
We really are caught in a downward spiral now. We desperately need to get Americans back to work so that they can start earning paychecks again, but with so few customers right now, businesses will continue to lay off even more workers in the weeks and months ahead.
Meanwhile, the cost of living is actually going up. Thanks to the ongoing meat shortages, fresh meat prices are escalating quite rapidly…
Fresh meat prices escalated 8.1% in stores, compared to the same period last year, according to Nielsen data for the week ending April 25. Experts expect prices to skyrocket in the coming weeks, as meat processing plants across the U.S. are forced to close due to the coronavirus pandemic. Pork and beef prices could increase by as much as 20% compared to 2019, according to a new report from CoBank, a cooperative bank that is part of the Farm Credit System.
The economic collapse that so many have been warning about is here, and it is going to continue whether there are lockdowns or not.
Yes, there will be ups and down ahead, and there will be moments of legitimate optimism.
But nobody is going to be able to stop the process that has now begun, and economic conditions will ultimately become far worse than most Americans would dare to imagine.


newswars--2020-05-07--Belgian Intelligence Accuses China Of ‘Bio-espionage’

Belgian intelligence officials have accused China of espionage targeting the county ’ s biological warfare and vaccine experts .
A report in the EU Observer details reports from Belgium ’ s homeland security service , the Veiligheid van de Staat ( VSSE ) , dating back a decade showing threats of Chinese military , scientific , and medical espionage .
“ This area [ biological warfare and vaccines ] is of great interest to Chinese [ intelligence ] services .
Both defensively , because China , due to its overpopulation , is very exposed to epidemics , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an offensive vector ” .
one of the reports notes .
Alex Jones breaks down the state of war between China ’ s aggression towards the U.S .
The VSSE report says that a former Belgian bioweapons expert was targeted by Chinese spies in 2010 while working as a scientist in Brussels : He was very friendly with a Chinese scientist , whom he had “ introduced into the scientific and medical milieu ” in Belgium , the VSSE said .
But the Chinese scientist used to be a military doctor in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and “ she might keep too-close ties with her country in general and her former employer in particular ” , it added .
“ She was obviously MSS , ” the Belgian security source told EUobserver , referring to China ’ s Ministry of State Security ( MSS ) .
Another bioweapons researcher , Jean-Luc Gala , was also targeted by China according to the report , during a time he was testing Japanese anti-viral drug Avigan , which is now being researched as a potential coronavirus treatment .
“ The VSSE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opened offices on a different floor of the same campus building that housed units of the Belgian bioweapons institute.
” the report states .
The report also suggest that Beijing has targeted the Belgium office of British pharmaceutical giant and vaccine manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline ( GSK ) .
While the report notes that the suspicions have no direct link to the current coronavirus pandemic , they come at a time when China is under intense scrutiny owing to its attempted cover up of the pandemic outbreak .
Intelligence agencies in the UK and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rival states ’ are conducting ‘ malicious cyber campaigns ’ against universities , pharmaceuticals and research institutes carrying out research on the coronavirus .

Belgian intelligence officials have accused China of espionage targeting the county’s biological warfare and vaccine experts.
A report in the EU Observer details reports from Belgium’s homeland security service, the Veiligheid van de Staat (VSSE), dating back a decade showing threats of Chinese military, scientific, and medical espionage.
“This area [biological warfare and vaccines] is of great interest to Chinese [intelligence] services. Both defensively, because China, due to its overpopulation, is very exposed to epidemics, as well as offensively, since it has studied Ebola as an offensive vector”. one of the reports notes.
Alex Jones breaks down the state of war between China’s aggression towards the U.S.
The VSSE report says that a former Belgian bioweapons expert was targeted by Chinese spies in 2010 while working as a scientist in Brussels:
He was very friendly with a Chinese scientist, whom he had “introduced into the scientific and medical milieu” in Belgium, the VSSE said. But the Chinese scientist used to be a military doctor in the Chinese army, the VSSE noted, and “she might keep too-close ties with her country in general and her former employer in particular”, it added. “She was obviously MSS,” the Belgian security source told EUobserver, referring to China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS).
Another bioweapons researcher, Jean-Luc Gala, was also targeted by China according to the report, during a time he was testing Japanese anti-viral drug Avigan, which is now being researched as a potential coronavirus treatment.
“The VSSE noted that two suspicious Chinese entities had opened offices on a different floor of the same campus building that housed units of the Belgian bioweapons institute.” the report states.
The report also suggest that Beijing has targeted the Belgium office of British pharmaceutical giant and vaccine manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).
While the report notes that the suspicions have no direct link to the current coronavirus pandemic, they come at a time when China is under intense scrutiny owing to its attempted cover up of the pandemic outbreak.
Intelligence agencies in the UK and the US this week jointly warned that ‘rival states’ are conducting ‘malicious cyber campaigns’ against universities, pharmaceuticals and research institutes carrying out research on the coronavirus.


