The post Affordability and an Abundance Agenda for Health Care appeared first on CEPR.



 

 

This week, I speak with Matt Cherwin, Co-Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Marek Capital, an alternative asset management firm launched in 2024. He is responsible for the firm’s investment strategy, portfolio construction, research and risk management.

Previously, he spent 16-years at JPMorgan Chase & Co where he held titles of Chief Investment Officer, Group Treasurer, Co-Head of Global Spread Markets, Global Head of Securitized Products, and Global Head of Asset-Backed Trading.

His framework for analyzing markets relies on five vectors: Money, Capital, Credit, Liquidity and Regulation.

A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Bill Miller IV, Chief Investment Officer and Portfolio Manager at Miller Value Fund. Previously, he was at Legg Mason Capital Management covering specialty finance + consumer spaces with a focus on high-yielding securities. Miller competed in the Poker World Series Main Event. He began his career working for his father, famed investor Bill Miller III.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Matt Cherwin, Co-Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Marek Capital appeared first on The Big Picture.

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

• David Zaslav Gets the Last Laugh.  The Warner Bros. mogul’s $111 billion deal with David Ellison reveals the next stage of the business: The rich get richer, the big get bigger and everybody else is left in the dust. A look inside the Ellison empire and how Warner Bros. Discovery’s much-mocked CEO wound up in a stronger position than anyone expected. (Hollywood Reporter) 

• Coding After Coders: The End of Computer Programming as We Know It. Yes, In the era of A.I. agents, many Silicon Valley programmers are now barely programming. Instead, what they’re doing is deeply, deeply weird. (New York Times) see also After the AI Revolution. What does the economy — and society — actually look like on the other side of the AI transformation? Like a prism, AI will reveal the civilizational differences between China and the U.S., making visible the invisible within each society. (NOEMA) 

• They Came to Spy on America. They Stayed to Coach Little League. Soviet spies who settled into American suburban life and couldn’t quite bring themselves to leave. In the wake of the Cold War, some Soviet bloc spies decided their fake American lives weren’t so bad. (Politico)

• Sucker: My year as a degenerate gambler: When I set out to report on the sports-betting industry—its explosive growth, its sudden cultural ubiquity, and what it’s doing to America—my editors thought I should experience the phenomenon firsthand. Mindful of my religious constraints, they proposed a work-around: The Atlantic would stake me $10,000 to gamble with over the course of the upcoming NFL season. The magazine would cover any losses, and—to ensure my ongoing emotional investment—split any winnings with me, 50–50. Surely God would approve of such an arrangement, my editors reasoned, because I wouldn’t be risking my own hard-earned money. (The Atlantic)

• Inside the Space-Age Bid to Build Millions of Homes in Factories. Operation Breakthrough, a 1970s federal moonshot to build 26 million homes using advanced manufacturing, has lessons for today’s abundance movement. Operation Breakthrough, a 1970s federal moonshot to build 26 million homes using advanced manufacturing methods, has lessons for today’s abundance movement. (CityLab)

• The Status Economy: How the signaling game has shifted from logos and luxury goods to taste, access, and knowledge. “Every purchase is now a status signal. Discover The Status Economy — three reports exploring the categories defining cultural credibility and taste in 2026. “For the last decade, fashion has been the most direct way to communicate status, knowledge, and cultural credibility. Today, that concentration has broken apart. For Cultural Pioneers, everything is now a signal. Every purchase, product, and experience functions as a marker of taste, knowledge, and cultural credibility, regardless of category. We’re calling this shift The Status Economy. Across three reports, we take a deep dive into the categories defining status in 2026.  (Highsnobiety)

• Building Brasília: A twentieth-century experiment in urban planning promised progress—but carried immense financial and human costs. (JSTOR Daily)

• Tech legend Stewart Brand on Musk, Bezos and his extraordinary life: ‘We don’t need to passively accept our fate’ The Whole Earth Catalog creator reflects on Silicon Valley’s evolution and our collective agency. He was at the heart of 1960s counterculture, then paved the way for the libertarian mindset of Silicon Valley. At 87, Brand is still keen to ensure the world is maintained properly – not just today, but for the next 10,000 years. “We don’t need to passively accept our fate.” (The Guardian)

• How the ‘Neo-Vintage’ Era Became the Hottest Thing in Watches From ornate perpetual calendars to classic divers, watches from the 1980s and 1990s hit the sweet spot between value, reliability, and soul. (GQ)

• Hollywood’s Most Invisible Job Gets Its Own Oscar: After nearly a century, the Oscars are finally honoring the art of casting. But those who built the category say the toughest questions are just beginning. (Wall Street Journal)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Matt Cherwin, co-founder and Chief Investment Officer of Marek Capital. The alternative asset management firm launched in 2024. Previously, he spent 16-years at JPMorgan Chase & Co where he held titles of Chief Investment Officer, Group Treasurer, Co-Head of Global Spread Markets, Global Head of Securitized Products, and Global Head of Asset-Backed Trading.

 

YouTube Lays Claim to Another Crown: The World’s Largest Media Company

Source: Hollywood Reporter

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

War Abroad Should Not Mean Less Freedom At Home

Authored by Mollie Engelhart via The Epoch Times,

As an American, a mother, and a rancher, I have been reflecting on what it means when our country enters another war—and what history tells us often follows at home.

There will be endless debate about who is right and who is wrong. Some will praise our leaders, others will criticize them, and neighbors will disagree about how we got here and how events will unfold in the future. Those conversations are natural in a free society.

But there is another conversation that deserves just as much attention, one that history quietly asks every time the United States goes to war: What freedoms will Americans lose this time?

History suggests that wartime often reshapes the relationship between citizens and government.

The United States remains one of the last English-speaking countries where speech and thought are still broadly protected. That did not happen by accident. It is the inheritance of a constitutional republic built on the understanding that rights do not come from government; they come from God. The Constitution did not grant Americans their freedoms. It recognized them and placed limits on what government may do.

Yet when we look honestly at the past century, a pattern becomes difficult to ignore. Nearly every major war America has entered has been followed by some erosion of liberty at home.

During World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917, followed by the Sedition Act of 1918. Under these laws, Americans could be arrested and imprisoned simply for criticizing the war or discouraging military enlistment. Speech that would normally fall under the protection of the First Amendment suddenly became criminal. One of the most famous cases involved Eugene V. Debs, a political leader who received a 10-year prison sentence for delivering a speech opposing the war and the draft.

The war eventually ended, but the Espionage Act remains on the books more than a century later.

World War II produced an even more direct violation of civil liberties. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the federal government issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing the forced relocation of Japanese Americans living on the West Coast. More than 120,000 people, mostly American citizens, were removed from their homes and placed in internment camps. Families lost farms, businesses, and property, and people were detained without criminal charges or trials. The Supreme Court upheld the policy at the time, though it is now widely regarded as one of the most troubling civil liberties failures in modern American history.

The war ended and the camps were eventually closed, but the lesson remained clear: in times of fear and national emergency, the rights of citizens can be pushed aside.

The Cold War era introduced another form of government intrusion into American life. Fear of communist infiltration led to sweeping investigations into the political beliefs of citizens. The House Un-American Activities Committee summoned Americans to testify about their associations and views, while the Smith Act allowed prosecutions for advocating certain political ideas. Teachers, actors, writers, and government employees were blacklisted or pressured into oaths of loyalty. Careers were destroyed not because someone had committed a crime, but because they held—or were suspected of holding—the wrong political beliefs.

The Vietnam War era expanded another category of government power: domestic surveillance. During this period, the FBI operated a secret program known as COINTELPRO, which monitored activists, journalists, and political organizations across the country. Civil rights groups, anti-war movements, student organizations, and political activists found themselves under federal surveillance. What began as intelligence gathering against perceived threats grew into widespread monitoring of American citizens engaged in political activism.

The pattern continued into the modern era. In response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the United States launched what became known as the War on Terror, a series of conflicts that included military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and later involvement in the war in Syria.

At home, these wars were accompanied by some of the most significant expansions of federal surveillance authority in modern American history. Congress passed the Patriot Act, granting intelligence agencies broader powers to monitor communications, access financial records, and collect data connected to national security investigations. The federal government also created the Department of Homeland Security, dramatically expanding the domestic security infrastructure of the United States.

Airport travel changed almost overnight with the creation of the Transportation Security Administration, bringing new searches, body scanners, and security databases that monitor millions of travelers. Years later, whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that intelligence agencies had been collecting vast amounts of digital information through programs designed to monitor global communications networks. Phone metadata, internet traffic, and other digital communications were gathered on a scale few Americans had previously imagined.

The technology had changed, but the pattern had not. Once again, a national crisis and the wars that followed led to an expansion of government authority over the lives and communications of ordinary citizens.

None of this history is meant to pass judgment on any particular war or moment in time. Every generation faces dangers that require difficult decisions, and national security is not an abstract concern. But history does reveal a pattern. War has often expanded the power of government while gradually narrowing the freedoms of citizens. Perhaps our generation can be the one that finally recognizes that pattern and refuses to let the erosion continue.

It is easy to succumb to the emotions of the moment.

War brings grief, anger, fear, and uncertainty. Families pray for sons and daughters in uniform, and communities mourn the innocent lives lost in conflicts far from our shores. Those responses are deeply human.

But between the praying and the grieving, there must also be vigilance. Americans must stand shoulder to shoulder and guard the freedoms that define this country.

