lewrockwell--2020-03-14--US Intel Agencies Played an Unsettling Role in Classified and ‘9/11-Like’ Coronavirus Response Plan

As the COVID-19 coronavirus crisis comes to dominate headlines , little media attention has been given to the federal government ’ s decision to classify top-level meetings on domestic coronavirus response and lean heavily “ behind the scenes ” on U.S. intelligence and the Pentagon in planning for an allegedly imminent explosion of cases .
The classification of coronavirus planning meetings was first covered by Reuters , which noted that the decision to classify was “ an unusual step that has restricted information and hampered the U.S. government ’ s response to the contagion.
” Reuters further noted that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Human Services ( HHS ) , Alex Azar , and his chief of staff had “ resisted ” the classification order , which was made in mid-January by the National Security Council ( NSC ) , led by Robert O ’ Brien — a longtime friend and colleague of his predecessor John Bolton .
Following this order , HHS officials with the appropriate security clearances held meetings on coronavirus response at the department ’ s Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility ( SCIF ) , which are facilities “ usually reserved for intelligence and military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case — for responses to “ biowarfare or chemical attacks.
” Several officials who spoke to Reuters noted that the classification decision prevented key experts from participating in meetings and slowed down the ability of HHS and the agencies it oversees , including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) , to respond to the crisis by limiting participation and information sharing .
strylin Protective N95 ... Buy New $ 4.59 ( $ 4.59 / Count ) It has since been speculated that the decision was made to prevent potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that aspects of the planned response would cause controversy if made public , especially given that the decision to classify government meetings on coronavirus response negatively impacted HHS ’ ability to respond to the crisis .
After the classification decision was made public , a subsequent report in Politico revealed that not only is the National Security Council managing the federal government ’ s overall response but that they are doing so in close coordination with the U.S. intelligence community and the U.S. military .
It states specifically that “ NSC officials have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence and defense communities to gauge the threat and prepare for the possibility that the U.S. government will have to respond to much bigger numbers—and soon.
” Little attention was given to the fact that the response to this apparently imminent jump in cases was being coordinated largely between elements of the national security state ( i.e .
the NSC , Pentagon , and intelligence ) , as opposed to civilian agencies or those focused on public health issues , and in a classified manner .
The Politico article also noted that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ key role ” in a pandemic situation , but did not specify what the role would specifically entail .
However , it did note that intelligence agencies would “ almost certainly see an opportunity to exploit the crisis ” given that international “ epicenters of coronavirus [ are ] in high-priority counterintelligence targets like China and Iran.
” It further added , citing former intelligence officials , that efforts would be made to recruit new human sources in those countries .
Politico cited the official explanation for intelligence ’ s interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being aimed at determining accurate statistics of coronavirus cases in “ closed societies , ” i.e .
nations that do not readily cooperate or share intelligence with the U.S. government .
Yet , Politico fails to note that Iran has long been targeted for CIA-driven U.S. regime change , specifically under the Trump administration , and that China had been fingered as the top threat to U.S. global hegemony by military officials well before the coronavirus outbreak .
The decision to classify government coronavirus preparations in mid-January , followed by the decision to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and with intelligence deserves considerable scrutiny , particularly given that at least one federal agency , Customs and Border Patrol ( CBP ) , will be given broad , sweeping powers and will work closely with unspecified intelligence “ partners ” as part of its response to a pandemics like COVID-19 .
The CBP ’ s pandemic response document , obtained by The Nation , reveals that the CBP ’ s pandemic directive “ allows the agency to actively surveil and detain individuals suspected of carrying the illness indefinitely.
” The Nation further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the George W. Bush administration , but is the agency ’ s most recent pandemic response plan and remains in effect .
Three Killer Face Mask ... Medlen , Drew Buy New $ 0.99 Though only CBP ’ s pandemic response plan has now been made public , those of other agencies are likely to be similar , particularly on their emphasis on surveillance , given past precedent following the September 11 attacks and other times of national panic .
Notably , several recent media reports have likened coronavirus to 9/11 and broached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to coronavirus , suggestions that should concern critics of the post-9/11 “ Patriot Act ” and other controversial laws , executive orders and policies that followed .
While the plans of the federal government remain classified , recent reports have revealed that the military and intelligence communities — now working with the NSC to develop the government ’ s coronavirus response — have anticipated a massive explosion in cases for weeks .
U.S. military intelligence came to the conclusion over a month ago that coronavirus cases would reach “ pandemic proportions ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That military intelligence agency , known as the National Center for Medical Intelligence ( NCMI ) , coordinates closely with the National Security Agency ( NSA ) to conduct “ medical SIGINT [ signals intelligence ] .
” The coming government response , the agencies largely responsible for crafting it and its classified nature deserve public scrutiny now , particularly given the federal government ’ s tendency to not let “ a serious crisis to go to waste , ” as former President Obama ’ s then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel infamously said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , during a time of panic — over a pandemic and over a simultaneous major economic downturn — concern over government overreach is warranted , particularly now given the involvement of intelligence agencies and the classification of planning for an explosion of domestic cases that the government believes is only weeks away .

As the COVID-19 coronavirus crisis comes to dominate headlines, little media attention has been given to the federal government’s decision to classify top-level meetings on domestic coronavirus response and lean heavily “behind the scenes” on U.S. intelligence and the Pentagon in planning for an allegedly imminent explosion of cases.
The classification of coronavirus planning meetings was first covered by Reuters, which noted that the decision to classify was “an unusual step that has restricted information and hampered the U.S. government’s response to the contagion.” Reuters further noted that the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Alex Azar, and his chief of staff had “resisted” the classification order, which was made in mid-January by the National Security Council (NSC), led by Robert O’Brien — a longtime friend and colleague of his predecessor John Bolton.
Following this order, HHS officials with the appropriate security clearances held meetings on coronavirus response at the department’s Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF), which are facilities “usually reserved for intelligence and military operations” and — in HHS’ case — for responses to “biowarfare or chemical attacks.” Several officials who spoke to Reuters noted that the classification decision prevented key experts from participating in meetings and slowed down the ability of HHS and the agencies it oversees, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to respond to the crisis by limiting participation and information sharing. strylin Protective N95... Buy New $4.59 ($4.59 / Count) (as of 03:49 UTC - Details)
It has since been speculated that the decision was made to prevent potential leaks of information by stifling participation and that aspects of the planned response would cause controversy if made public, especially given that the decision to classify government meetings on coronavirus response negatively impacted HHS’ ability to respond to the crisis.
After the classification decision was made public, a subsequent report in Politico revealed that not only is the National Security Council managing the federal government’s overall response but that they are doing so in close coordination with the U.S. intelligence community and the U.S. military. It states specifically that “NSC officials have been coordinating behind the scenes with the intelligence and defense communities to gauge the threat and prepare for the possibility that the U.S. government will have to respond to much bigger numbers—and soon.”
Little attention was given to the fact that the response to this apparently imminent jump in cases was being coordinated largely between elements of the national security state (i.e. the NSC, Pentagon, and intelligence), as opposed to civilian agencies or those focused on public health issues, and in a classified manner.
The Politico article also noted that the intelligence community is set to play a “key role” in a pandemic situation, but did not specify what the role would specifically entail. However, it did note that intelligence agencies would “almost certainly see an opportunity to exploit the crisis” given that international “epicenters of coronavirus [are] in high-priority counterintelligence targets like China and Iran.” It further added, citing former intelligence officials, that efforts would be made to recruit new human sources in those countries.
Politico cited the official explanation for intelligence’s interest in “exploiting the crisis” as merely being aimed at determining accurate statistics of coronavirus cases in “closed societies,” i.e. nations that do not readily cooperate or share intelligence with the U.S. government. Yet, Politico fails to note that Iran has long been targeted for CIA-driven U.S. regime change, specifically under the Trump administration, and that China had been fingered as the top threat to U.S. global hegemony by military officials well before the coronavirus outbreak.
A potential “9/11-like” response
The decision to classify government coronavirus preparations in mid-January, followed by the decision to coordinate the domestic response with the military and with intelligence deserves considerable scrutiny, particularly given that at least one federal agency, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), will be given broad, sweeping powers and will work closely with unspecified intelligence “partners” as part of its response to a pandemics like COVID-19.
The CBP’s pandemic response document, obtained by The Nation, reveals that the CBP’s pandemic directive “allows the agency to actively surveil and detain individuals suspected of carrying the illness indefinitely.” The Nation further notes that the plan was drafted during the George W. Bush administration, but is the agency’s most recent pandemic response plan and remains in effect. Three Killer Face Mask... Medlen, Drew Buy New $0.99 (as of 03:49 UTC - Details)
Though only CBP’s pandemic response plan has now been made public, those of other agencies are likely to be similar, particularly on their emphasis on surveillance, given past precedent following the September 11 attacks and other times of national panic. Notably, several recent media reports have likened coronavirus to 9/11 and broached the possibility of a “9/11-like” response to coronavirus, suggestions that should concern critics of the post-9/11 “Patriot Act” and other controversial laws, executive orders and policies that followed.
While the plans of the federal government remain classified, recent reports have revealed that the military and intelligence communities — now working with the NSC to develop the government’s coronavirus response — have anticipated a massive explosion in cases for weeks. U.S. military intelligence came to the conclusion over a month ago that coronavirus cases would reach “pandemic proportions” domestically by the end of March. That military intelligence agency, known as the National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI), coordinates closely with the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct “medical SIGINT [signals intelligence].”
The coming government response, the agencies largely responsible for crafting it and its classified nature deserve public scrutiny now, particularly given the federal government’s tendency to not let “a serious crisis to go to waste,” as former President Obama’s then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel infamously said during the 2008 financial crisis. Indeed, during a time of panic — over a pandemic and over a simultaneous major economic downturn — concern over government overreach is warranted, particularly now given the involvement of intelligence agencies and the classification of planning for an explosion of domestic cases that the government believes is only weeks away.


