Data Center Backup Power Contributes To Health Risks: Report

By Robert Freedman of UtilityDive

Federal regulatory changes impacting enforcement of on-site backup generator emissions are contributing to increased data center health risks, a report says. 

Air pollution from data centers could increase healthcare costs by almost $21 billion by 2028, contributing to roughly 600,000 asthma cases and 1,300 premature deaths, says the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit whose members are former public officials who maintain an interest in environmental policy. 

Much of the health risk is from federal regulatory changes made to help utilities meet data center energy demand, like expanding the use of coal and keeping coal and other combustion-based power plants online rather than phasing them out. But a portion of the risk is from regulatory changes that pave the way for data centers to maintain on-site backup power, EPN says in its Hidden Health Costs of AI Data Centers report.  

“These engines and turbines can emit nitrogen oxides, smog-forming volatile organic compounds, and soot pollution,” the report says. “The combined generating capacity of a large generator or turbine fleet can rival that of a conventional power plant.”

In Virginia, the emissions from on-site generators emitting just 10% of the levels allowed under their air permits will contribute to some 14,000 asthma symptom cases, 13 to 19 premature deaths and $220 million to $300 million in annual public-health costs, says the report, drawing on estimates released earlier this year by researchers. 

Several regulatory actions are helping to fuel risks from on-site generation, the report says: 

Temporary turbine category. A rule the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized earlier this year created a category of small and medium temporary turbines that can remain on site for up to two years with substantially reduced monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements. “Those requirements matter not only for estimating pollution, but for determining whether equipment is operating as permitted and whether pollution limits are being met,” the report says. As a result of the rule, 89% more nitrogen oxide is expected to be released into the air annually than would have been the case under a more restrictive 2024 version of the rule that the Trump administration scrapped, the report says. 

The report points to the high-profile lawsuit that was filed against xAI for its data center in Southaven, Mississippi. The dispute is over whether it received appropriate permits for its use of temporary or mobile on-site turbines to generate backup power. “The company and Mississippi regulators dispute that a permit was required,” the report says. “The dispute illustrates why clear permitting requirements and consistent enforcement become more important as equipment labeled ’backup, ‘temporary,’ or ‘mobile’ is used more extensively to supply power.”

Demand-response participation. An interpretive letter EPA released last year lets operators of on-site emergency backup generation use their generators to participate in utility demand-response programs. The report doesn’t mention that the letter is limited to on-site generators that operate within the jurisdiction of a local balancing authority. It “does not extend to Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs) or Independent System Operators (ISOs),” an analysis by standby power compliance company BackupPower AI says.   

Emergency generation. In another action that lets operators use their on-site generation at certain times, the U.S. Department of Energy earlier this year issued an emergency order authorizing the PJM Interconnection to use backup generation at data centers and other major facilities to help it manage demand. The order was issued in May, when parts of the Northeast and Midwest were going through a hot spell at the same time that many utilities within PJM’s jurisdiction were preparing planned outages for annual maintenance. “Their use during heat waves and other periods of grid stress adds smog-forming nitrogen oxides and fine-particle soot pollution at times when extreme heat and existing air pollution already place people at greater risk,” the report says. 

The report lists 30 federal regulatory actions in all that it says risk increasing pollution from data centers, many of them easing rules on utilities and some easing rules on non-utility power plants — such as a rule exempting private power facilities from acid rain program permits, emissions requirements and standardized reporting requirements.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 19:15

Data Center Backup Power Contributes To Health Risks: Report

By Robert Freedman of UtilityDive

Federal regulatory changes impacting enforcement of on-site backup generator emissions are contributing to increased data center health risks, a report says. 

Air pollution from data centers could increase healthcare costs by almost $21 billion by 2028, contributing to roughly 600,000 asthma cases and 1,300 premature deaths, says the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit whose members are former public officials who maintain an interest in environmental policy. 

Much of the health risk is from federal regulatory changes made to help utilities meet data center energy demand, like expanding the use of coal and keeping coal and other combustion-based power plants online rather than phasing them out. But a portion of the risk is from regulatory changes that pave the way for data centers to maintain on-site backup power, EPN says in its Hidden Health Costs of AI Data Centers report.  

“These engines and turbines can emit nitrogen oxides, smog-forming volatile organic compounds, and soot pollution,” the report says. “The combined generating capacity of a large generator or turbine fleet can rival that of a conventional power plant.”

In Virginia, the emissions from on-site generators emitting just 10% of the levels allowed under their air permits will contribute to some 14,000 asthma symptom cases, 13 to 19 premature deaths and $220 million to $300 million in annual public-health costs, says the report, drawing on estimates released earlier this year by researchers. 