Foreign policy decisions are often far beyond the control of ordinary citizens. Individuals living in small towns and rural counties do not set global strategy, but we do have a voice when it comes to the preservation of liberty at home. Whether someone supports this war or opposes it should not matter when it comes to defending constitutional freedoms. Americans across the political spectrum should be able to agree that freedom of speech, privacy, and due process matter. Our disagreements about policy cannot become an excuse to surrender the principles that allow us to disagree in the first place.

History shows that government often expand their reach during wartime through censorship, surveillance, or emergency authority that remains long after the emergency has passed. Americans should make one thing clear: war must never become an excuse to erode the freedoms of citizens at home.

Do not use technological capabilities, border crises, or fears of instability to justify mass surveillance of the American people. Military intelligence tools and artificial intelligence designed for battlefield awareness do not belong in the daily lives of citizens. The American people are not subjects of the state. We are sovereign citizens, and sovereignty means something simple but powerful: government authority ultimately flows from the consent of the governed.

Many forces in the world are beyond the control of ordinary people. Wars between nations are often among them. But the preservation of liberty inside our own country has always depended on the vigilance of citizens, and that responsibility does not disappear in wartime. In fact, wartime is when it matters most.

If the past century teaches us anything, it is that freedom rarely disappears all at once. It erodes slowly, piece by piece, often justified by fear and the promise that restrictions will only be temporary.

Americans have heard that promise before.

This time we should respond that we will pray for peace, we will pray for our troops, and we will mourn innocent lives lost in war. But we will also stand together in sending a clear message:

Our freedoms are not negotiable.

Not this time. Not ever.

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

Ty Fri, 03/13/2026 - 23:05

US Issues $10M Bounty For Location Info On Mojtaba Khamenei & Ali Larijani

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice program has newly issued a $10 million reward for information on the whereabouts of Iranian Supreme leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei and Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani.

The alert calls for information on the two "Iranian terrorist leaders" at a moment of ongoing heavy bombardment of Iran by the US and Israel. Interestingly the State Department said that informants could make people eligible for "relocation". The Pentagon on Friday said it believes the new Ayatollah is likely wounded and disfigured.

via Associated Press

"These individuals command and direct various elements of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which plans, organizes and executes terrorism around the world," the alert stated.

It actually also seeks information on other top security and government officials. Below is the official US statement in part:

Rewards for Justice is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information on the key leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its component branches. These individuals command and direct various elements of the IRGC, which plans, organizes, and executes terrorism around the world.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), part of Iran’s official military, plays a central role in Iran’s use of terrorism as a key tool of Iranian statecraft.

Already amid the US-Israeli operation, at least 40 high-ranking government and military leaders have been killed. Many were slain in the opening days of the war, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

All of this seems part of a US-Israeli effort to foment spying and defections within Iranian ranks and society. There have been claims this week that Iranian citizens are feeding information to Israel - which of course means they are spying as assets.

It seems the US may not even know what some of the "wanted" officials look like, based on some of the blank photos below:

The U.S. State Department’s Rewards for Justice program is offering up to $10 million for credible information on senior leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The reward aims to identify or locate key figures linked to the IRGC’s leadership and operations. pic.twitter.com/QgTLTQWiAX

— ILRedAlert (@ILRedAlert) March 13, 2026

Israel says it is even bombing Basij/IRGC security checkpoints, and that spotter and spies have assisted on the ground. Whether or not this latter claim is true, it is at the very least intended to sow confusion and distrust on the ground.

Israel and the US are seeking to collapse the system and regime, however, it is showing signs of resiliency on the ground, also as many military analysts have said it is nearly impossible to completely dislodge a government system through sheer airpower alone - also as they warn of the obvious scope creep happening.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 22:40

Seventh Circuit Slams Chicago Judge Over Her "Constitutionally Suspect" Orders Against The Trump Admin

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

There has been an ongoing struggle between district court judges and the Trump Administration over a variety of policies. In the first year, some district court judges issued nationwide injunctions that were largely rejected by the Supreme Court and appellate courts. These conflicts have continued and the intracourt tensions have increased. That was evident with the recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which delivered a virtual haymaker in reversing Judge Sara Ellis, an Obama nominee.

The panel criticized Ellis for limiting the operation of federal officers in Chicago, saying that she “effectively established the district court as the supervisor of all Executive Branch activity in the city of Chicago.”

Protesters and journalists went to Ellis to restrain “Operation Midway Blitz.”  They challenged the conduct of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under the First and Fourth Amendments, specifically raising  the use of tear gas and other chemical agents. Judge Ellis issued a preliminary injunction described by the panel as “sweeping”:  “It enjoined all law enforcement officers in the Northern District of Illinois, as well as federal agencies and the Secretary of the DHS, from using certain crowd control tactics and tools. It also required the defendants to regularly inform the court of its efforts at implementing the injunction.”

That included requirements that U.S. Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino report to her daily to brief her on his activities. The panel found that her order  “impermissibly infringes on separation of powers principles.”

Notably, this order came after various district courts were reversed on such orders, but Judge Ellis went forward with another attempt at a sweeping injunction. She reinforced her order by certifying a class action and then including 170 pages of fact-finding in her long order.

After the operations ended, the plaintiffs were not eager to have the case reviewed on appeal. While the plaintiffs asked for dismissal with prejudice, Judge Ellis refused. She instead dismissed without prejudice and departed from standard rules on such dismissals. This was meant to allow a resumption of litigation.

That led to an interesting (and telling) issue for the Seventh Circuit. Ordinarily, the court would have simply declared the case moot (as Judge Frank Easterbrook would have in dissent). However, two judges clearly felt that Judge Ellis needed a corrective measure on appeal for her future handling of such cases:

“The district court’s order may also spawn adverse legal consequences. Because the district court dismissed this case without prejudice—against the plaintiffs’ unopposed request for a dismissal with prejudice—any class members or the lead plaintiffs could refile these claims tomorrow. They could ask the district court to reinstate a near-identical preliminary injunction, adopting the facts and legal reasoning from the district court’s order.”

It reaffirmed that Judge Ellis’s order was  “overbroad” and “constitutionally suspect.”

It made clear that “federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch” and that the district court “likely abused its discretion by issuing such a sweeping injunction.”

The decision not to simply dismiss this case was clearly meant to send a message not only to Judge Ellis but also to other such judges who are exceeding their authority in seeking to limit Trump policies and programs.

Here is the opinion: Chicago Headline Club v. Noem

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 22:15

Democrat Lawmakers in Minnesota Pass Draconian Gun Laws After Silencing Largest Gun Rights Group

The Minnesota Senate rammed through sweeping gun control measures on Friday, after deliberately sidelining the state’s largest pro-Second Amendment organization with just 6 minutes of testimony, while gun control supporters got 32 minutes of speaking time on the flagship gun ban bill. 

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

The Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee, chaired by Sen. Ron Latz (DFL), advanced S.F. 3655 - a near-total ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 rounds - on a strict 6-3 party-line vote. Latz admitted they “prioritized individual testifiers over organizations” - yet anti-gun groups still got slots while the state’s biggest 2A voice was frozen out.

Before allowing input from the public, the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus - representing tens of thousands of law-abiding citizens - warned the public yesterday that committee staff had already told them the hearing schedule was “full” - effectively blocking them from offering in-person testimony on the core bills: the semi-auto ban, the magazine ban, repeal of state preemption (opening the door to a patchwork of local gun laws), and new carry restrictions at the State Capitol and schools.

The largest & most effective gun rights group in Minnesota was just told we can’t testify against most of the gun control bills tomorrow.

Why?

Because the schedule is “full.”

Apparently, there’s plenty of room for gun control activists and other testifiers, but not the people… pic.twitter.com/NJqhnB3BXb

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 12, 2026

Caucus Director of Government Relations & Advocacy Anna Leamy did manage to testify on a secondary privacy bill (S.F. 3836, which would expose permit-to-carry holder data to harassment and passed on a voice vote). She stood firm when Latz tried to grill her on the partisan ties of the “Violence Prevention Project” pushing for taxpayer-funded gun-control propaganda. But on the bills that actually matter - the ones that would turn everyday hunters, sport shooters, and self-defense gun owners into felons - the largest gun rights group in Minnesota was effectively silenced.

Senator @RonLatzMN attempted to grill our Anna Leamy, challenging her testimony about the partisan alignment of the Violence Prevention center, who are trying to get a $1 million blank check from MN taxpayers to push for gun control. Anna stood firm, because she's right.

The…

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 13, 2026

“This isn’t democracy. That’s rigging the hearing,” the caucus stated bluntly before today’s vote — and the numbers proved them right.

Because SCOTUS hasn't ruled clearly on semi-automatic rifle bans and magazine bans - so they pull this crap.

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 13, 2026

These bills are textbook draconian. S.F. 3655 doesn’t just target so-called “assault weapons”; it criminalizes nearly every modern semiautomatic rifle and standard-capacity magazine in common use. Grandfathering is a joke: current owners face registration, home inspections by law enforcement, storage mandates, and transfer bans. 

The Bills

SF 3655 (Semiautomatic Military-Style Assault Weapons and Large-Capacity Magazines Ban)

Bans manufacture, import, transfer, ownership, or possession of "semiautomatic military-style assault weapons" (e.g., AR-15, AK-47 variants and similar rifles/pistols/shotguns with features like pistol grips, folding stocks, threaded barrels, or detachable magazines) and large-capacity magazines (>10 rounds or parts to make them). Current owners can grandfather items by certifying/registering with state/local authorities by Feb 1, 2027 (fee required, renew every 3 years), with strict storage rules, limited use (e.g., no hunting, only on private property or ranges), no transfers (except surrender/destruction), and possible inspections. Violations are felonies (up to 5 years prison/$25,000 fine). Effective August 1, 2026. Exceptions for law enforcement/military.