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--COVID-19: Further Evidence That the Virus Originated in the US

As readers will recall from the earlier article , Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists and pharmacologists have determined that the new coronavirus almost certainly originated in the US since that country is the only one known to have all five types – from which all others must have descended .
Wuhan in China has only one of those types , rendering it in analogy as a kind of “ branch ” which can not exist by itself but must have grown from a “ tree ” .
The Taiwanese physician noted that in August of 2019 the US had a flurry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Americans blamed on ‘ vaping ’ from e-cigarettes , but which , according to the scientist , the symptoms and conditions could not be explained by e-cigarettes .
He said he wrote to the US officials telling them he suspected those deaths were likely due to the coronavirus .
He claims his warnings were ignored .
Immediately prior to that , the CDC totally shut down the US Military ’ s main bio-lab at Fort Detrick , Maryland , due to an absence of safeguards against pathogen leakages , issuing a complete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military .
It was immediately after this event that the ‘ e-cigarette ’ epidemic arose .
Screenshot from The New York Times August 08 , 2019 We also had the Japanese citizens infected in September of 2019 , in Hawaii , people who had never been to China , these infections occurring on US soil long before the outbreak in Wuhan but only shortly after the locking down of Fort Detrick .
Then , on Chinese social media , another article appeared , aware of the above but presenting further details .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign ” athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games ( October 18-27 , 2019 ) were hospitalised in Wuhan for an undetermined infection .
The Dark Secrets of SH ... Selco Begovic Best Price : $ 17.24 Buy New $ 17.75 The article explains more clearly that the Wuhan version of the virus could have come only from the US because it is what they call a “ branch ” which could not have been created first because it would have no ‘ seed ’ .
It would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the original ‘ trunk ’ , and that trunk exists only in the US .
( 1 ) There has been much public speculation that the coronavirus had been deliberately transmitted to China but , according to the Chinese article , a less sinister alternative is possible .
If some members of the US team at the World Military Games ( 18-27 October ) had become infected by the virus from an accidental outbreak at Fort Detrick it is possible that , with a long initial incubation period , their symptoms might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could easily have ‘ toured ’ the city of Wuhan during their stay , infecting potentially thousands of local residents in various locations , many of whom would later travel to the seafood market from which the virus would spread like wildfire ( as it did ) .
That would account also for the practical impossibility of locating the legendary “ patient zero ” – which in this case has never been found since there would have been many of them .
Next , Daniel Lucey , an infectious disease expert at Georgetown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article in Science magazine that the first human infection has been confirmed as occurring in November 2019 , ( not in Wuhan ) , suggesting the virus originated elsewhere and then spread to the seafood markets .
“ One group put the origin of the outbreak as early as 18 September 2019.
” ( 2 ) ( 3 ) China ’ s New Coronavirus : An Examination of the Facts Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally .
The paper , written by a large group of Chinese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus ( 2019-nCoV ) .
In the earliest case , the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market , the authors report .
“ No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases ” , they state .
Their data also show that , in total , 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace .
“ That ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ link ” , says Daniel Lucey .
.
.
( 6 ) Earlier reports from Chinese health authorities and the World Health Organization had said the first patient had onset of symptoms on 8 December 2019 – and those reports simply said “ most ” cases had links to the seafood market , which was closed on 1 January .
( 7 ) “ Lucey says if the new data are accurate , the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019 – if not earlier – because there is an incubation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If so , the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan – and perhaps elsewhere – before the cluster of cases from the city ’ s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December .
“ The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace ” , Lucey asserts .
“ China must have realized the epidemic did not originate in that Wuhan Huanan seafood market ” , Lucey told Science Insider .
( 8 ) Kristian Andersen is an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to try to clarify its origin .
He said the scenario was “ entirely plausible ” of infected persons bringing the virus into the seafood market from somewhere outside .
According to the Science article , It was interesting that Lucey also noted that MERS was originally believed to have come from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June of 2012 , but later and more thorough studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year .
Lucey said that from stored samples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical authorities confirmed they had been infected with the MERS virus .
( 10 ) The Prepperu2019s Blue ... Tess Pennington Best Price : $ 11.98 Buy New $ 18.98 This would provide impetus for caution among the public in accepting the “ official standard narrative ” that the Western media are always so eager to provide – as they did with SARS , MERS , and ZIKA , all of which ‘ official narratives ’ were later proven to have been entirely wrong .
In this case , the Western media flooded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus originating in the Wuhan seafood market , caused by people eating bats and wild animals .
All of this has been proven wrong .
Not only did the virus not originate at the seafood market , it did not originate in Wuhan at all , and it has now been proven that it did not originate in China but was brought to China from another country .
Part of the proof of this assertion is that the genome varieties of the virus in Iran and Italy have been sequenced and declared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infected China and must , by definition , have originated elsewhere .
It would seem the only possibility for origination is the US because only that country has the “ tree trunk ” of all the varieties .
And it may therefore be true that the original source of the COVID-19 virus was the US military bio-warfare lab at Fort Detrick .
This would not be a surprise , given that the CDC completely shut down Fort Detrick , but also because , as I related in an earlier article , between 2005 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events where pathogens had been either stolen or escaped from American bio-labs during the prior ten years – an average of one every three days .