Several regulatory actions are helping to fuel risks from on-site generation, the report says: 

Temporary turbine category. A rule the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized earlier this year created a category of small and medium temporary turbines that can remain on site for up to two years with substantially reduced monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements. “Those requirements matter not only for estimating pollution, but for determining whether equipment is operating as permitted and whether pollution limits are being met,” the report says. As a result of the rule, 89% more nitrogen oxide is expected to be released into the air annually than would have been the case under a more restrictive 2024 version of the rule that the Trump administration scrapped, the report says. 

The report points to the high-profile lawsuit that was filed against xAI for its data center in Southaven, Mississippi. The dispute is over whether it received appropriate permits for its use of temporary or mobile on-site turbines to generate backup power. “The company and Mississippi regulators dispute that a permit was required,” the report says. “The dispute illustrates why clear permitting requirements and consistent enforcement become more important as equipment labeled ’backup, ‘temporary,’ or ‘mobile’ is used more extensively to supply power.”

Demand-response participation. An interpretive letter EPA released last year lets operators of on-site emergency backup generation use their generators to participate in utility demand-response programs. The report doesn’t mention that the letter is limited to on-site generators that operate within the jurisdiction of a local balancing authority. It “does not extend to Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs) or Independent System Operators (ISOs),” an analysis by standby power compliance company BackupPower AI says.   

Emergency generation. In another action that lets operators use their on-site generation at certain times, the U.S. Department of Energy earlier this year issued an emergency order authorizing the PJM Interconnection to use backup generation at data centers and other major facilities to help it manage demand. The order was issued in May, when parts of the Northeast and Midwest were going through a hot spell at the same time that many utilities within PJM’s jurisdiction were preparing planned outages for annual maintenance. “Their use during heat waves and other periods of grid stress adds smog-forming nitrogen oxides and fine-particle soot pollution at times when extreme heat and existing air pollution already place people at greater risk,” the report says. 

The report lists 30 federal regulatory actions in all that it says risk increasing pollution from data centers, many of them easing rules on utilities and some easing rules on non-utility power plants — such as a rule exempting private power facilities from acid rain program permits, emissions requirements and standardized reporting requirements.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 19:15

US Cattle Slaughter Plunges 16% In One Week As Immigration Crackdown Guts Kansas "Golden Triangle" Workforce

A heightened wave of federal immigration enforcement in southwest Kansas has sent a shockwave through the U.S. beef supply chain, causing severe processing plant slowdowns, stranding thousands of cattle at feedlots, and threatening to drive up consumer meat prices.

U.S. cattle slaughter plummeted 16% in one week to an estimated 90,000 head on Thursday, September 24, as fear of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity led to widespread workforce absenteeism. By Friday, slaughter numbers remained 14% below the previous week's levels, translating into millions of dollars in lost revenue for producers whose animals are suddenly backed up.

The disruptions are centered in the Kansas "Golden Triangle" of commercial beef packing, which encompasses Dodge City, Liberal, and Garden City. This rural region is home to massive facilities operated by Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef. Collectively, these plants process roughly 24,000 head of cattle per day, representing more than 20% of daily U.S. fed-cattle slaughter capacity.

Agricultural groups, including the Kansas Livestock Association, Texas Cattle Feeders Association, and Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association, warned that the unannounced enforcement actions are creating supply-chain chokepoints from feedyards to processors. In a joint statement, the organizations said the ICE presence has created a "massive chilling effect on the legal, documented, skilled workers that put beef on the table and keep the cattle supply chain moving."

The Department of Homeland Security has pushed back against characterizations of the sweeps as worksite raids. "ICE is not conducting worksite operations in Kansas," Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said, adding that agents are targeting "heinous criminals including murderers, rapists, and drug traffickers and illegal aliens with final orders of removal." However, the heavy presence of federal agents near packing plants and in local communities has kept many of the region's agricultural workers at home.

Local officials from Dodge City, Garden City, and Liberal reported receiving no advance notice of the federal operation. "When ICE operates in Kansas, it needs to coordinate with our local law enforcement," said Sen. Roger Marshall, who along with fellow Kansas Republican Sen. Jerry Moran has pressed DHS on the operation. "Our community is a ghost town," Liberal's vice mayor told Reuters. "Businesses are not open because people are scared to leave their homes."

The labor shock arrives at a particularly sensitive time for the cattle market. Driven by prolonged drought, the U.S. cattle herd has shrunk to its smallest size in roughly 75 years. This historically tight physical market caused cattle futures to gyrate wildly this week as traders weighed the sudden loss of processing capacity against limited animal supplies. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said ranchers are receiving $300 to $500 less per head for their cattle.