SF 3836 (Firearm Permit Data Classification and Retention)

Makes data on revocation, suspension, or voiding of a permit to carry a firearm public (previously more protected). Also makes permit data public if the holder dies by suicide with a firearm or from police use of force. Extends retention requirements for these records (e.g., 6 years for denied/revoked/voided permits or specified death cases). General active permit application/purchase data remains private; sheriffs must purge non-essential inactive records annually except in these cases. No broad public release of current permit holder lists.

Democrats hold the trifecta in Minnesota. Gov. Tim Walz and his DFL allies have been itching to push this agenda since taking full control. Today they showed exactly how they plan to do it: limit debate, stack the clock, and steamroll constitutional rights while pretending it’s “public safety.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 21:50

SNAP Recipients Sue Trump Administration Over Sugary Food Restrictions

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beneficiaries sued the Department of Agriculture on March 11 over the issuance of waivers to five states restricting certain types of foods that can be purchased under the program.

On May 19 last year, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins issued a waiver to Nebraska that bans SNAP recipients in the state from buying soda or energy drinks. As of March 4 this year, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has approved similar waivers for 22 states in total.

In addition to soda and energy drinks, the additional waivers prohibit the purchase of fruit and vegetable drinks with less than 50 percent natural juice, as well as candy, unhealthy drinks, soft drinks, prepared desserts, sugar-sweetened beverages, and processed foods and beverages. Different states ban one or more of these items.

In the lawsuit, filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, plaintiffs argued that the USDA’s actions amount to “authorizing a patchwork of state-by-state food prohibition regimes.”

“These changes deprive SNAP recipients and their families of the food they need to maintain their health and employment, and in some cases, to survive,” the lawsuit alleged. “Individuals with chronic illnesses are losing access to products they need to manage blood sugar or sustain diets they need to maintain baseline health care needs.

“Families must choose between using scarce cash to purchase restricted items or foregoing essential household expenses such as rent, utilities, or transportation. These harms are tangible, ongoing, and irreparable.”

The lawsuit specifically challenges SNAP waivers issued for Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia, the states in which the five plaintiffs reside.

In 2018, the USDA had rejected similar food restriction proposals on SNAP purchases. According to the lawsuit, this was because the agency concluded that the restrictions would force the government to draw arbitrary lines among food products, limit food choices for households without clear evidence of health benefits, impose significant burdens on retailers, and increase administrative costs.

“Even though the challenged waivers present the same defects USDA previously recognized, they were approved without any attempt to address, let alone resolve, those concerns,” the complaint stated.

By approving the five waivers, the defendants are in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act and the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, the lawsuit claims.

Plaintiffs have asked the court to deem the food restriction waivers as unlawful.

The Epoch Times reached out to the USDA for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

SNAP Restrictions and Health

While announcing SNAP waiver approvals for six states in December 2025, Rollins justified the need for food restrictions as a way to improve people’s health.

“President Trump has made it clear: we are restoring SNAP to its true purpose—nutrition. Under the MAHA initiative, we are taking bold, historic steps to reverse the chronic diseases epidemic that has taken root in this country for far too long,” Rollins said in a Dec. 10 statement.

“With these new waivers, we are empowering states to lead, protecting our children from the dangers of highly-processed foods, and moving one step closer to the President’s promise to Make America Healthy Again.”

Rollins and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are strong advocates of banning food items deemed unhealthy from SNAP as part of the Make America Healthy Again agenda. Kennedy said he hopes that all states will have asked for, and received approval for, SNAP restrictions by the end of 2026.

In June 2025, Kennedy called on all state governors to exclude sugary drinks from the SNAP program. “Taxpayer dollars should never bankroll products that fuel the chronic disease epidemic,” he said at the time.

A study published on Dec. 8, 2024, in Frontiers in Public Health found that consuming more sugary drinks was linked to a higher risk of developing cardiovascular diseases than eating sweet food items such as pastries.

“Liquid sugars, found in sweetened beverages, typically provide less satiety than solid forms—they make you feel less full, potentially leading to overconsumption,” Suzanne Janzi, the study’s co-author, said in a statement.

“Context also matters—treats are often enjoyed in social settings or [for] special occasions, while sweetened beverages might be consumed more regularly.”

The waivers have already been implemented in eight states: Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia.

The waivers will come into effect in the remainder of the year in Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

The waivers are set to be implemented in 2027 or 2028 in three states: Kansas, Nevada, and Wyoming.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 21:25

The Pacific Northwest's Anti-Democracy Progressives

Authored by Jeff Eager via RealClearPolitics,

Seattle, which is home to Amazon and Microsoft, currently employs some 193,000 well-compensated Washingtonians working in the tech sector. One major reason that Seattle emerged as the first big tech hub outside of California is obvious: It is the only West Coast state with no state income tax. Its state constitution forbids an income tax. High wage workers and entrepreneurs seeking a piece of the relatively laid back, outdoors-focused Pacific Northwest lifestyle can move to Washington without taking a state-mandated pay cut.

For the progressive Democrats who dominate state politics in the Pacific Northwest, money in the pockets of anyone other than the government and its political allies is wasted. To grab more of it, legislative Democrats in Washington are pushing through an income tax in the guise of a “millionaire’s tax” that would levy a 9.9% tax on incomes over $1 million. Just yesterday, as the “millionaire’s tax” neared the finish line in the Washington legislature, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced he and his wife have relocated from Seattle, where they lived for 47 years, to Miami. Florida has neither a state income tax nor a state income tax masquerading as a “millionaire’s tax.”

The constitutionality of the bill rests on progressives’ expectation that the Washington Supreme Court will completely abandon decades of precedent deeming income taxes unconstitutional. The expectation may not be unfounded: Five of nine justices were appointed by Democratic governors. Democrats also voted down an amendment to forbid applying an income tax to lower income levels, signaling the “millionaire’s tax” is likely to become a “thousandaire’s tax” if Democrats get their way.

What makes this proposed tax truly egregious, however, is its attempt to stop voters from having any say in it. The Democrats’ tax bill includes a necessity clause that precludes a voter referendum that could overturn the new income tax. So long as the majority-progressive-appointed state Supreme Court goes along, progressives will have upended 90 years of constitutionally prohibited income taxes while shielding it from a vote of the people.

Additionally, Washington progressives have taken a brazen step to undermine local governance in the state. The state house just passed a bill giving unelected bureaucrats appointed by the governor the power to remove any elected sheriff in the state based on vague guidelines, overriding local voters’ ability to select their own law enforcement. The move is an effort to exert progressive control of sheriffs in rural parts of the state who have questioned unpopular and difficult-to-enforce laws, such as COVID restrictions and gun regulations.

Not to be outdone by its neighbor to the north, Oregon’s progressive governance is also thumbing its nose at the will of the voters. The Beaver State, which has made itself into an economic backwater, has long levied high state income taxes, driving businesses and people who earn money for a living out of state. (The state’s second largest business, the $12 billion Dutch Brothers coffee chain, left the state last year, taking its corporate tax revenue with it.) The state’s economy, always tenuous, is now crumbling. Oregon’s unemployment rate of 5.2% is third worst in the nation, better than only California (5.5%) and New Jersey (5.4%). Layoffs since the beginning of 2025 are comparable to job losses during the Great Recession.

Oregon progressives charge forward undaunted. The Democratic legislative supermajority voted in February to disconnect Oregon’s tax code from the federal code so the state can continue to tax job-creating business investment at the higher rate eschewed by D.C. Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill. The disconnect will not help attract the investors needed to stabilize Portland’s cratering downtown real estate market, where values, when buyers can be found, are a fraction of what they were five years ago. Investors recently rated Portland as the worst place in the country to invest in real estate other than Hartford, Connecticut. 

Punitive rates of income taxation are not enough for Oregon Democrats. For the past year, they’ve tried to muscle through the largest tax increase in state history. It is a deeply unpopular package consisting of fuel tax increases to pay for more unionized transportation workers and a doubling of the state payroll tax to fund public transportation – even though the state is shedding jobs at an historic rate and such a massive payroll tax will only make things worse.

Those increases, which would hit consumers’ wallets directly, fomented a tax revolt among Oregon’s left-leaning and normally placid electorate. It took Gov. Tina Kotek and the backroom persuasion of the Service Employees International Union two legislative sessions, including the longest special session in state history, to eke out passage of the tax increases in the face of overwhelming public opposition.

Kotek then waited to sign her signature bill to try to deprive opponents of the ability to collect signatures to repeal it. That tactic backfired spectacularly; opponents collected nearly 250,000 signatures from an electorate of 3 million voters in weeks, setting the tax hike on a path to near-certain defeat this November.

Not having learned their lesson, Oregon Democrats are again trying to frustrate voter involvement by moving the date of the repeal vote from November to May, so that Kotek, who is up for reelection, and other Democrats, need not appear on the same ballot as their radioactive tax increase. This is in spite of the fact that the voter repeal petition signed by so many Oregonians specifically said the ballot measure was to be voted on in the November election. 

Pacific Northwest progressives’ crusade against allowing the voters a direct say in their schemes is ironic. In 1902, Oregon was one of the first states in the union to adopt voter initiatives and referenda to supplant, in the eyes of that era’s progressives, the corrupt and elite legislators blocking the popular will. Washington state joined not long after.