As readers will recall from the earlier article , Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists and pharmacologists have determined that the new coronavirus almost certainly originated in the US since that country is the only one known to have all five types – from which all others must have descended. Wuhan in China has only one of those types, rendering it in analogy as a kind of “branch” which cannot exist by itself but must have grown from a “tree”.
The Taiwanese physician noted that in August of 2019 the US had a flurry of lung pneumonias or similar, which the Americans blamed on ‘vaping’ from e-cigarettes, but which, according to the scientist, the symptoms and conditions could not be explained by e-cigarettes. He said he wrote to the US officials telling them he suspected those deaths were likely due to the coronavirus. He claims his warnings were ignored.
Immediately prior to that, the CDC totally shut down the US Military’s main bio-lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland, due to an absence of safeguards against pathogen leakages, issuing a complete “cease and desist” order to the military. It was immediately after this event that the ‘e-cigarette’ epidemic arose.
Screenshot from The New York Times August 08, 2019
We also had the Japanese citizens infected in September of 2019, in Hawaii, people who had never been to China, these infections occurring on US soil long before the outbreak in Wuhan but only shortly after the locking down of Fort Detrick.
Then, on Chinese social media, another article appeared, aware of the above but presenting further details. It stated in part that five “foreign” athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games (October 18-27, 2019) were hospitalised in Wuhan for an undetermined infection. The Dark Secrets of SH... Selco Begovic Best Price: $17.24 Buy New $17.75 (as of 08:50 UTC - Details)
The article explains more clearly that the Wuhan version of the virus could have come only from the US because it is what they call a “branch” which could not have been created first because it would have no ‘seed’. It would have to have been a new variety spun off the original ‘trunk’, and that trunk exists only in the US. (1)
There has been much public speculation that the coronavirus had been deliberately transmitted to China but, according to the Chinese article, a less sinister alternative is possible.
If some members of the US team at the World Military Games (18-27 October) had become infected by the virus from an accidental outbreak at Fort Detrick it is possible that, with a long initial incubation period, their symptoms might have been minor, and those individuals could easily have ‘toured’ the city of Wuhan during their stay, infecting potentially thousands of local residents in various locations, many of whom would later travel to the seafood market from which the virus would spread like wildfire (as it did).
That would account also for the practical impossibility of locating the legendary “patient zero” – which in this case has never been found since there would have been many of them.
Next, Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease expert at Georgetown University in Washington, said in an article in Science magazine that the first human infection has been confirmed as occurring in November 2019, (not in Wuhan), suggesting the virus originated elsewhere and then spread to the seafood markets. “One group put the origin of the outbreak as early as 18 September 2019.” (2) (3)
China’s New Coronavirus: An Examination of the Facts
Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally.
Description of earliest cases suggests outbreak began elsewhere.
The article states:
“As confirmed cases of a novel virus surge around the world with worrisome speed, all eyes have so far focused on a seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the outbreak. But a description of the first clinical cases published in The Lancet on Friday challenges that hypothesis.” (4) (5)
The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. “No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases”, they state. Their data also show that, in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace. “That’s a big number, 13, with no link”, says Daniel Lucey . . . (6)
Earlier reports from Chinese health authorities and the World Health Organization had said the first patient had onset of symptoms on 8 December 2019 – and those reports simply said “most” cases had links to the seafood market, which was closed on 1 January. (7)
“Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019 – if not earlier – because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan – and perhaps elsewhere – before the cluster of cases from the city’s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December. “The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace”, Lucey asserts.
“China must have realized the epidemic did not originate in that Wuhan Huanan seafood market”, Lucey told Science Insider. (8)
Kristian Andersen is an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research Institute who has analyzed sequences of 2019-nCoV to try to clarify its origin. He said the scenario was “entirely plausible” of infected persons bringing the virus into the seafood market from somewhere outside. According to the Science article,
“Andersen posted his analysis of 27 available genomes of 2019-nCoV on 25 January on a virology research website. It suggests they had a “most recent common ancestor” – meaning a common source – as early as 1 October 2019.” (9)
It was interesting that Lucey also noted that MERS was originally believed to have come from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June of 2012, but later and more thorough studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year. Lucey said that from stored samples from people who died in Jordan, medical authorities confirmed they had been infected with the MERS virus. (10) The Prepperu2019s Blue... Tess Pennington Best Price: $11.98 Buy New $18.98 (as of 02:20 UTC - Details)
This would provide impetus for caution among the public in accepting the “official standard narrative” that the Western media are always so eager to provide – as they did with SARS, MERS, and ZIKA, all of which ‘official narratives’ were later proven to have been entirely wrong.
In this case, the Western media flooded their pages for months about the COVID-19 virus originating in the Wuhan seafood market, caused by people eating bats and wild animals. All of this has been proven wrong.
Not only did the virus not originate at the seafood market, it did not originate in Wuhan at all, and it has now been proven that it did not originate in China but was brought to China from another country. Part of the proof of this assertion is that the genome varieties of the virus in Iran and Italy have been sequenced and declared to have no part of the variety that infected China and must, by definition, have originated elsewhere.
It would seem the only possibility for origination is the US because only that country has the “tree trunk” of all the varieties. And it may therefore be true that the original source of the COVID-19 virus was the US military bio-warfare lab at Fort Detrick. This would not be a surprise, given that the CDC completely shut down Fort Detrick, but also because, as I related in an earlier article, between 2005 and 2012 the US had experienced 1,059 events where pathogens had been either stolen or escaped from American bio-labs during the prior ten years – an average of one every three days.
Notes
(1) https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/CjGWaaDSKTyjWRMyQyGXUA
(2) https://science.sciencemag.org/content/367/6477/492.full
(3) Science; Jon Cohen; Jan. 26, 2020
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally
(4) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext
(5) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext
(6) http://wjw.wuhan.gov.cn/front/web/showDetail/2020011109036
(7) http://wjw.wuhan.gov.cn/front/web/showDetail/2020011509040
(8) https://sciencespeaksblog.org/2020/01/25/wuhan-coronavirus-2019-ncov-qa-6-an-evidence-based-hypothesis/
(9) http://virological.org/t/clock-and-tmrca-based-on-27-genomes/347
(10) http://applications.emro.who.int/emhj/v19/Supp1/EMHJ_2013_19_Supp1_S12_S18.pdf


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--Socialism Would Have Solved This Problem

Everything about this virus situation is making me crazy .
Including this kind of thing , from socialists : So it ’ s “ capitalism ” that makes people fight over toilet paper at a time when toilet paper isn ’ t a product they particularly need .
Socialism , they tell us , is “ a system in which scarcity is no longer an issue.
” So when there ’ s an unanticipated pandemic , socialism will evidently have huge warehouses of toilet paper sitting there for no reason , waiting for consumers who don ’ t actually need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , that seems like a rational approach to production .
How about the fact that it ’ s capitalism itself that ’ s made it seem normal and unremarkable that everybody you know readily purchases and uses soap , disinfectants , and sanitizers ?
Which European king had all of these ?
Scarcity is always an issue .
If we produce A with resources B , C , and D , we can not simultaneously produce F with B , C , and D. If we employ labor in the service of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not simultaneously employ it in the service of another .
Here is the situation we face : Billions of people have an enormous number of conflicting preferences .
We have to figure out a way to satisfy as many of those preferences as possible , but arrange the means of production in such a way that in satisfying one preference we are not inadvertently depriving more urgent preferences of the resources necessary for them to be satisfied .
The market economy , with its price system , accomplishes this seemingly impossible task — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as mankind is capable of — without coercion or central direction .
It does it so well that people consider it automatic , like a spontaneously occurring feature of human existence .
Instead of marveling at it , they complain — and risk destroying the very thing that in all likelihood makes their own existences possible .
I might add , incidentally , that one thing the market provides that socialism surely would not , is home education .
The kind of system being described above would place indoctrination of the young fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so good luck homeschooling .
Meanwhile , we ’ ve created the Ron Paul Curriculum , which — gasp — presents students with more than one point of view , while at the same time giving them a top-notch education in all the major subjects , plus others : like how to speak effectively , how to run a small business , how to operate a blog , or how to manage money .
There ’ s going to be more demand for it in the coming weeks , for obvious reasons .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I throw in three bonuses I created myself : Real Dissent : A Libert ... Thomas E. Woods Jr. Best Price : $ 8.48 Buy New $ 7.93 CHURCH & THE MARKET ( S ... Woods Jr. , Thomas E. Best Price : $ 6.04 Buy New $ 101.04 How the Catholic Churc ... Thomas E. Woods Best Price : $ 8.00 Buy New $ 9.06 The Politically Incorr ... Thomas E. Woods Jr. Best Price : $ 1.51 Buy New $ 8.71 The Best of Tom Woods