The situation presents a unique policy collision in Washington. The Trump administration has actively sought to lower historically high consumer beef prices by expanding access to imported meat and enacting other supply-side measures. However, the abrupt reduction in domestic processing capacity - triggered by the administration's own immigration enforcement push - directly undercuts those efforts.

As the backlog grows, market-ready animals are getting heavier at feedlots, piling up feed costs and creating animal welfare concerns. Industry groups warn that if the Kansas bottleneck persists, fewer cattle moving through packing plants will mean less beef on supermarket shelves - and higher prices at the meat counter.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:50

US Cattle Slaughter Plunges 16% In One Week As Immigration Crackdown Guts Kansas "Golden Triangle" Workforce

A heightened wave of federal immigration enforcement in southwest Kansas has sent a shockwave through the U.S. beef supply chain, causing severe processing plant slowdowns, stranding thousands of cattle at feedlots, and threatening to drive up consumer meat prices.

U.S. cattle slaughter plummeted 16% in one week to an estimated 90,000 head on Thursday, September 24, as fear of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity led to widespread workforce absenteeism. By Friday, slaughter numbers remained 14% below the previous week's levels, translating into millions of dollars in lost revenue for producers whose animals are suddenly backed up.

The disruptions are centered in the Kansas "Golden Triangle" of commercial beef packing, which encompasses Dodge City, Liberal, and Garden City. This rural region is home to massive facilities operated by Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef. Collectively, these plants process roughly 24,000 head of cattle per day, representing more than 20% of daily U.S. fed-cattle slaughter capacity.

Agricultural groups, including the Kansas Livestock Association, Texas Cattle Feeders Association, and Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association, warned that the unannounced enforcement actions are creating supply-chain chokepoints from feedyards to processors. In a joint statement, the organizations said the ICE presence has created a "massive chilling effect on the legal, documented, skilled workers that put beef on the table and keep the cattle supply chain moving."

The Department of Homeland Security has pushed back against characterizations of the sweeps as worksite raids. "ICE is not conducting worksite operations in Kansas," Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said, adding that agents are targeting "heinous criminals including murderers, rapists, and drug traffickers and illegal aliens with final orders of removal." However, the heavy presence of federal agents near packing plants and in local communities has kept many of the region's agricultural workers at home.

Local officials from Dodge City, Garden City, and Liberal reported receiving no advance notice of the federal operation. "When ICE operates in Kansas, it needs to coordinate with our local law enforcement," said Sen. Roger Marshall, who along with fellow Kansas Republican Sen. Jerry Moran has pressed DHS on the operation. "Our community is a ghost town," Liberal's vice mayor told Reuters. "Businesses are not open because people are scared to leave their homes."

The labor shock arrives at a particularly sensitive time for the cattle market. Driven by prolonged drought, the U.S. cattle herd has shrunk to its smallest size in roughly 75 years. This historically tight physical market caused cattle futures to gyrate wildly this week as traders weighed the sudden loss of processing capacity against limited animal supplies. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said ranchers are receiving $300 to $500 less per head for their cattle.

The situation presents a unique policy collision in Washington. The Trump administration has actively sought to lower historically high consumer beef prices by expanding access to imported meat and enacting other supply-side measures. However, the abrupt reduction in domestic processing capacity - triggered by the administration's own immigration enforcement push - directly undercuts those efforts.

As the backlog grows, market-ready animals are getting heavier at feedlots, piling up feed costs and creating animal welfare concerns. Industry groups warn that if the Kansas bottleneck persists, fewer cattle moving through packing plants will mean less beef on supermarket shelves - and higher prices at the meat counter.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:50

Saylor Outlines 'Bill Of Digital Rights' To Help Build Prosperity In Future Economy

Authored by Michael Millard via Cointelegraph,

Michael Saylor, co-founder of Strategy, said that an age of digital assets and intelligence needs a "bill of digital rights," rather than restrictions.

An age of AI can increase production, but it needs better money and capital markets to realize its potential, according to an essay that Saylor, executive chairman of world's largest corporate Bitcoin holder, posted on X Saturday.

A useful framework for digital assets should establish five fundamental rights, or freedoms, Saylor wrote.

These rights include (1) the freedom to create new digital assets and (2) to issue them to the market to finance business and productivity. They also include (3) the right to hold them or choose a custodian, as well as (4) to transfer them, to move the assets among people, companies, wallets and service providers. Finally, (5) to use them, to spend, invest, earn income and borrow against digital assets.