Yet, today’s progressives are the elites in Washington and Oregon, dominating every function of state government and culture. Their rule depends on seizing an ever-increasing share of the resources of private citizens to distribute among progressives’ sprawling and union-dominated political coalitions.

And despite their obvious policy failures and responsibility for crumbling state economies, Pacific Northwest progressives have decided that the will of the people no longer matters. Voters cannot be permitted to stand in the way of the elite definition of “progress.”

Jeff Eager is an attorney, former mayor of Bend, Oregon, and author of “Oregon Roundup” on Substack.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 20:35

China Owns Canada's Only Antimony Mine And Shuttered It In Critical Minerals Power Play

Submitted by The Bureau's Sam Cooper (emphasis our own), 

In the rugged interior of Newfoundland, an hour's drive west from the Canadian Forces Base in Gander, sits a dormant mine with profound implications for the nation's security and prosperity. Beaver Brook could be the largest North American producer of antimony — a critical mineral threaded through the entire spectrum of modern military hardware, from small arms and artillery shells to advanced missile seekers and night-vision goggles.

But China owns the mine and shut it down in early 2023 — one year before Beijing imposed export controls blocking antimony sales to U.S. military end users, driving prices from about US$5,900 per tonne to more than US$50,000.

Antimony forms in crystalline masses, often clustered in dark silver needles — nature's own suggestion of the gunmetal world it enters. It was little known before Washington recognized that Beijing had quietly secured a near-monopoly over the world's critical mineral supply, antimony among them. The metal fires every conventional round, hardens military components, and provides the infrared edge that defines lethality in modern conflict. Armies could not sustain combat for even a single day without it — a reality that has driven urgent U.S. efforts to stockpile it, revive domestic processing, and cut reliance on China and Russia.

The Newfoundland mine was acquired in December 2009 by Hunan Nonferrous Metals Corporation, a Chinese state-linked producer, for $29.5 million. It went silent in 2013 — the year Xi Jinping secured his presidency — revived in 2019 under China Minmetals Rare Earth Group, employed roughly 100 workers, shipped concentrate to China, and was abruptly shuttered again in 2023. It has not produced since.

In a microcosm, The Bureau's reporting on Beaver Brook surfaces a contest that is reshaping geopolitics in ways inconceivable only a few years ago — one waged not with weapons but through control of the materials that make weapons. The questions it raises for Canada are urgent.

Is Beijing deliberately keeping this strategic mine dormant to constrain global supply and freeze out Western competitors? Are Chinese party-state mining operatives in Canada blocking what could be Ottawa's trump card in its stalled trade negotiations with Washington — an administration now spending billions and scouring the Western Hemisphere, from Greenland to Argentina, to secure non-China-dependent supply chains? Could Canada invoke national security powers to compel Beijing's divestiture and reclaim the asset? And would it dare to — while Mark Carney moves Canada into deeper strategic alignment with Beijing, spanning electric vehicles and the critical mineral supply chains that sit at the heart of the new global security order?

Some in the industry have been watching Beaver Brook for exactly this reason.

Anthony Vaccaro, president of The Northern Miner, told the Central MinEx 2025 conference that the stakes for antimony were rising. "It's an important mineral. We need it. We need to make sure our military is strong, but China is absolutely dominating it," he said. "Prices have been surging on antimony and the Americans have woken up to it."

He cited The Northern Miner's own 2004 assessment — that at full production, Beaver Brook would rank as North America's only primary antimony mine, producing about five percent of the world's supply. The contrast between Ottawa and Washington's response is telling.

Perpetua Resources is developing a lower-grade antimony deposit in Idaho on more than $80 million in Defense Department funding and a federal financing commitment of up to $2 billion. Canada's better deposit sits idle in Chinese hands.

"That is what the U.S. government is looking to secure," Vaccaro told the conference.

"Well, lo and behold, Newfoundland and Labrador has the biggest antimony potential mine in all of North America. Who owns it? Why isn't it in production? The Chinese own it. We have this critical asset that's Canadian, on care and maintenance by the Chinese."

The minister most directly responsible for Canada's critical minerals file is Tim Hodgson, appointed by Prime Minister Mark Carney as Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. His ministry oversees the federal critical minerals strategy, the sovereign minerals fund, and the Investment Canada Act framework governing foreign control of strategic assets.

The Bureau submitted questions to Ministers Hodgson, Anand, and Joly before publication. The questions have been acknowledged, but not answered before deadline for this story.

China Minmetals is not a commercial mining company in any sense Western regulators would recognize. It is one of China's largest state-owned resource conglomerates — Communist Party leadership embedded, operations spanning mining, metals production, trading, and engineering across dozens of countries. By its own description, it is a "national team" and the "main force to ensure the security of resources."

It is directly supervised by China's State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission. In practical terms, that places the company inside China's industrial strategy — particularly in sectors considered essential to technology manufacturing, defense systems, and the global energy transition. In 2021, the company became a core shareholder in the formation of China Rare Earth Group, a state-directed merger designed to concentrate Beijing's control over a strategically vital mineral industry.

Ottawa's response to China Minmetals' outsized strategic presence in Canada has been notably absent.

In November 2022, it ordered three Chinese companies to divest from Canadian critical mineral firms on national security grounds — Power Metals Corp., Lithium Chile, and Ultra Lithium, all minor lithium exploration plays.

Canada's only primary antimony mine remained untouched. In November 2024, the government approved Zijin Mining Group's acquisition of a Pan American Silver critical minerals asset, citing rigorous scrutiny and security undertakings. Fourteen months later, Zijin announced a C$5.5 billion all-cash takeover of Toronto-based Allied Gold Corporation.

The Bureau's review of corporate records identified a Canada-based executive connected to China Minmetals — the enterprise that controls Beaver Brook — whose involvement in discussions about the mine's future was flagged by a Canadian mining source. Independent review of the same executive's profile disclosed a concurrent role at Zijin Mining Group, the firm now acquiring Allied Gold and the Pan American Silver asset.

The same pattern reaches into Canada's Arctic.

Through MMG, China Minmetals controls the Izok Corridor Project in the Kitikmeot region of Nunavut — a 1,083-square-kilometer package of high-grade copper, zinc, lead, silver, and gold claims, among the most significant undeveloped mineral corridors in the North.

MMG has linked its development to the proposed Grays Bay Road and Port, which would open the first all-weather land route and deep-water Arctic port in that part of the country. Commercially, that unlocks the ore body. Strategically, it determines who builds Canada's Arctic infrastructure.

The proposition carries immediate military concerns.

On March 12, 2026, Prime Minister Carney announced $35 billion in Arctic military and infrastructure spending — repackaging funds first earmarked by Justin Trudeau's government in 2022 — and referred the Grays Bay Road and Port to his government's Major Projects Office for fast-track approval. The same road MMG has identified as essential to unlocking the Izok Corridor. Canada's sovereignty-asserting Arctic plan would, if executed, directly accelerate the strategic position of a Chinese state enterprise in Canada's North. Carney's plan also specifically designated 5 Wing Goose Bay in Labrador as a Deployed Operating Base — a forward platform for F-35s and allied NORAD training operations — deepening the military significance of a province that also hosts, an hour's drive from 9 Wing Gander, the dormant Beaver Brook antimony mine in Chinese state hands.

The sovereignty concern in Canada's Arctic was already on record in Ottawa six years ago. A 2019 House of Commons Standing Committee report warned that China had shown "considerable interest" in Arctic shipping routes, infrastructure, and resource access. Duane Smith of the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation delivered the plainest verdict: "We stand here on the edge of the continent waving our maple leaves at China, at Russia, at the U.S. and at any others who have designs on our Arctic."

The Chinese academic literature is candid about why. A 2023 paper by researchers including Menglong Li of Jilin University frames China's Arctic position with notable directness. Russia dominates the Northern Sea Route, it says, and Canada and Russia treat Arctic passages as internal waters.

China — though not an Arctic state — is a legitimate outside stakeholder whose role should grow, the paper argues.

The paper quotes Xi Jinping directly: "I hope that the international community will attach great importance to development issues, promote the establishment of global development partnerships, and achieve stronger, greener, and healthier global development. A sustainable Arctic is the only way out. The peace, stability, and sustainable development of the Arctic region will be beneficial to the whole world and accelerate the pace of economic globalization," the quote from Xi continues.

"In this era of great change, we should abandon the confinement of the Cold War mentality and strengthen cooperation between the East and the West. We should not distinguish by ideology but work hard for the common interests of all mankind. If human society can reach beneficial cooperation on the Arctic issue, it will become a template for resolving other disputes, and it will be a new chapter in history to sell part of the interests in exchange for the common development of all mankind."

Reading between the language of environmentalism and globalism and humanism, General Secretary Xi's hardened CCP language and objectives can be easily discerned.

China Minmetals' global reach has sometimes broached conflict.

Its subsidiary MMG — the same entity straddling the Nunavut deep-water port that Carney's $35 billion Arctic plan has now fast-tracked — operates Las Bambas, one of the world's largest copper mines, in Peru's Apurimac region. Acquired in 2014 for $5.85 billion and in production since 2016, Las Bambas topped the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre's global ranking of transition mineral conflicts in 2024, with more than 100 documented allegations of abuse. Indigenous communities report polluted water, blocked ancestral lands, and environmental assessments they say concealed risks to local aquifers. Lima declared states of emergency over unrest at the mine four times between 2015 and 2022. Three protesters were killed by gunfire in 2015. More than 300 people have been charged or jailed for opposing its operations, according to monitors including the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders. MMG says it pursues dialogue and operates in compliance. The record tells a more complicated story.