Shop all books by Tom Woods
From the Tom Woods Letter:
Everything about this virus situation is making me crazy.
Including this kind of thing, from socialists:
So it’s “capitalism” that makes people fight over toilet paper at a time when toilet paper isn’t a product they particularly need.
Socialism, they tell us, is “a system in which scarcity is no longer an issue.”
So when there’s an unanticipated pandemic, socialism will evidently have huge warehouses of toilet paper sitting there for no reason, waiting for consumers who don’t actually need it to get all they need.
Well, that seems like a rational approach to production.
How about the fact that it’s capitalism itself that’s made it seem normal and unremarkable that everybody you know readily purchases and uses soap, disinfectants, and sanitizers?
Which European king had all of these?
Scarcity is always an issue. If we produce A with resources B, C, and D, we cannot simultaneously produce F with B, C, and D. If we employ labor in the service of one line of production, we cannot simultaneously employ it in the service of another.
Here is the situation we face:
Billions of people have an enormous number of conflicting preferences.
We have to figure out a way to satisfy as many of those preferences as possible, but arrange the means of production in such a way that in satisfying one preference we are not inadvertently depriving more urgent preferences of the resources necessary for them to be satisfied.
The market economy, with its price system, accomplishes this seemingly impossible task — or at least approaches it as closely as mankind is capable of — without coercion or central direction.
It does it so well that people consider it automatic, like a spontaneously occurring feature of human existence.
Instead of marveling at it, they complain — and risk destroying the very thing that in all likelihood makes their own existences possible.
I might add, incidentally, that one thing the market provides that socialism surely would not, is home education.
The kind of system being described above would place indoctrination of the young fairly high on its list of goals, so good luck homeschooling.
Meanwhile, we’ve created the Ron Paul Curriculum, which — gasp — presents students with more than one point of view, while at the same time giving them a top-notch education in all the major subjects, plus others: like how to speak effectively, how to run a small business, how to operate a blog, or how to manage money.
There’s going to be more demand for it in the coming weeks, for obvious reasons.
Curious? Join through my link and I throw in three bonuses I created myself:
http://www.RonPaulHomeschool.com
http://www.LibertyClassroom.com
Real Dissent: A Libert... Thomas E. Woods Jr. Best Price: $8.48 Buy New $7.93 (as of 03:10 UTC - Details) CHURCH & THE MARKET (S... Woods Jr., Thomas E. Best Price: $6.04 Buy New $101.04 (as of 04:20 UTC - Details) How the Catholic Churc... Thomas E. Woods Best Price: $8.00 Buy New $9.06 (as of 05:30 UTC - Details) The Politically Incorr... Thomas E. Woods Jr. Best Price: $1.51 Buy New $8.71 (as of 06:15 UTC - Details)
The Best of Tom Woods


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--Coronavirus and the Sun

Coronavirus and the Sun

When new , virulent diseases emerge , such SARS and Covid-19 , the race begins to find new vaccines and treatments for those affected .
As the current crisis unfolds , governments are enforcing quarantine and isolation , and public gatherings are being discouraged .
Health officials took the same approach 100 years ago , when influenza was spreading around the world .
The results were mixed .
But records from the 1918 pandemic suggest one technique for dealing with influenza — little-known today — was effective .
Some hard-won experience from the greatest pandemic in recorded history could help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Put simply , medics found that severely ill flu patients nursed outdoors recovered better than those treated indoors .
A combination of fresh air and sunlight seems to have prevented deaths among patients ; and infections among medical staff .
[ 1 ] There is scientific support for this .
Research shows that outdoor air is a natural disinfectant .
Fresh air can kill the flu virus and other harmful germs .
Equally , sunlight is germicidal and there is now evidence it can kill the flu virus .
Influenza patients getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospital in Boston .
Medical staff were not supposed to remove their masks .
( National Archives ) During the great pandemic , two of the worst places to be were military barracks and troop-ships .
Overcrowding and bad ventilation put soldiers and sailors at high risk of catching influenza and the other infections that often followed it .
[ 2,3 ] As with the current Covid-19 outbreak , most of the victims of so-called ` Spanish flu ’ did not die from influenza : they died of pneumonia and other complications .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 When the influenza pandemic reached the East coast of the United States in 1918 , the city of Boston was particularly badly hit .
So the State Guard set up an emergency hospital .
They took in the worst cases among sailors on ships in Boston harbour .
The hospital ’ s medical officer had noticed the most seriously ill sailors had been in badly-ventilated spaces .
So he gave them as much fresh air as possible by putting them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were taken out of their tents and put in the sun .
At this time , it was common practice to put sick soldiers outdoors .
Open-air therapy , as it was known , was widely used on casualties from the Western Front .
And it became the treatment of choice for another common and often deadly respiratory infection of the time ; tuberculosis .
Patients were put outside in their beds to breathe fresh outdoor air .
Or they were nursed in cross-ventilated wards with the windows open day and night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ antibiotics replaced it in the 1950s .
Doctors who had first-hand experience of open-air therapy at the hospital in Boston were convinced the regimen was effective .
It was adopted elsewhere .
If one report is correct , it reduced deaths among hospital patients from 40 per cent to about 13 per cent .
[ 4 ] According to the Surgeon General of the Massachusetts State Guard : ` The efficacy of open air treatment has been absolutely proven , and one has only to try it to discover its value.
’ Patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposed to the infectious germs that are often present in conventional hospital wards .
They were breathing clean air in what must have been a largely sterile environment .
We know this because , in the 1960s , Ministry of Defence scientists proved that fresh air is a natural disinfectant .
[ 5 ] Something in it , which they called the Open Air Factor , is far more harmful to airborne bacteria — and the influenza virus — than indoor air .
They couldn ’ t identify exactly what the Open Air @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was effective both at night and during the daytime .
Their research also revealed that the Open Air Factor ’ s disinfecting powers can be preserved in enclosures — if ventilation rates are kept high enough .
Significantly , the rates they identified are the same ones that cross-ventilated hospital wards , with high ceilings and big windows , were designed for .
[ 6 ] But by the time the scientists made their discoveries , antibiotic therapy had replaced open-air treatment .
Since then the germicidal effects of fresh air have not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ design .
Yet harmful bacteria have become increasingly resistant to antibiotics .

When new, virulent diseases emerge, such SARS and Covid-19, the race begins to find new vaccines and treatments for those affected. As the current crisis unfolds, governments are enforcing quarantine and isolation, and public gatherings are being discouraged. Health officials took the same approach 100 years ago, when influenza was spreading around the world. The results were mixed. But records from the 1918 pandemic suggest one technique for dealing with influenza — little-known today — was effective. Some hard-won experience from the greatest pandemic in recorded history could help us in the weeks and months ahead.
Put simply, medics found that severely ill flu patients nursed outdoors recovered better than those treated indoors. A combination of fresh air and sunlight seems to have prevented deaths among patients; and infections among medical staff.[1] There is scientific support for this. Research shows that outdoor air is a natural disinfectant. Fresh air can kill the flu virus and other harmful germs. Equally, sunlight is germicidal and there is now evidence it can kill the flu virus.
Influenza patients getting sunlight at the Camp Brooks emergency open-air hospital in Boston. Medical staff were not supposed to remove their masks. (National Archives)
`Open-Air’ Treatment in 1918
During the great pandemic, two of the worst places to be were military barracks and troop-ships. Overcrowding and bad ventilation put soldiers and sailors at high risk of catching influenza and the other infections that often followed it.[2,3] As with the current Covid-19 outbreak, most of the victims of so-called `Spanish flu’ did not die from influenza: they died of pneumonia and other complications. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
When the influenza pandemic reached the East coast of the United States in 1918, the city of Boston was particularly badly hit. So the State Guard set up an emergency hospital. They took in the worst cases among sailors on ships in Boston harbour. The hospital’s medical officer had noticed the most seriously ill sailors had been in badly-ventilated spaces. So he gave them as much fresh air as possible by putting them in tents. And in good weather they were taken out of their tents and put in the sun. At this time, it was common practice to put sick soldiers outdoors. Open-air therapy, as it was known, was widely used on casualties from the Western Front. And it became the treatment of choice for another common and often deadly respiratory infection of the time; tuberculosis. Patients were put outside in their beds to breathe fresh outdoor air. Or they were nursed in cross-ventilated wards with the windows open day and night. The open-air regimen remained popular until antibiotics replaced it in the 1950s.
Doctors who had first-hand experience of open-air therapy at the hospital in Boston were convinced the regimen was effective. It was adopted elsewhere. If one report is correct, it reduced deaths among hospital patients from 40 per cent to about 13 per cent.[4] According to the Surgeon General of the Massachusetts State Guard:
`The efficacy of open air treatment has been absolutely proven, and one has only to try it to discover its value.’
Fresh Air is a Disinfectant
Patients treated outdoors were less likely to be exposed to the infectious germs that are often present in conventional hospital wards. They were breathing clean air in what must have been a largely sterile environment. We know this because, in the 1960s, Ministry of Defence scientists proved that fresh air is a natural disinfectant.[5] Something in it, which they called the Open Air Factor, is far more harmful to airborne bacteria — and the influenza virus — than indoor air. They couldn’t identify exactly what the Open Air Factor is. But they found it was effective both at night and during the daytime.
Their research also revealed that the Open Air Factor’s disinfecting powers can be preserved in enclosures — if ventilation rates are kept high enough. Significantly, the rates they identified are the same ones that cross-ventilated hospital wards, with high ceilings and big windows, were designed for.[6] But by the time the scientists made their discoveries, antibiotic therapy had replaced open-air treatment. Since then the germicidal effects of fresh air have not featured in infection control, or hospital design. Yet harmful bacteria have become increasingly resistant to antibiotics.
Read the Whole Article