These rights should apply to both people and companies, Saylor wrote. "An asset's value depends on what its owner can do with it. Restrict its usefulness, and you restrict its economic potential," he said.

As digital intelligence will automate jobs and make many products obsolete, future prosperity will depend on our ability to create new businesses and opportunities at a faster pace, Saylor wrote, adding that "our ambition should be to enable 10 million new companies to raise capital."

Cointelegraph reported on Monday that Strategy had resumed buying Bitcoin after a two-week pause, acquiring 950 Bitcoin (BTC) for $75.7 million at an average price of $79,670 per coin.

Digital dollars should be allowed to compete

This brought Strategy's holdings to 846,000 BTC, acquired for about $63.8 billion at an average cost of $75,416 per coin. Bitcoin was trading at about $84,523 at the time of publication.

Saylor also wrote in his essay that "protecting existing business models while making it difficult to finance their successors leaves the economy poorly prepared for technological change."

Therefore, digital dollars should be allowed to compete on yield and "move at the speed of light," he said. Banks, financial technology companies and technology platforms should offer digital dollars through the devices and applications people already use.

"Where the law prevents it, the law should change," Saylor added.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:25

Saylor Outlines 'Bill Of Digital Rights' To Help Build Prosperity In Future Economy

Authored by Michael Millard via Cointelegraph,

Michael Saylor, co-founder of Strategy, said that an age of digital assets and intelligence needs a "bill of digital rights," rather than restrictions.

An age of AI can increase production, but it needs better money and capital markets to realize its potential, according to an essay that Saylor, executive chairman of world's largest corporate Bitcoin holder, posted on X Saturday.

A useful framework for digital assets should establish five fundamental rights, or freedoms, Saylor wrote.

These rights include (1) the freedom to create new digital assets and (2) to issue them to the market to finance business and productivity. They also include (3) the right to hold them or choose a custodian, as well as (4) to transfer them, to move the assets among people, companies, wallets and service providers. Finally, (5) to use them, to spend, invest, earn income and borrow against digital assets.

These rights should apply to both people and companies, Saylor wrote. "An asset's value depends on what its owner can do with it. Restrict its usefulness, and you restrict its economic potential," he said.

As digital intelligence will automate jobs and make many products obsolete, future prosperity will depend on our ability to create new businesses and opportunities at a faster pace, Saylor wrote, adding that "our ambition should be to enable 10 million new companies to raise capital."

Cointelegraph reported on Monday that Strategy had resumed buying Bitcoin after a two-week pause, acquiring 950 Bitcoin (BTC) for $75.7 million at an average price of $79,670 per coin.

Digital dollars should be allowed to compete

This brought Strategy's holdings to 846,000 BTC, acquired for about $63.8 billion at an average cost of $75,416 per coin. Bitcoin was trading at about $84,523 at the time of publication.

Saylor also wrote in his essay that "protecting existing business models while making it difficult to finance their successors leaves the economy poorly prepared for technological change."

Therefore, digital dollars should be allowed to compete on yield and "move at the speed of light," he said. Banks, financial technology companies and technology platforms should offer digital dollars through the devices and applications people already use.

"Where the law prevents it, the law should change," Saylor added.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:25

Bill Maher Credits Falling Crime To Trump's 'FAFO' Image

Of all people, Democrat Bill Maher believes President Trump’s aggressive image may be playing a role in America’s ongoing decline in crime.

On Friday’s “Real Time,” Maher argued that while falling crime has plenty of potential explanations, it would be foolish to completely dismiss the psychological effect of having a president who openly projects a law-and-order persona, according to the NY Post.

“It’s just childish to pretend that when you elect a “f— around and find out” president, a ‘no more Mr. Nice Guy-booting-your-ass-V-for-vendetta-kick-ass—and-take-names-say-hello-to-my-little-friend’ president, that’s not going to have some effect on crime,” Maher said to laughs from his studio audience.

He was quick to make clear that Trump wasn’t the only explanation. Crime was already moving lower before Trump returned to the White House, and Maher pointed to America’s increasingly pervasive surveillance as another possible factor.

“It’s not just drug crime that’s way down – it’s all crime. And again, probably much of it is not political. It’s because you can’t move two inches in America without being tracked, photographed, and followed by a flock camera,” he quipped.

The Post writes that Maher also argued that policies traditionally associated with Democrats deserve some credit, particularly programs aimed at reducing economic desperation.