In Brazil, MMG's February 2025 acquisition of Anglo American's Barro Alto and Niquelândia nickel mines for $500 million drew antitrust complaints from a Dutch-Turkish rival — whose $900 million bid was passed over — filed in Brasilia and Brussels. Critics warned the deal could hand China 52 to 62 percent of Brazil's nickel output. The American Iron and Steel Institute asked the White House to intervene, arguing it would give Beijing direct influence over a metal critical to electric vehicle batteries and stainless steel. The European Commission opened a formal probe in November 2025 into MMG's state ties. The transaction remained under scrutiny in early 2026.

Understanding how Beijing built its Western Hemisphere mining positions — and why governments from Ottawa to Washington were so slow to see it — requires going back further.

While Western industrial policy in the 1990s and 2000s operated on the assumption that trade made war obsolete — a variant of Fukuyama's "End of History" thesis — Chinese strategic planners were reading their history differently. The lesson they drew from the past century of American dominance was not that economic integration creates peace. It was that whoever controls the physical inputs of modern industry controls the terms on which everyone else does business.

The Chinese Communist Party's minerals strategy was, like most of its 5-, 25-, and 100-year plans, patient, systematic, and nearly invisible to Western publics until reversing it became expensive. China produces approximately 48 percent of the world's mined antimony and refines the overwhelming majority of what is processed globally. For gallium — essential to semiconductors and communications equipment — China controls 98.8 percent of refined global output. For rare earth elements, which power the magnets in every electric vehicle, every wind turbine, and most advanced weapons systems, China accounts for roughly 60 percent of mining and over 90 percent of processing. The International Energy Agency has calculated that China dominates refining for 19 of the 20 key strategic minerals the energy transition and defense industry require.

Back to Newfoundland.

One year after China Minmetals shuttered North America's most significant antimony mine, on August 14, 2024, Beijing announced that antimony exports would require a government license, effective the following month. In October, Chinese shipments fell 97 percent against the prior month. In December, Beijing escalated: it banned antimony exports to United States military users specifically — the first time China had directed a critical minerals restriction against a single country rather than the world at large. The price at Rotterdam doubled in two months, then doubled again.

In February 2025, China added tungsten to its export control list. In April, seven heavy rare earth elements were placed under licensing requirements globally. Then, in January 2026, China issued Announcement No. 1 of 2026, prohibiting all dual-use exports to Japan for military end users or any purpose that could enhance Japan's military capabilities.

The trigger was Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's statement that a Chinese military attack on Taiwan could legally constitute a threat to Japan's survival. On February 2, 2026, President Trump announced Project Vault: a strategic reserve for critical minerals backed by a $10 billion Export-Import Bank loan. Two days later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio convened 54 countries and the European Commission at the State Department for the first Critical Minerals Ministerial, launching FORGE — the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement — as the successor to the Minerals Security Partnership. Eleven new bilateral frameworks were signed. The stated ambition: a preferential trading bloc for critical minerals, with minimum price floors designed to make Western production viable against Chinese state-subsidized output.

Canada attended the FORGE ministerial. It was not among the eleven countries that signed a new bilateral critical minerals framework with Washington.

The U.S. Defense Department has committed $245 million in antimony offtake to U.S. Antimony Corporation, the only antimony smelter in North America, based in Thompson Falls, Montana, currently running at a fraction of its mandated target.

Perpetua Resources, developing the Stibnite gold-antimony project in Idaho, has received more than $80 million in Defense Department funding.

"Perpetua never would've been able to build a mine here five or ten years ago," Vaccaro told Central MinEx 2025. "It's this federal funding. So critical."

Vaccaro's presentation ranged broadly — critical minerals, great-power competition, a world reorganizing around strategic resource control. But on Beaver Brook, he zeroed in on something specific: what he described as circulating chatter in Canadian mining and political circles about Beijing's real intentions for the mine.

"I will tell you, there's rumors that the Chinese use this — that Beaverbrook is on care and maintenance, but if the price of antimony stays high and other projects come on, they can turn the tap on, flood the market a little bit, drive the price back down, discourage others from entering," he said.

"There's rumors that that's one of the games they're playing. There's certainly nothing stopping them currently from doing that. So I think this is going to be a very interesting asset to look at as possibly a microcosm for what's going on on that big geopolitical scale."

There is a harder lens through which to view Beaver Brook — the hardened geopolitical logic that sovereignty is expressed not only through the votes of citizens, but through jobs, productivity, presence, and utility. By that measure, a dormant mine in Chinese hands in the interior of Newfoundland is a statement of power, and not Ottawa's.

Then there is polar projection — the map centered on the North Pole that NORAD has always used, the one that shows the world as it actually is rather than as Mercator flattened it. Russia and Canada face each other across the Arctic Ocean. Greenland bridges them. Newfoundland's coast is the eastern hinge of North America's Arctic exposure, closer to Moscow than to Vancouver.

The province no longer hosts permanent U.S. military bases — Fort Pepperrell, Argentia, and Ernest Harmon Air Station belong to another era. But 9 Wing Gander, roughly an hour's drive from Beaver Brook, anchors search and rescue and continental air operations on the island. To the north, Five Wing Goose Bay in Labrador serves allied low-level training and NORAD-related activity. The province sits at the intersection of Arctic strategy and transatlantic defense — North America's eastern gateway to the North Atlantic, close neighbor to Greenland across the Labrador Sea — at a moment when both are being urgently renegotiated.

The questions The Bureau put to Carney's mining minister Tim Hodgson, a Goldman Sachs banking alumnus, were direct: Has the government assessed Beaver Brook as a strategic asset within North American defense-industrial supply chains? Has any national security review been conducted into Chinese state control of Canada's only primary antimony mine? Does the 2023 rationale for not requiring Chinese divestiture — policy uncertainty — still apply, given Beijing's subsequent ban on antimony exports to United States military users? Has Ottawa raised Beaver Brook with Washington as part of critical minerals cooperation? Has any mechanism been considered to restart production? The questions were acknowledged. They were not answered before deadline.

Ottawa's inaction and China's potentially intentional dormancy of one of the world's most significant antimony deposits is not a question of market inertia or supply and demand.

It is a test of sovereignty — one that sharpens as Newfoundland's geostrategic salience grows, its ports and radar installations forming a bulwark near American strategic assets in Greenland at a moment of intensifying Beijing activity in the Arctic, including through state-linked mining footholds like the Izok Corridor in Nunavut.

Meanwhile in Glenwood, where Beaver Brook workers have waited for work that did not return, life is slower than it might be. A Tim Hortons. A gas station. A Legion hall. Population roughly 700. Canada's latent potential in microcosm.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 19:45

Panic Buying Sweeps India As War Disrupts Cooking Gas Supplies

Long lines are forming outside cooking gas dealers across India as fears of shortages spread following disruptions to fuel imports linked to the war in the Middle East.

At a small distribution shop in Pune, gas dealer Vishal Vilas Mandhare has watched demand surge in recent days. Customers arrive carrying empty cylinders, pressing him and his staff for answers about when the next delivery of liquefied petroleum gas, or LPG, will arrive.

"The dealers are facing as much trouble as the customers," he told Bloomberg, “just a different kind.”

India depends heavily on LPG for everyday cooking, and millions of households rely on regular cylinder refills to prepare meals. But since hostilities in the Middle East began disrupting a major share of India’s fuel imports, panic buying has spread, straining the country’s vast distribution system.

India is the world’s second-largest consumer of LPG and imports about 90 percent of the fuel it uses. Shipments for the week beginning March 9 are estimated at about 270,000 tons, the lowest level since April 2023, according to data from the analytics firm Kpler. Supplies from the Middle East have been sharply curtailed after attacks on Iran by the United States and Israel led to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for energy shipments.

India’s LPG network includes roughly 26,000 distributors serving more than 333 million households. While many families receive subsidized cylinders through government programs, migrant workers and small businesses that rely on the open market have been particularly hard hit. As supplies tighten and authorities ration deliveries, informal distributors have begun charging higher prices.

The rush to secure cylinders has also strained booking systems. Indian Oil Corp.’s online reservation portal briefly crashed on Thursday amid the surge in demand, adding to delays and prompting complaints from customers.

People queue up to book LPG cylinders at a gas agency in Prayagraj on Wednesday. (PTI Photo)

Government officials say they are working to stabilize supplies. Oil Minister Hardeep Puri recently told Parliament that India is seeking additional LPG cargoes from countries including the United States, Norway, Canada, Algeria and Russia. Authorities are also in discussions with Iran to ensure safe passage for shipments headed to India.

Domestic refiners have been ordered to increase output, raising local LPG production by 28 percent, Mr. Puri said. The government has also raised retail LPG prices for the first time in a year in an effort to moderate demand.

State-run companies say the national distribution network continues to function, though demand has surged in some areas. “The network remains stable and adequate,” a spokesman for Bharat Petroleum Corp. said, adding that distributors in some regions were seeing unusually high bookings driven by precautionary purchases.

"There is no shortage of gas anywhere. Consumers will continue to receive LPG cylinders at the prescribed price. Both gas agencies and the public must avoid unnecessary hoarding," said District Magistrate VK Singh. 

Yet, there is definitely a shortage of commercial LPG cylinders. 