The Anti-Corona

It ’ s hard to sustain a state of panic , a sense of imminent doom , when the sun is shining , the breeze is warm – and you ’ re getting your classic car ready for spring .
This is a necessary and therapeutic annual ritual .
Like the first green shoots and buds on the trees , it marks the end of the dead season and the beginning of a new beginning .
We could all use a lot of that right now .
The basics first .
Air up the tires , check all the fluids @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Cars that sit for weeks and months have different needs – and develop different problems – than regularly used cars.
< For example , there ’ s more to check than just the air in the tires .
Cars that are driven regularly usually wear out their tires before the tires age out .
Cars that aren ’ t driven regularly often have tires with plenty of tread but hairline cracks on the sidewall and maybe also structural deterioration you can ’ t even see – the result of age and oxidation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Best Price : null Buy New $ 25.00 My car is driven maybe 500 miles each year .
Its tires will never go bald .
Well , maybe the rear tires will – from burnouts – but you get the point .
Unless you drive your classic car at least a few thousand miles each year , it is very likely the tires you buy today will still have most of their tread a decade – or even two – from now .
But by that time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to drive on .
If you see cracks , it ’ s a clue that it ’ s time for new rubber .
Send the old ones to Valhalla via celebratory burnouts !
I next check all the lights .
Head and brake and tail and turn .
Hi and low beam .
Make sure they ’ re all working before you go driving .
Remember that the cost of a turn signal bulb is much lower than a ticket from an AGW – or the cost of body and paint work for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the hit you ’ ll take on insurance for being the cause of an accident that occurred because you though you signaled a left turn in front of that car coming at you but didn ’ t actually .
Oil and filter change .
My practice is every spring , regardless of mileage .
As with tires , the passage of time is the determining factor here .
The oil does not wear out – certainly not after 500 miles ( or less ) of driving in a year .
The Best @ @ @

It’s hard to sustain a state of panic, a sense of imminent doom, when the sun is shining, the breeze is warm – and you’re getting your classic car ready for spring.
This is a necessary and therapeutic annual ritual. Like the first green shoots and buds on the trees, it marks the end of the dead season and the beginning of a new beginning. We could all use a lot of that right now.
The basics first. Air up the tires, check all the fluids; a general walk-around and close inspection. Cars that sit for weeks and months have different needs – and develop different problems – than regularly used cars.<

For example, there’s more to check than just the air in the tires. Cars that are driven regularly usually wear out their tires before the tires age out. Cars that aren’t driven regularly often have tires with plenty of tread but hairline cracks on the sidewall and maybe also structural deterioration you can’t even see – the result of age and oxidation of the compounds that make rubber pliable. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $25.00 (as of 11:14 UTC - Details)
My car is driven maybe 500 miles each year. Its tires will never go bald . Well, maybe the rear tires will – from burnouts – but you get the point. Unless you drive your classic car at least a few thousand miles each year, it is very likely the tires you buy today will still have most of their tread a decade – or even two – from now. But by that time, they may no longer be safe to drive on.
If you see cracks, it’s a clue that it’s time for new rubber. Send the old ones to Valhalla via celebratory burnouts!
I next check all the lights. Head and brake and tail and turn. Hi and low beam. Make sure they’re all working before you go driving. Remember that the cost of a turn signal bulb is much lower than a ticket from an AGW – or the cost of body and paint work for your classic car – and the cost of the hit you’ll take on insurance for being the cause of an accident that occurred because you though you signaled a left turn in front of that car coming at you but didn’t actually.
Oil and filter change. My practice is every spring, regardless of mileage. As with tires, the passage of time is the determining factor here. The oil does not wear out – certainly not after 500 miles (or less) of driving in a year.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Eric Peters


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--It’s About Those Official Corona Virus Figures…

In fact , I ’ m looking at the Gold Standard of official corona virus figures — from the Johns Hopkins based Coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) Tracker .
It ’ s a remarkable piece of work and gives by far the best display of available data on the world-wide progress of the COVID-19 pandemic .
Without context however , the data it displays is misleading .
The key question is , “ How does a person , verified as having COVID-19 , show up in the data ?
” In the early stages — when the number infected is still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are known to have COVID-19 and those who have come in contact with them and test positive or come down with the disease .
Barring that , however , someone worried about their symptoms would have to take themselves to a doctor or medical pro etc .
who ’ s plugged into the reporting network .
The Prepperu2019s Blue ... Tess Pennington Best Price : $ 11.98 Buy New $ 18.98 But suppose they ’ re not sick enough — or worried enough — to seek a medical opinion ?
Or feel they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Or are asymptomatic — that is , while infected , don ’ t show symptoms and so don ’ t know they ’ re infected .
And then there ’ s the question , “ Are such folks contageous ?
” The estimates I ’ ve seen suggest that , yes they are , for the entire incubation period which is thought to be at least 14 days and possibly as long as 37 days .
Also , possibly , even after recovery .
It ’ s these folks that make it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of COVID-19 than show up in the official data so far .
In fact , some scientists estimate that as of March 1 , there were as many as 10,000 unrecognized cases in the U.S. How many folks have they unknowingly infected since then ?
This explains why there ’ s no centralized way to stop the spread of COVID-19 .
Which means it ’ s up to you to protect yourself and your family as best you can .
Probably the things that help protect you from the flu will also help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , social distancing , etc.
, vitamin C and zinc supplements may help .
Also you might look into anti-viral L-lysine suplementation and possibly short-term echinacea use as well .
If you have children , you might want to consider that the public health course required of teachers warned us that public schools are “ sumps of infection ” and act accordingly .
That ’ s because the kids bring disease from home to the schools where it spreads to the other kids who then take it home , etc .
The sort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of deaths to reported cases only takes into account those who enter the medical system , which is slanted toward the most ill and misses those unknown less ill cases .
Clearly that means the official death rate mostly reflects what happens to the the worse-off subset of those infected folks who are actually under observation .
Thus the over-all death rate of the whole universe of those who get infected with COVID-19 is likely smaller than the one implied by the official figures so far .
And that puts the official data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like conspiracy theories — or even just the truth — you might find these well-documented articles interesting – – – China ’ s Coronavirus : A Shocking Update .
Did The Virus Originate in the US ?
Japan , China and Taiwan Reports on the Origin of the Virus , By Larry Romanoff , Global Research Here for updates , additions , comments , and corrections .
AND , “ Like , ” “ Tweet , ” and otherwise , pass this along !
The Best of L. Reichard White