newswars--2020-05-07--Pointless Celebrities Call For World To ‘Not Return To Normal’;  ‘Radical Transformation’ Of Economi

Pointless Celebrities Call For World To ‘Not Return To Normal’;  ‘Radical Transformation’ Of Economies

Millionaire celebrities , who still do not seem to realise that the world does not revolve around them , have rallied behind a call to ‘ end consumerism ’ and not to allow the world to go back to how it was before the virus outbreak .
Over 200 famous people have signed a ‘ plea ’ titled Please , let ’ s not go back to normal , that calls for ‘ radical transformation ’ of economies and for humanity to ‘ examine what is essential ’ .
Those who have added their names to the proposal include Madonna @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Jane Fonda , Marion Cotillard and Monica Bellucci .
Of course , most of these vacuous pointless idiots would not have the wealth , or the platform they are now using to lecture everyday people if they followed their own advice .
“ We believe it is unthinkable to “ go back to normal ” , the letter notes , adding “ Adjustments are not enough .
The problem is systemic.
” “ The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis .
Unlike a pandemic… a global ecological collapse will have immeasurable consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have found time to get behind the campaign between constantly tweeting out videos of themselves complaining about being ‘ imprisoned ’ in their luxurious properties .
“ The pursuit of consumerism and an obsession with productivity have led us to deny the value of life itself : that of plants , that of animals , and that of a great number of human beings , ” the letter also states .
Will these people follow their own decrees ?
Or Will they continue to rake in millions every month , jetting around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while pointing the finger at the rest of the planet and declaring that it is our “ consumerism ” and excessive lifestyles that have “ brought the world to a breaking point.
” “ We must act now .
It is as much a matter of survival as of dignity and coherence , ” the sickeningly patronising decree concludes .
These people never knew what ‘ normal ’ was .

Millionaire celebrities, who still do not seem to realise that the world does not revolve around them, have rallied behind a call to ‘end consumerism’ and not to allow the world to go back to how it was before the virus outbreak.
Over 200 famous people have signed a ‘plea’ titled Please, let’s not go back to normal, that calls for ‘radical transformation’ of economies and for humanity to ‘examine what is essential’.
Those who have added their names to the proposal include Madonna, Robert de Niro, Cate Blanchett, Jane Fonda, Marion Cotillard and Monica Bellucci.
Of course, most of these vacuous pointless idiots would not have the wealth, or the platform they are now using to lecture everyday people if they followed their own advice.
“We believe it is unthinkable to “go back to normal”, the letter notes, adding “Adjustments are not enough. The problem is systemic.”
“The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis. Unlike a pandemic… a global ecological collapse will have immeasurable consequences,” it continues.
The celebs have found time to get behind the campaign between constantly tweeting out videos of themselves complaining about being ‘imprisoned’ in their luxurious properties.
“The pursuit of consumerism and an obsession with productivity have led us to deny the value of life itself: that of plants, that of animals, and that of a great number of human beings,” the letter also states.
Will these people follow their own decrees? Or Will they continue to rake in millions every month, jetting around the globe, living between multiple mansions, while pointing the finger at the rest of the planet and declaring that it is our “consumerism” and excessive lifestyles that have “brought the world to a breaking point.”
“We must act now. It is as much a matter of survival as of dignity and coherence,” the sickeningly patronising decree concludes.
These people never knew what ‘normal’ was.