In Prayagraj, several hotel and restaurant operators claim commercial cylinders are being sold for ₹2,500– ₹2,600 in the open market.

A dhaba owner in George Town said he called the delivery worker of his gas agency on Tuesday morning to request a commercial cylinder. The worker allegedly said it could be arranged for ₹2,500. “I urgently needed it for my business, so I agreed,” he said. -Hindustan Times

For dealers like Mr. Mandhare, the current rush has echoes of past crises. During the Covid-19 pandemic, many faced similar scenes of anxious customers lining up for essentials. “We know how to handle upset and panicked customers,” he said. “This is nothing we can’t handle.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 19:20

CDC: Little-Known Virus With No Vaccine Spreading In US

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The human metapneumovirus (HMPV) is spreading in the United States, including in California and the Great Lakes region, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

A person receives a vaccine in Los Angeles in a file photograph. Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images

Symptoms include cough, fever, and nasal congestion, and, unlike better-known respiratory viruses, HMPV does not have a vaccine or known treatments, the CDC stated.

“There’s no specific treatment that’s generally recommended,” Dr. Dean Blumberg, chief of pediatric infectious diseases at the University of California–Davis Children’s Hospital, said in a video released by the school.

“For the youngest children, using a bulb syringe to clear the congestion can be useful. Sometimes a humidifier or vaporizer may be useful, especially if they have something like croup as a complication of infection and trying to make sure that they don’t get dehydrated and get enough fluids.”

Hospitalized patients typically receive supportive care, or oxygen if they need it, and intravenous fluids to prevent or treat dehydration.

Of nationwide tests that were positive for respiratory viruses in the week that ended on Feb. 28, 5 percent tested positive for HMPV—the highest percentage for HMPV since mid-2025. The percentage is lower than that of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) but higher than that of COVID-19, according to the National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System.

California and New Jersey are among the states that have recently reported HMPV cases. According to the CDC, cases have been recorded in all regions of the country.

Data voluntarily reported to the California Department of Public Health from clinical laboratories show an increase in HMPV test positivity to 8.6 percent during the week that ended on Feb. 28, a spokesperson for the department told The Epoch Times in an email on March 10.

The HMPV levels in California at this point are higher than during four of the past five respiratory virus seasons. The seasons run from the fall into the following year.

“While levels are currently higher than previous seasons, HMPV most commonly causes mild respiratory illness in people of all ages,” the spokesperson said. “Severe illness is less common. However, it can occur in young children, older adults, those with chronic medical conditions, and people with weakened immune systems.”

Blumberg also stated that symptoms are usually mild but that the virus can lead to more severe complications, particularly in young children, the elderly, and others with weaker immune systems.

HMPV usually starts circulating later in the season than influenza and RSV, researchers with the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and other institutions said in a study published in February.

They found that the virus also peaks later, often in April.

The researchers said that the study shows that HMPV was “an important cause” of respiratory symptoms among both children and adults.

Experts recommend practicing good hygiene during the virus season to prevent HMPV and other viruses, including covering one’s mouth when coughing or sneezing and frequently washing one’s hands.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 18:55

UBS And Goldman Map The Paralysis Across Hormuz Chokepoint

The second week of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran is coming to a close, with no visible off-ramp yet emerging, even as the White House continues to project victory. Goldman now expects the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to persist for three weeks, a timeline that suggests further intensification of what the IEA has already described as an unprecedented global energy shock.

Focusing on the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint, data from UBS and Goldman desks show that flows through the critical waterway remain muted by the end of the week.

Current situation in the Hormuz and Gulf area:

Oil & gas tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, in number of ships, entering and exiting the Gulf

Crude loadings by ports in the Middle East (Mb/d)

Iran's crude loadings by port (Mb/d)

Map of oil & gas infrastructure in the Persian Gulf

Iranian attacks on vessels (direct & attempted)

Map of ships' locations when struck in the Gulf region since early March

Summary of attacks on energy infrastructure

In addition to UBS, Goldman's tracking of Persian Gulf exports also shows limited activity through the strait.

The estimated total hit to oil flows from the Persian Gulf stands at 16 mb/d (16 times larger than the peak April 2022 hit to Russian oil production).

According to S&P Global, only 22 tankers crossed the Strait of Hormuz since March 1, with most tankers operating with AIS signals off.

With an incoming energy shock, the analysts show which countries have the largest buffers, as well as the countries with the least.

Details on the 32-nation IEA SPR dump.

Both notes only suggest that paralysis in the critical waterway is set to persist into next week. Even if the IRGC's conventional military capabilities have been severely degraded, the more immediate threat to commercial vessel traffic in the waterway is the IRGC's asymmetric warfare, which includes low-cost kamikaze drones and naval mines.

More in the full notes available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 17:40

The Order Of Battle

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Don’t lose your shit over mines in the Strait of Hormuz and the oil price shooting up. Iran has many thousands of mines. But something has to lay them out in the water. Iran has no more naval ships. They have small boats. The US can see everything moving on the surface, or sitting at docks. We are blowing them up methodically. The news outlets who want the US to fail in this operation (because: Trump) want you to think that we had no plan for dealing with this problem. That’s not so.

There are very few mines actually laid so far. Tankers are not going through the Strait of Hormuz because their captains are nervous. Their ships and their cargos are worth millions and the insurance costs millions. So, they’re waiting in place, hanging back. The US still has work to do destroying Iran’s shoreline defenses of missile and drone launch sites. Iran is firing all they’ve got left. Whenever they launch something, we see the geo-location on our satellites and radars. The mobile launchers are a little trickier because, obviously, they shoot and move. But they don’t always move fast enough, and there isn’t an endless supply of them.

The US Navy decommissioned its four Avenger-class minesweeper ships in the Persian Gulf in September, 2025, but replaced them with more agile Littoral Combat Ships (LCSs) capable of countering submarines and clearing mines. Two LCS ships — USS Santa Barbara and USS Canberra — quietly deployed in March 2025.

An LCS uses an Airborne Laser Mine Detection System and an Airborne Mine Neutralization System via helicopter. In the water, it uses mine-hunting sonar and the Unmanned Influence Sweep System — all operated from unmanned surface vessels. The unmanned sweep vehicle triggers magnetic, acoustic, or combination mines, with the LCS at a safe distance.

The LCS vessels are armed with an 11-cell SeaRAM launcher for point defense that fires Rolling Airframe Missiles — fast, radar-guided missiles designed to knock down incoming anti-ship missiles and drones at short range. They also carry Longbow Hellfire missiles with updated software and hardware specifically to counter drones. The Longbow Hellfire uses radar-guided technology enabling it to engage targets through battlefield clutter, with a range of up to eight kilometers — giving the LCS the ability to engage drones before they get close. The LCS ships will be accompanied by Arleigh Burke-class destroyers equipped with Aegis and full missile defense suites for protection against the full spectrum of Iranian threats.

The oil markets are extremely sensitive to any changes in the oil environment, and war induces the most extreme changes.

Even outside of war, weird things happen.

April 20, 2020, was the apex of Covid-19 paranoia when everyday life was shutting down all over Western Civ.

The price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil futures — specifically the May 2020 contract, which was expiring the very next day — crashed to an historic low of negative $37.63 per barrel.

That is, sellers were literally paying buyers to take oil off their hands. By the following day, April 21, prices had rebounded back into positive territory, though still at very depressed levels around $10–$15 per barrel.

The current situation with oil in the $100 range is not going to be a one-day event, but it won’t last forever, either, so do your deep-breathing exercises and calm down.

Of course, in America right now, a seditious news media will take every opportunity to induce exquisite anxiety in the public-at-large to deflect from the order-of-battle that President DJT is carrying out to 1) improve America’s geopolitical position and relations, and 2) to defeat the forces both external and domestic that seek to wreck the country.

Which is why you might see that the next move in the order of battle will be against the wrecking crew in our own country, including the political figures behind the decade-long conspiracy to undermine the president, the administrative rogues running the “resistance” in government agencies, the Lawfare ninjas queering the justice system, and the big money that funds the hundreds of NGOs attempting to instigate a color revolution here.

I have visions of perp walks and indictments coming in on the zephyrs of spring.

It looks just now like Majority Leader John Thune and his RINO herd will trample the SAVE Act (election reform) into failure. But consider that Mr. Trump’s FBI has had more than a month to analyze the Fulton County, Georgia, ballot evidence from the 2020 election (while only last week it seized the Maricopa County, AZ, records, and for all we know the agency also has 2020 ballot evidence from Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada, too).

So, prepare for the public to be shocked and amazed at what has been discovered, and expect to see a sharp attitude change among embarrassed US Senators who will be compelled to come on-board for election reform.

Somewhere in all that, you might expect Cuba to fall — a momentous event, actually, considering the cumulative mischief Cuba’s government has provoked all over the western hemisphere since 1958. We don’t even have to do anything to make it happen, just respond in the aftermath with emergency food and fuel relief, and perhaps some help averting the vengeful slaughter of the old Castro governing network. We don’t want a bloodbath there.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 17:15

401(k) Hardship Withdrawals Hit Record High

The AI bubble and data center buildout have helped catapult equity markets to new highs (pre-Middle East conflict), minting a record number of 401(k) millionaires. However, beneath the surface, hardship withdrawals from 401(k) plans have also climbed to a record, reinforcing the view that the K-shaped economy is becoming more entrenched.

Vanguard's How America Saves 2025 report shows that hardship withdrawal activity "increased to a new high" of 6% in 2025, up from 4.8% in 2024 and about 2% before the pandemic.