In fact, I’m looking at the Gold Standard of official corona virus figures — from the Johns Hopkins based Coronavirus (COVID-19) Tracker.
It’s a remarkable piece of work and gives by far the best display of available data on the world-wide progress of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Without context however, the data it displays is misleading.
The key question is, “How does a person, verified as having COVID-19, show up in the data?”
In the early stages — when the number infected is still managable — there are the folks who are known to have COVID-19 and those who have come in contact with them and test positive or come down with the disease.
Barring that, however, someone worried about their symptoms would have to take themselves to a doctor or medical pro etc. who’s plugged into the reporting network. The Prepperu2019s Blue... Tess Pennington Best Price: $11.98 Buy New $18.98 (as of 02:20 UTC - Details)
But suppose they’re not sick enough — or worried enough — to seek a medical opinion? Or feel they can’t afford the medical system. Or are asymptomatic — that is, while infected, don’t show symptoms and so don’t know they’re infected.
And then there’s the question, “Are such folks contageous?” The estimates I’ve seen suggest that, yes they are, for the entire incubation period which is thought to be at least 14 days and possibly as long as 37 days. Also, possibly, even after recovery.
It’s these folks that make it clear there are a lot more cases of COVID-19 than show up in the official data so far. In fact, some scientists estimate that as of March 1, there were as many as 10,000 unrecognized cases in the U.S. How many folks have they unknowingly infected since then?
This explains why there’s no centralized way to stop the spread of COVID-19. Which means it’s up to you to protect yourself and your family as best you can.
Probably the things that help protect you from the flu will also help head-off COVID-19. In addition to hand-washing, social distancing, etc., vitamin C and zinc supplements may help. Also you might look into anti-viral L-lysine suplementation and possibly short-term echinacea use as well.
If you have children, you might want to consider that the public health course required of teachers warned us that public schools are “sumps of infection” and act accordingly. That’s because the kids bring disease from home to the schools where it spreads to the other kids who then take it home, etc.
The sort of good news is that the ratio of deaths to reported cases only takes into account those who enter the medical system, which is slanted toward the most ill and misses those unknown less ill cases. Clearly that means the official death rate mostly reflects what happens to the the worse-off subset of those infected folks who are actually under observation.
Thus the over-all death rate of the whole universe of those who get infected with COVID-19 is likely smaller than the one implied by the official figures so far. And that puts the official data in context.
Now, if you like conspiracy theories — or even just the truth — you might find these well-documented articles interesting – – –
China’s Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did The Virus Originate in the US? Japan, China and Taiwan Reports on the Origin of the Virus, By Larry Romanoff, Global Research
Coronavirus: A Contrived Pandemic? By Bill Sardi
Coronavirus- Blunt Truth | Capitalist Eric
Here for updates, additions, comments, and corrections.
AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!
The Best of L. Reichard White


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--The Impotence of Monetary Policy Exposed Yet Again

As I write this , the DJIA has just closed down over 2,300 points or 9.99 percent and the S & P 500 is down 9.51 percent .
This is the market ’ s largest daily decline since the crash of October 22 , 1987 .
And this is despite the fact that the Fed announced a “ liquidity ” injection of over $ 1.2 trillion into credit markets via term repurchase operations starting immediately .
The market briefly pared its losses in the wake of the announcement and then spit and continued on its downward spiral .
This should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give pause for reflection to those who extol the creation of money as the panacea for every economic ailment .
In an article published in the Wall Street Journal three days ago , John Greenwood and Steve Hanke properly criticized the Fed for “ fetishizing ” and manipulating interest rates .
But then they went on to implore the Fed to supply liquidity “ to deal with the [ coronavirus ] panic—whether by quantitative-easing purchases of long bonds , by Treasury bill purchases , by repos or , most important , by increasing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the central banks of Japan , China , South Korea , Taiwan and Hong Kong.
” And this is despite their recognition that their preferred broad money supply measure , Divisia M4 , is growing at an annual rate of 6.9 percent , providing “ ample monetary support for continued [ economic ] growth.
” Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 Well , the Fed—at least partly—followed their advice yesterday to no avail .
Trying to direct dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swaps with foreign banks would not work either .
Dollar swaps are an attempt to assist foreign central banks in maintaining an overvalued currency in defiance of economic reality .
In fact , the Reserve Bank of India ( RBI ) , the central bank of India , just yesterday announced that it will undertake $ 2 billion worth of US dollar-rupee sell/buy swaps on March 16 in response to external outflows of dollars from local equity and debt markets .
The bottom line is that any economic contraction caused by the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shock ” caused by real factors such as factory closings , supply chain interruptions , the impaired efficiency of service sector employees forced to work from home , etc .
Printing up paper money and giving it or lending it to domestic businesses or to India will not bring about a miraculous replacement of the lost goods and services or repair broken supply chains .
However , the “ pandemic shock ” may , and probably will , have repercussions on the demand side of the economy , likely precipitating a financial crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designed fragility of a financial system based on fractional reserve banking and propped up by governmental policies such as deposit insurance and the too-big-to-fail doctrine .
And we saw just how well money creation via quantitative easing and financial bailouts worked during the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008 .
The Best of Joseph T. Salerno

As I write this, the DJIA has just closed down over 2,300 points or 9.99 percent and the S&P 500 is down 9.51 percent. This is the market’s largest daily decline since the crash of October 22, 1987. And this is despite the fact that the Fed announced a “liquidity” injection of over $1.2 trillion into credit markets via term repurchase operations starting immediately. The market briefly pared its losses in the wake of the announcement and then spit and continued on its downward spiral. This should, but probably won’t, give pause for reflection to those who extol the creation of money as the panacea for every economic ailment.
In an article published in the Wall Street Journal three days ago, John Greenwood and Steve Hanke properly criticized the Fed for “fetishizing” and manipulating interest rates. But then they went on to implore the Fed to supply liquidity “to deal with the [coronavirus] panic—whether by quantitative-easing purchases of long bonds, by Treasury bill purchases, by repos or, most important, by increasing the amounts of U.S. dollar swaps available to the central banks of Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong.” And this is despite their recognition that their preferred broad money supply measure, Divisia M4, is growing at an annual rate of 6.9 percent, providing “ample monetary support for continued [economic] growth.” Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
Well, the Fed—at least partly—followed their advice yesterday to no avail. Trying to direct dollars into foreign supply chains by increasing dollar swaps with foreign banks would not work either. Dollar swaps are an attempt to assist foreign central banks in maintaining an overvalued currency in defiance of economic reality. In fact, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the central bank of India, just yesterday announced that it will undertake $2 billion worth of US dollar-rupee sell/buy swaps on March 16 in response to external outflows of dollars from local equity and debt markets.
The bottom line is that any economic contraction caused by the coronavirus pandemic would originate as a “supply-side shock” caused by real factors such as factory closings, supply chain interruptions, the impaired efficiency of service sector employees forced to work from home, etc. Printing up paper money and giving it or lending it to domestic businesses or to India will not bring about a miraculous replacement of the lost goods and services or repair broken supply chains. However, the “pandemic shock” may, and probably will, have repercussions on the demand side of the economy, likely precipitating a financial crisis. But this is due to the designed fragility of a financial system based on fractional reserve banking and propped up by governmental policies such as deposit insurance and the too-big-to-fail doctrine. And we saw just how well money creation via quantitative easing and financial bailouts worked during the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008.
The Best of Joseph T. Salerno


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--Black Swans, Dead Cats, Live Bats, and Goodbye to All That

Had enough excitement yet ?
At least the stock markets are following an established script : the bubble pops , the elevator drops , for a while it stops… and then investments sink to the deepest sub-basement , where they linger for a long , long time .
Hello , next great depression… .
We know how that story goes , even if it hurts .
This corona virus is something else .
It engulfs whole populations in a fog of confounding narratives .
Is it no worse than a bad common cold , except for old folks already half-gone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really slam people even in the midst of life ?
Well , Wuhan hospital director Liu Zhiming , 51 , went down two weeks ago , and gastroenterologist Xia Sisi , 29 , and Dr. Peng Yinhua , also 29 , and some prominent Iranian politicians , and lots of very sick healthcare workers from Korea to Italy .
Whatever corona virus is , I ’ m not persuaded that it ’ s a hoax .
One monster banging around in that fog is the narrative that China started this thing simply to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a real baby-and-bathwater proposition .
Would China , in effect , blow up its export economy for that , i.e .
commit suicide ?
Because a lot of those prior arrangements will probably not come back — the manufacturing supply lines for this-and-that , the fabulous cornucopia of plastic goodies extruded from all those smoking factories and flushed out to the world , the whole glorious let ’ s-get-rich extravaganza that Deng Xiaoping kicked off forty years ago .
It ’ s looking like the global economy is on the rocks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knew it .
Is China as plumb crazy as , for instance , America ’ s political Left ?
Living in the Long Eme ... James Howard Kunstler Buy New $ 24.95 If anything , China has only validated Mr. Trump ’ s point that America bargained away its industrial independence , and must become more self-sufficient again .
True enough .
Where I depart from MAGA is my sense that the industrial age itself has probably shot its wad , and that whatever America makes of itself going forward is likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of life , without a lot of the dazzling bells and whistles we ’ ve become accustomed to , and perhaps some genuine hardship .
I say that , readers will recall , because it really all comes down to the energy inputs available and that part of the picture has gone pretty grim in just the past week .
The convergence of world events has driven a wooden stake through the heart of the shale oil business .
From the get-go , shale oil was a loser because it just cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the rock it was trapped in .
It only worked as a financial stunt during the low interest lending orgy of the past decade .
It was a magnificent stunt , you understand , goosing US production to 13 million barrels a day — energy independence , with all those short-term feel-good vibes — but it was just a stunt and now it ’ s over .
The reality of this has yet to penetrate the American hive-mind .
Corona virus neatly imploded that financing scaffold , and now , with world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capital is vanishing .
As I ’ ve averred before , the shale companies spent ten years proving to investors that they can ’ t make a red cent .
Their bonds and notes are sinking into sub-investment-grade oblivion .
Some of the major producers — Whiting , Oasis , Chesapeake — have lost over 90 percent of their share value and will probably soon be gone .
Who would lend them more money now , even if the money was there ?
( Maybe Uncle Sam ’ s wicked step-son , Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that… we ’ ll see . )
Meanwhile , oil is cheap , but demand is gone , planes are not flying , ships are not sailing , stadiums are empty , lots of things are shutting down , and quite a bit of it may not ever come back .
The Geography of Nowhe ... Kunstler , James Howard Best Price : null Buy New $ 4.99 US politics were already crazy enough before all this suddenly happened .
The crisis of the past few weeks also saw the supernatural elevation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of last-vehicle-standing in the Democratic Party demolition derby .
Who do they think they are kidding ?
Not only is Joe Biden observably gone-in-the-head — that is , clearly unfit to be president — but he ’ s loaded down with a steaming , fetid cargo of easily proven grifting offenses so clunky and obvious they would embarrass a South Philly mobster .
I ’ m sure Mr. Biden stayed in the race solely to avoid investigation for his operations in Ukraine and China with son , Hunter .
Corona virus has provided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ duck out of the spotlight , where he spent recent weeks blathering incoherently and starting fights with voters .
And now something really nefarious may be a ’ foot with the Dems .
If the wounded Bernie Sanders does not use Sunday ’ s debate as an opportunity to expose Mr. Biden ’ s dementia and finish him off , here ’ s the DNC ’ s playbook : Hope that the stock market crash and broken economy sink Mr. Trump in public opinion , then contrive to nominate Mr. Biden and get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veep .
That part of the story has been trotted out already .
I ’ m beginning to wonder whether that black woman will happen to be Michelle Obama , and I ’ m also wondering whether Barack Obama is behind the scenes orchestrating this .
Of course , Mr. Biden , if elected , will serve in office less than a week — just long enough to hustle him off with the 25th amendment .
Voila !
The Obamas are back in the White House , out-Clintoning even the Clintons !
Happy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
The Best of James Howard Kunstler

Had enough excitement yet? At least the stock markets are following an established script: the bubble pops, the elevator drops, for a while it stops… and then investments sink to the deepest sub-basement, where they linger for a long, long time. Hello, next great depression…. We know how that story goes, even if it hurts.
This corona virus is something else. It engulfs whole populations in a fog of confounding narratives. Is it no worse than a bad common cold, except for old folks already half-gone with chronic illness? Or does it really slam people even in the midst of life? Well, Wuhan hospital director Liu Zhiming, 51, went down two weeks ago, and gastroenterologist Xia Sisi, 29, and Dr. Peng Yinhua, also 29, and some prominent Iranian politicians, and lots of very sick healthcare workers from Korea to Italy. Whatever corona virus is, I’m not persuaded that it’s a hoax.
One monster banging around in that fog is the narrative that China started this thing simply to get rid of Mr. Trump. There’s a real baby-and-bathwater proposition. Would China, in effect, blow up its export economy for that, i.e. commit suicide? Because a lot of those prior arrangements will probably not come back — the manufacturing supply lines for this-and-that, the fabulous cornucopia of plastic goodies extruded from all those smoking factories and flushed out to the world, the whole glorious let’s-get-rich extravaganza that Deng Xiaoping kicked off forty years ago. It’s looking like the global economy is on the rocks, perhaps for good, as we knew it. Is China as plumb crazy as, for instance, America’s political Left? Living in the Long Eme... James Howard Kunstler Buy New $24.95 (as of 10:56 UTC - Details)
If anything, China has only validated Mr. Trump’s point that America bargained away its industrial independence, and must become more self-sufficient again. True enough. Where I depart from MAGA is my sense that the industrial age itself has probably shot its wad, and that whatever America makes of itself going forward is likely to be a much more modest and simpler way of life, without a lot of the dazzling bells and whistles we’ve become accustomed to, and perhaps some genuine hardship.
I say that, readers will recall, because it really all comes down to the energy inputs available and that part of the picture has gone pretty grim in just the past week. The convergence of world events has driven a wooden stake through the heart of the shale oil business. From the get-go, shale oil was a loser because it just cost too much to get that oil out of the rock it was trapped in. It only worked as a financial stunt during the low interest lending orgy of the past decade. It was a magnificent stunt, you understand, goosing US production to 13 million barrels a day — energy independence, with all those short-term feel-good vibes — but it was just a stunt and now it’s over. The reality of this has yet to penetrate the American hive-mind.
Corona virus neatly imploded that financing scaffold, and now, with world business locked down and markets cratering, capital is vanishing. As I’ve averred before, the shale companies spent ten years proving to investors that they can’t make a red cent. Their bonds and notes are sinking into sub-investment-grade oblivion. Some of the major producers — Whiting, Oasis, Chesapeake — have lost over 90 percent of their share value and will probably soon be gone. Who would lend them more money now, even if the money was there? (Maybe Uncle Sam’s wicked step-son, Mr. Trump, if it comes down to that… we’ll see.) Meanwhile, oil is cheap, but demand is gone, planes are not flying, ships are not sailing, stadiums are empty, lots of things are shutting down, and quite a bit of it may not ever come back. The Geography of Nowhe... Kunstler, James Howard Buy New $4.99 (as of 07:20 UTC - Details)
US politics were already crazy enough before all this suddenly happened. The crisis of the past few weeks also saw the supernatural elevation of Joe Biden to the utterly implausible role of last-vehicle-standing in the Democratic Party demolition derby. Who do they think they are kidding? Not only is Joe Biden observably gone-in-the-head — that is, clearly unfit to be president — but he’s loaded down with a steaming, fetid cargo of easily proven grifting offenses so clunky and obvious they would embarrass a South Philly mobster. I’m sure Mr. Biden stayed in the race solely to avoid investigation for his operations in Ukraine and China with son, Hunter.
Corona virus has provided a chance for the former veep to duck out of the spotlight, where he spent recent weeks blathering incoherently and starting fights with voters. And now something really nefarious may be a’foot with the Dems. If the wounded Bernie Sanders does not use Sunday’s debate as an opportunity to expose Mr. Biden’s dementia and finish him off, here’s the DNC’s playbook: Hope that the stock market crash and broken economy sink Mr. Trump in public opinion, then contrive to nominate Mr. Biden and get a black woman on the ticket as veep. That part of the story has been trotted out already. I’m beginning to wonder whether that black woman will happen to be Michelle Obama, and I’m also wondering whether Barack Obama is behind the scenes orchestrating this. Of course, Mr. Biden, if elected, will serve in office less than a week — just long enough to hustle him off with the 25th amendment. Voila! The Obamas are back in the White House, out-Clintoning even the Clintons! Happy days are here again! (Not.)
Reprinted with permission from Kunstler.com.
The Best of James Howard Kunstler


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--The Putin Stimulus: $30 Oil Will Be Great for the Global Economy

$ 30 dollar oil will be great for the global economy ( and in turn , a good global economy is good for oil ) .
At a time when the global economy is visibly losing steam , when we ’ re overdue for another business cycle recession , and when nobody seems to have an answer , Moscow delivered what nobody else could — a massive economic boost for the whole world .
Sure there will be losers , chief among them US shale and the Saudis who need far higher prices to make their budgets work .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shale has always been a loss-making enterprise for America .
The scaling-down of shale is not bearish for the US at all .
It ’ s bullish .
If Putin can make Americans stop throwing more good money down the shale pit that ’ s not a bad thing , that ’ s a giant favor to the US and the health of its economy right there .
To say nothing of the effect of cheap energy itself .
Personally I don ’ t think even $ 30 oil will be enough to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it would be that .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 Similar story with the Saudis , if they have less money to throw around backing Salafists and bribing Washington , that ’ s not a bad thing .
That ’ s a great thing for the world .
Some of Russia ’ s friends like Venezuela and Iran will be hurt as well , but ironically the fact the US has already cut down their imports to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a lot less left to lose .
It certainly will kill the Trump administration ’ s fantasy of the US displacing Russia as the energy supplier to Europe .
Finally , unlike money printing , Putin ’ s cheap oil stimulus is not redistributive and is not inflationary .
And unlike a low-interest rate stimulus , it doesn ’ t throw economic calculation off balance by falsifying the price of credit and conjuring up a false abundance of real-world capital .
For three years Russia went along with OPECE energy price-fixing because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its FX reserves .
Those reserves have now been rebuilt .
In the meantime , Russia developed a number of new oil fields but couldn ’ t move on with exploiting them which made its effort rather pointless .
This is a classical win-win .
Rather than looking to squeeze every last dime from the consumers in the short term , the oil producers will be helping them to thrive which in turn will make sure the demand keeps growing .