The increase marks the sixth straight annual rise since Congress eased the rules in 2018 by removing the requirement that participants first take a 401(k) loan. Vanguard said the median hardship withdrawal was about $1,900 for avoiding foreclosure or eviction (36%), paying medical expenses (31%), and covering tuition (13%).

"Given that it's now easier to request a hardship withdrawal and that automatic enrollment is helping more workers save for retirement, especially lower-income workers, a modest increase isn't surprising," the Vanguard report said.

The report noted, "For a small subset of workers facing financial stress, hardship withdrawals may serve as a safety net that may not otherwise have been available without plan-implemented automatic solutions."

The report shows the K-shaped economy is continuing with no end in sight as the cost-of-living crisis rages on, forcing those with the weakest financial profiles to tap into 401(k)s and retirement accounts just to stay afloat.

"Withdrawing from your 401(k) has become one of the easiest ways to access excess capital," Shelby Rothman, founder of EnJoy Financial, told CNBC Select.

Rothman said, "Nearly half of Americans don't have $1,000 for unexpected expenses — no emergency fund, no available credit. Nothing."

 

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 16:50

29% Of Americans Have Finally Figured Out The Problem... 71% To Go

Authored by James Hickman via SchiffSovereign.com,

A new Gallup poll finds that 29% of Americans now say government itself is the country’s biggest problem.

That’s a higher percentage than people who think America’s biggest problem is the economy. Or immigration. Or inflation.

Think about that for a moment.

The institution whose entire job is to solve problems has become, in the eyes of the public, the single biggest problem of all.

Joseph Tainter described exactly this phenomenon in his 1988 book, The Collapse of Complex Societies. Tainter studied empires from Rome to the Maya and found the same pattern every time: as societies grow, they create layers of bureaucracy and complexity to solve problems.

Eventually the bureaucracy becomes so bloated and expensive that it stops solving anything — and starts generating new problems instead.

And you can see it playing out in real time. Rather than address why it is failing to solve problems with the $5 trillion plus it already collects, a growing number of politicians simply want to extract more wealth from the people who create it.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ro Khanna just introduced the “Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act” — a 5% annual wealth tax on America’s roughly 938 billionaires, which they optimistically estimate would raise $4.4 trillion over ten years. That’s about $440 billion a year.

Sounds like a lot. Until you remember the federal government is running $2 trillion deficits every single year. Sanders’ grand plan wouldn’t cover a quarter of the annual shortfall.

And that’s the best case — which assumes no billionaire leaves the country, no assets decline in value, no capital flees to friendlier jurisdictions.

Britain tried something similar when the Labour government abolished its 110-year-old “non-dom” tax regime. The result? Over 10,000 millionaires left the country, and tax revenue actually fell.

But even setting aside the question of whether it would “work,” a 5% annual tax on existing wealth — compounding every year — is an extraordinarily destructive idea.

It’s not a tax on income. It’s a tax on assets — on the factories, businesses, and investments that employ people and produce things.

If you tax at 5% annually, within 15 years you’ve confiscated more than half the wealth. You haven’t funded the government. You’ve just driven capital, talent, and entire companies to friendlier places.

Then what? America is poorer. There are fewer businesses, fewer jobs, fewer wealthy people left to tax. Growth slows. Tax revenue declines. The deficit gets worse, not better.

The federal government already collects $5.2 trillion a year in tax revenue. The problem was never insufficient taxation. It’s a spending addiction that no amount of taxation can feed.

And we know that’s true because the entire federal budget in 2019 was $4.4 trillion.

If Congress had simply held spending at that level, the government would have posted an $800 billion surplus last year. Even adjusted for inflation, they would have roughly broken even — without making a single spending cut.

Instead, spending surged 59% to over $7 trillion.

And what did Americans get for it? Roads and bridges are still crumbling. Social Security is still barreling toward insolvency. Is America safer? Is inflation down? Do we receive more government services?

No.

The only people it’s working out for are the Somali immigrant fraudsters who are part of the network that steals $600 billion from taxpayers every year.

And the bureaucrats in California, where the legal graft funnels $100 billion in government grants to DEI initiatives, intersectionality programs, and non-binary construction apprenticeships.

Of course this dysfunction is not just at the federal level.

In Los Angeles, fire victims who lost their homes in the devastating Palisades fires have been receiving citations from the city’s fire department — for failing to clear brush on properties that already burned to the ground.

In Baltimore, where the Francis Scott Key bridge collapsed in March 2024, the city initially said that reconstruction would cost $1.7 billion and be complete in 2028. Nine months later they revised their cost estimate to $5.2 billion, and completion to 2030.

These people just cannot execute.

This is what late-stage institutional decay looks like. Not a dramatic collapse, but a slow, grinding loss of competence and legitimacy — where the government’s primary function shifts from solving problems to perpetuating itself.

But here’s the thing — history shows that this kind of decay is less “end of the world” and more forest fire. Painful, yes. Destructive, absolutely.

But forest fires clear out the deadwood, return nutrients to the soil, and make way for new growth. It’s happened to every overgrown empire in history, and what comes after is almost always better than what came before.

The sensible course of action is to make sure, one, you have fire insurance, and two, you’re positioned for the new growth.

That’s what a good Plan B is all about.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 16:25

'President Boasberg' Protects Powell, Quashes DOJ 'Pressure Campaign' Subpoena Over Fed Renovation

Another day, another activist judge deciding they're the president... 

On Friday, chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has blocked subpoenas issued by the Trump Justice Department to Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and the Fed Board of Governor

Boasberg claims that the subpoenas were served for an improper, pretextual purpose, and that "a mountain of evidence suggests that the Government served these subpoenas on the Board to pressure its Chair into voting for lower interest rates or resigning," and that the government produced “essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime; indeed, its justifications are so thin and unsubstantiated that the Court can only conclude that they are pretextual.” The order explicitly quashes the subpoenas.

The subpoenas were issued as part of a DOJ probe into the Fed’s management of its headquarters renovation project - an investigation that Powell and others have called a pretext. Powell himself issued an unprecedented video statement in January 2026 saying the threatened indictment stemmed from his Senate testimony and the Fed’s independent interest-rate decisions rather than any actual crime. He described it as part of broader administration pressure to politicize monetary policy.

White House officials have criticized the Federal Reserve over its handling of renovations to two historic buildings in Washington: the Marriner S. Eccles Building, the Fed’s headquarters, and the 1951 Constitution Avenue building.

Renovation costs for the Fed’s headquarters have risen to $2.5 billion, $700 million over budget, according to Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.

Last July, Trump indicated that Powell’s handling of the renovation project could be grounds to fire him, saying, “I think it sort of is.”

“When you spend $2.5 billion on, really, a renovation, I think it’s really disgraceful,” he said.

The Fed responded to the criticism, stating on its website that major systems in both buildings, whose construction dates back to the 1930s, are “obsolete and in need of replacement for health and safety reasons.”

The decision has drawn praise from those defending Fed independence and sharp criticism from Trump allies who view it as judicial interference. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) has already said he will block confirmation of Trump’s nominee to replace Powell until the probe is dropped.

Warsh’s nomination by President Donald Trump is bogged down because of an effective blockade imposed by Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who sits on the Banking Committee. That panel is the first hurdle for would-be Fed board members such as Warsh.

Tillis has vowed to vote against passing along Warsh’s nomination or any other Fed nominee to the full Senate for a confirmation vote as long as a criminal investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell remains in progress.

Now Tillis says that if the Trump admin appeals Boasberg's ruling, Warsh's confirmation will be delayed even further. Moments later, DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro said that the decision will be appealed. 

Boasberg’s Record of Interventions in Trump-Related Matters

This just the latest instance where Judge Boasberg has stepped in to block, quash, or otherwise limit actions or probes tied to Trump - including:

• 2017 — Trump Tax Returns FOIA Lawsuit: Boasberg dismissed a Freedom of Information Act suit seeking President Trump’s personal tax returns, ruling they remained confidential without Trump’s consent or congressional approval. This effectively quashed public access efforts.
• 2022–2023 — January 6 Committee & Jack Smith Grand Jury Subpoenas: As chief judge overseeing the D.C. grand jury in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s post-2020 election conduct, Boasberg denied a Trump spokesperson’s attempt to claw back financial records subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 Committee. He also ordered former Vice President Mike Pence to testify before the grand jury (partially rejecting executive-privilege claims) and approved nondisclosure orders on phone records of Republican senators — actions Trump allies strongly opposed as advancing the probe against him.
• March 2025–2026 — J.G.G. v. Trump (Alien Enemies Act Deportations): In the highest-profile clash, Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order halting the Trump administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport Venezuelan migrants (alleged gang members) to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. He ordered in-flight deportation planes to turn around. When flights proceeded anyway, he found “probable cause” of criminal contempt due to the administration’s “willful disregard” of his order and initiated contempt proceedings (repeatedly revived despite appeals-court stays). He later ordered the government to facilitate the return of over 100 deported individuals to allow due-process hearings. Appeals courts (often Trump-appointed panels) repeatedly limited or paused his contempt efforts, but the core blocking and remedial orders stood as major interventions against the policy.
• 2025 — American Oversight v. Hegseth (“Signalgate”): Assigned to the lawsuit alleging Trump administration officials (including Cabinet members) violated record-keeping laws by using the Signal app for sensitive military discussions, Boasberg issued preservation orders and described aspects of the conduct as concerning, while stopping short of ordering full message recovery.

Bukele was right...