$30 dollar oil will be great for the global economy (and in turn, a good global economy is good for oil). At a time when the global economy is visibly losing steam, when we’re overdue for another business cycle recession, and when nobody seems to have an answer, Moscow delivered what nobody else could — a massive economic boost for the whole world.
Sure there will be losers, chief among them US shale and the Saudis who need far higher prices to make their budgets work.
But then as a whole, the US shale has always been a loss-making enterprise for America. The scaling-down of shale is not bearish for the US at all. It’s bullish. If Putin can make Americans stop throwing more good money down the shale pit that’s not a bad thing, that’s a giant favor to the US and the health of its economy right there.
To say nothing of the effect of cheap energy itself. Personally I don’t think even $30 oil will be enough to avert a crash but if anything could, it would be that. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
Similar story with the Saudis, if they have less money to throw around backing Salafists and bribing Washington, that’s not a bad thing. That’s a great thing for the world.
Some of Russia’s friends like Venezuela and Iran will be hurt as well, but ironically the fact the US has already cut down their imports to a fraction of their capacity means they have a lot less left to lose.
It certainly will kill the Trump administration’s fantasy of the US displacing Russia as the energy supplier to Europe.
Finally, unlike money printing, Putin’s cheap oil stimulus is not redistributive and is not inflationary. And unlike a low-interest rate stimulus, it doesn’t throw economic calculation off balance by falsifying the price of credit and conjuring up a false abundance of real-world capital.
For three years Russia went along with OPECE energy price-fixing because it represented the quickest way to replenish its FX reserves. Those reserves have now been rebuilt. In the meantime, Russia developed a number of new oil fields but couldn’t move on with exploiting them which made its effort rather pointless.
This is a classical win-win. Rather than looking to squeeze every last dime from the consumers in the short term, the oil producers will be helping them to thrive which in turn will make sure the demand keeps growing.
Source: Anti-Empire


lewrockwell--2020-03-14--Why Does S. Korea Have Lower Death Rate Compared to the US?

South Korea was one of the first countries affected by Coronavirus after China .
Their first case occurred January 20 , 2020 .
The number of cases remained low until February 18 when the country reported 31 new cases .
A few days later hundreds more were confirmed and continued to rise .
At that time , S. Korea had the highest number of COVID-19 patients outside of China .
( 1 ) By February 27 , with a few hundred cases of COVID-19 reported , S. Korea had tested over 66,000 people while the US had tested just 445 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not spiral out of control like it has in the US ?
In later January , just after the first case , S. Korea procured a massive amount of tests .
When the infection spread in February , S. Korean health agencies were quickly mobilized to test tens of thousands of exposed Koreans .
In fact , they tested tens of thousands of patients and properly instituted quarantining and treatment .
That is a perfect example of how a national health service is supposed to function .
We—especially the CDC–have a lot to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How did this fare for the Korean citizens ?
In the March 13 , 2020 Korean Times it is reported that there are 7,869 cases of COVID-19 .
How many have died ?
Sixty-six people , mostly elderly patients with underlying illnesses have died so far .
That means the death rate in Korea is 0.8 % ( 66/7,869 ) .
This is still higher than the death rate for the flu in the US which is approximately 0.1 % .
However , this number is much lower than the 3-4 % promoted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Healthy E ... David Brownstein , M.D .
Best Price : $ 1.46 Buy New $ 2.99 At present , the US has 1,716 cases and 41 deaths have occurred .
That is a death rate of 2.3 % ( 41/1716 ) .
It is important to keep in mind that the death rate is currently inflated due to the lack of COVID-19 testing kits .
Those most likely to be tested are the sick and dying .
Patients who convalesce at home with cold and flu-like symptoms will generally not be tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death rate .
It simply is impossible to say how many Americans have COVID-19 .
In fact , we will never know the true number .
I have seen dozens of patients over the past month who could have it .
Why didn ’ t I test them ?
Ask the fools at the CDC .
They were late to the testing game , developed a faulty test kit and inhibited private industry from manufacturing accurate tests .
I received the proper testing items at my office late afternoon Wednesday March 11 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came out of China and well into the panicked atmosphere surrounding COVID-19 .
These test kits only became available after the CDC was forced to open testing to private labs .
Folks , I am not minimizing the severity of COVID-19 .
But , there is no rhyme or reason for what has transpired .
The public is scared beyond belief .
I think we need to be vigilant and cautious .
If we play our cards right ( which includes the use of IV vitamin C—see below ) , the death rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % range that many are predicting .
In fact , if the CDC played its ’ cards right from the beginning and properly monitored Americans coming from infected areas , the story would be much different .
We have lost nearly one-fourth of our economy because of the incompetence at the CDC .
Heads should roll when this crisis is over .
The Best of Dr. David Brownstein

South Korea was one of the first countries affected by Coronavirus after China. Their first case occurred January 20, 2020. The number of cases remained low until February 18 when the country reported 31 new cases. A few days later hundreds more were confirmed and continued to rise. At that time, S. Korea had the highest number of COVID-19 patients outside of China. (1) By February 27, with a few hundred cases of COVID-19 reported, S. Korea had tested over 66,000 people while the US had tested just 445. (2)
How did this not spiral out of control like it has in the US? In later January, just after the first case, S. Korea procured a massive amount of tests. When the infection spread in February, S. Korean health agencies were quickly mobilized to test tens of thousands of exposed Koreans. In fact, they tested tens of thousands of patients and properly instituted quarantining and treatment.
That is a perfect example of how a national health service is supposed to function. We—especially the CDC–have a lot to learn from the Korean health agencies. How did this fare for the Korean citizens?
In the March 13, 2020 Korean Times it is reported that there are 7,869 cases of COVID-19. How many have died? Sixty-six people, mostly elderly patients with underlying illnesses have died so far. That means the death rate in Korea is 0.8% (66/7,869). This is still higher than the death rate for the flu in the US which is approximately 0.1%. However, this number is much lower than the 3-4% promoted by the media. The Guide to Healthy E... David Brownstein, M.D. Best Price: $1.46 Buy New $2.99 (as of 08:55 UTC - Details)
At present, the US has 1,716 cases and 41 deaths have occurred. That is a death rate of 2.3% (41/1716). It is important to keep in mind that the death rate is currently inflated due to the lack of COVID-19 testing kits. Those most likely to be tested are the sick and dying. Patients who convalesce at home with cold and flu-like symptoms will generally not be tested. Counting them would dramatically lower the death rate.
It simply is impossible to say how many Americans have COVID-19. In fact, we will never know the true number. I have seen dozens of patients over the past month who could have it. Why didn’t I test them? Ask the fools at the CDC. They were late to the testing game, developed a faulty test kit and inhibited private industry from manufacturing accurate tests. I received the proper testing items at my office late afternoon Wednesday March 11, 2020—nearly three months after the first reports came out of China and well into the panicked atmosphere surrounding COVID-19. These test kits only became available after the CDC was forced to open testing to private labs.
Folks, I am not minimizing the severity of COVID-19. But, there is no rhyme or reason for what has transpired. The public is scared beyond belief. I think we need to be vigilant and cautious. If we play our cards right (which includes the use of IV vitamin C—see below), the death rate from COVID-19 should not approach the 2-6% range that many are predicting. In fact, if the CDC played its’ cards right from the beginning and properly monitored Americans coming from infected areas, the story would be much different.
We have lost nearly one-fourth of our economy because of the incompetence at the CDC. Heads should roll when this crisis is over.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Dr. David Brownstein