Bukele: “We had to remove corrupt judges and corrupt attorneys and prosecutors."

Activist judges must be impeached and removed. pic.twitter.com/pg5NdQwjJe

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) February 26, 2025

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 15:50

META Delays AI Rollout Because It Sucks, May License Gemini; Musk Reboots xAI 'From The Foundations Up'

Mark Zuckerberg bet the farm on AI supremacy, and this year's crop is infested with bugs.

According to a new report, Meta has quietly pushed back the launch of its next-generation foundational AI model, internally code-named Avocado, from this month until at least May. The reason? Internal tests showed it underperforming on key benchmarks for reasoning, coding, and writing - trailing rivals like Google's Gemini 3.0, even as it beat Meta's own prior efforts and older Google models.

The model, code-named Avocado, outperformed Meta’s previous A.I. model and did better than Google’s Gemini 2.5 model from March, two of the people said. But it has not performed as strongly as Gemini 3.0 from November, they said. -NYT

This delay arrives after Zuckerberg has poured unprecedented resources into the race. Meta is guiding for $115–135 billion in capital expenditures this year alone - nearly double last year's spend - with the overwhelming majority earmarked for AI data centers, compute clusters, and infrastructure. The company has also signaled longer-term commitments approaching $600 billion in U.S. investments, plus a $14.3 billion stake in Scale AI that installed its CEO, Alexandr Wang, as Meta's chief AI officer. The new "TBD Lab" was tasked with fruit-themed breakthroughs: Avocado as the core model, Mango for images/video, and a bigger "Watermelon" on the horizon, the NY Times reports.

Zuckerberg once promised these efforts would "push the frontier" toward superintelligence. Now, insiders say Meta is even weighing temporarily licensing superior models from competitors like Google to keep its products competitive. 

As a result, Meta has delayed Avocado’s release to at least May from this month, the people said. They added that the leaders of Meta’s A.I. division had instead discussed temporarily licensing Gemini to power the company’s A.I. products, though no decisions have been reached.

Not great... 

Musk Reboots xAI...

While Zuck licks his wounds, Elon Musk is reorganizing xAI - ordering another round of job cuts at the two-year-old startup over poor performance of its coding product, FT reports. Grok's coding capabilities have lagged behind rivals like Anthropic’s Claude Code and OpenAI’s Codex - however Musk on Thursday revealed the company's 'Macrohard' or "Digital Optimus" which can 'basically automate entire companies' by observing and intelligently simulating their functions. 

Musk has brought in managers from SpaceX and Tesla as "fixers" to audit employee work, focusing on data quality issues in model training and firing those deemed inadequate. This has forced out several more co-founders - including Zihang Dai (a senior technical leader who admitted xAI was behind on coding) and Guodong Zhang (who ran pre-training for Grok models and was blamed for coding shortfalls, departing Thursday). Only two of the original 11 co-founders remain: Manuel Kroiss (“Makro”) and Ross Nordeen. Previous exits include Greg Yang, Tony Wu, Jimmy Ba, and even Toby Pohlen, who briefly led the "Macrohard" digital agents project before leaving after 16 days.

Posting on X Thursday, Musk said "Same thing happened with Tesla."

xAI was not built right first time around, so is being rebuilt from the foundations up.

Same thing happened with Tesla.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 12, 2026

The upheaval follows the $1.25 billion merger of SpaceX with xAI, amid pressure to meet ambitious goals - including space-based AI data centers, Moon factories, and Mars colonization - and a potential blockbuster stock market listing by June. According to FT, xAI staff have been wilting under "extremely hardcore" demands, though a company memo denied mass layoffs. 

Yet Musk is aggressively course-correcting: redeploying Tesla's Ashok Elluswamy to reboot Macrohard and develop the "digital Optimus" - blending real-world AI with Grok models. He's also been reviewing past interview rejections, apologizing publicly - "Many talented people over the past few years were declined an offer or even an interview at xAI. My apologies" - and reaching back out to promising candidates. This week, xAI poached Andrew Milich and Jason Ginsberg from the hot AI coding app Cursor to supercharge "Grok Code Fast."

Many talented people over the past few years were declined an offer or even an interview @xAI. My apologies.@BarisAkis and I are going through the company interview history and reaching back out to promising candidates. https://t.co/tvhipa1lu1

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 13, 2026

Meanwhile, the massive Memphis supercluster - already with over 200,000 GPUs and expanding toward 1 million - benefits from X data integration, giving xAI unique advantages in scale and real-time training.

* * * Please consider supporting ZeroHedge with the purchase of a hat, t-shirt, or multitool. Thank you.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 15:20

56% Of Americans Now Suspect COVID-19 'Vaccines' Caused Mass-Deaths

Authored by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH,

Public opinion is shifting... and they want action.

A new Rasmussen survey of 1,158 likely U.S. voters - conducted September 7–9, 2025, with a ±3% margin of error - reveals that 56% believe side effects from the COVID-19 shots have likely caused a significant number of unexplained deaths. Nearly one-third (32%) say it’s very likely. Only 35% still dismiss the idea.

This shows that what was once called a “conspiracy theory” has become the mainstream view. The majority of Americans now believe vaccine harms are real and widespread.

Support for HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reflects this shift. Half of voters (50%) say government health officials deserve criticism for their handling of the pandemic, while 42% even think CDC employees should be fired for their role in misleading the public.

Among those who strongly believe the shots caused deaths, over 70% want CDC firings.

Partisan divides remain—70% of Republicans, 46% of Democrats, and 54% of independents think the vaccines likely caused deaths—but the skepticism crosses party lines and racial groups.

In fact, black (64%) and Hispanic (57%) voters are even more likely than white voters (54%) to suspect deadly vaccine effects.

According to the survey, RFK Jr. is viewed favorably by 45% of voters, with strong support among Republicans and independents, even as Democrats turn sharply against him.

The takeaway: A credible, nationally representative poll now confirms most Americans believe COVID-19 shots have killed many people, and they want accountability from the CDC and government health leaders.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 14:20

Trump Admin Sues California To Block Electric Vehicle Mandate

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

The Justice and Transportation Departments filed a lawsuit against California on Thursday to stop what they say is an illegal electric vehicle (EV) requirement, alleging that the state is mandating fuel economy standards that federal law places in the exclusive domain of the federal government.

Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy announced the lawsuit, which was filed for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The suit takes aim at regulations formulated by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which mandates automakers comply with stricter mileage standards.

CARB has implemented stringent rules, such as the Advanced Clean Cars II act approved in August 2022, which requires that 35 percent of new vehicles sold in the state must be zero-emission starting in 2026, gradually increasing to a complete ban on new gas-powered car sales by 2035.

The Clean Air Act bans states from establishing their own tailpipe emission standards for trucks and cars. However, California can get an exemption to the ban if it obtains a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Following the waiver approval, California can implement its own emissions rules. The waiver would allow state officials to enforce tougher standards than national ones, influencing automakers nationwide due to the state’s large market share.

However, federal law bars states from implementing their own fuel economy laws, officials argue in the suit.

California’s waivers were revoked in June 2025 when Congress passed resolutions under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which President Donald Trump signed into law, preventing California from implementing the stricter standards. California and 10 other states filed a lawsuit, arguing that the CRA does not apply to EPA waiver decisions as they are not “rules.” The case is currently ongoing.

The Golden State’s new laws seek to require manufacturers to redesign the vehicles they sell across the country, increasing prices and curtailing consumer choices, officials state.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta have not returned a request for comment.

Newsom previously accused Trump of “destroying” the state’s clean air and “America’s global competitiveness.” He also said that without the high standards, the low air quality in the state would cost California taxpayers an estimated $45 billion in health care costs.

The federal government’s legal action aligns with Trump’s “Freedom Means Affordable Cars” program, which targets the remaking of corporate average fuel economy standards and could save American families about $1,000 on the average new vehicle and also trim $109 billion in costs over five years, according to the Department of Transportation.

“Oppressive, expensive electric vehicle mandates drive up costs for American consumers and violate federal law,” Bondi said in a statement. “California is using unlawful policies from the last administration to create exorbitant costs for our citizens—this Department of Justice is proud to stand with President Trump and Secretary Duffy to bring litigation that will make life more affordable for American consumers.”

Duffy said the lawsuit is part and parcel of initiatives to halt EV policies.

“I was proud to stand alongside President Trump to unveil our plan to eliminate the Biden-Buttigieg EV mandate and allow auto manufacturers to produce cars American families actually want to buy at a more affordable price. But Gavin Newsom is determined to continue pushing Democrats’ radical EV fantasy—even if doing so is illegal,” Duffy said in a statement.

The departments filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against the California Air Resources Board and its executive officer. The case claims the Energy Policy and Conservation Act overrides state rules, which gives NHTSA sole authority over fuel economy.

“This lawsuit continues [the Environment and Natural Resources Division’s] war on regulatory overreach by California that is set on undermining the national market for motor vehicles through unlawful state policies,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division said in a statement.

“The state vehicle standards we are challenging today are preempted by federal law, just like the standards that were blocked by a court in our challenge to California’s so-called Clean Truck Partnership.”

NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison also criticized EV policies.

“This litigation will help automakers design and produce cars and trucks to meet one federal fuel economy regulation. It was a mistake by Presidents Obama and Biden to enable California to set its own backdoor fuel economy policies, which have now spiraled into a costly patchwork quilt of individual state fuel economy requirements. This litigation will correct that misstep,” Morrison said.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/13/2026 - 13:00