“But it’s also because when Democrats expand the safety net, there are less desperate people – and because Trump is a badass. No, I don’t agree with many of his methods, like how they sometimes just deport people to countries where they have absolutely no connection – like Meghan and Harry,” he said. “Is doing it this way the right thing? No.”

During the segment, Maher referenced an Atlantic piece examining the country’s broader decline in violent crime. FBI figures cited in the discussion showed the trend beginning during the Biden years and continuing under Trump. Other explanations have included changes in policing, a strong labor market and federal support sent to state and local governments during the pandemic.

But Maher’s closing argument was that Trump’s cultivated image of toughness may be reinforcing the trend.

“He has UFC fights on the lawn. I think the bad guys got the message,” he said.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:00

Bill Maher Credits Falling Crime To Trump's 'FAFO' Image

Of all people, Democrat Bill Maher believes President Trump’s aggressive image may be playing a role in America’s ongoing decline in crime.

On Friday’s “Real Time,” Maher argued that while falling crime has plenty of potential explanations, it would be foolish to completely dismiss the psychological effect of having a president who openly projects a law-and-order persona, according to the NY Post.

“It’s just childish to pretend that when you elect a “f— around and find out” president, a ‘no more Mr. Nice Guy-booting-your-ass-V-for-vendetta-kick-ass—and-take-names-say-hello-to-my-little-friend’ president, that’s not going to have some effect on crime,” Maher said to laughs from his studio audience.

He was quick to make clear that Trump wasn’t the only explanation. Crime was already moving lower before Trump returned to the White House, and Maher pointed to America’s increasingly pervasive surveillance as another possible factor.

“It’s not just drug crime that’s way down – it’s all crime. And again, probably much of it is not political. It’s because you can’t move two inches in America without being tracked, photographed, and followed by a flock camera,” he quipped.

The Post writes that Maher also argued that policies traditionally associated with Democrats deserve some credit, particularly programs aimed at reducing economic desperation.

“But it’s also because when Democrats expand the safety net, there are less desperate people – and because Trump is a badass. No, I don’t agree with many of his methods, like how they sometimes just deport people to countries where they have absolutely no connection – like Meghan and Harry,” he said. “Is doing it this way the right thing? No.”

During the segment, Maher referenced an Atlantic piece examining the country’s broader decline in violent crime. FBI figures cited in the discussion showed the trend beginning during the Biden years and continuing under Trump. Other explanations have included changes in policing, a strong labor market and federal support sent to state and local governments during the pandemic.

But Maher’s closing argument was that Trump’s cultivated image of toughness may be reinforcing the trend.

“He has UFC fights on the lawn. I think the bad guys got the message,” he said.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 18:00

More Hospitals Are Being Bought By Private Equity; Here's How It's Changing Healthcare...

Authored by Lawrence Wilson and Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times,

There's a greater than one in 10 chance your hospital is owned by someone who's trying to double their money in seven years.

If you live in Kentucky, your chances are one in six. In New Mexico, more than one in three.

Walk into an emergency room, and there's a 40 percent chance the doctor who stitches you up works for a staffing company owned by private investors, not the hospital.

At a time when less than half of Americans report being consistently able to afford healthcare, private investors are looking to hospitals and physician practices as a source of profit.

Private equity firms, which invest money on behalf of pension funds, universities, sovereign wealth funds, and wealthy individuals, buy healthcare providers expecting them to produce a better return than the stock market.

That may be no surprise to the 82 million Americans who make tradeoffs such as choosing between buying food and going to the doctor, nor to the nearly half of Americans with healthcare debt who have drained their savings to pay medical bills.

Providers are attractive targets for private investors for the same reasons any business might be, according to analysts.

Hospitals and physician practices are virtually recession-proof. They're fueled by a steady supply of aging customers. Historically, there have been lots of small, independent operators in the healthcare industry, ripe for consolidation. And they need vast amounts of capital to expand or even maintain complex facilities.

Private investors bring the business savvy and operational know-how that many healthcare providers lack. That has made physician offices and hospitals more efficient and productive, analysts say.

"Private equity has made a tremendous amount of investments in health technologies," Kelly Arduino, an executive with 25-years' experience in healthcare management, told The Epoch Times. "That's where we would see the biggest success."

But that success comes at a price.

Gains in efficiency and value to investors have left some hospitals bereft of real assets, loaded with debt, and struggling to maintain quality care, some studies indicate.

Private investors are buying into the healthcare system to extract profit, which can permanently change the structure of a healthcare institution, sometimes for the worse.

Debt Loading

When private equity firms buy an independent hospital or physician practice, they finance the deal mostly with borrowed money.

Investors typically put in between 10 percent and 40 percent of the funding and get the rest from commercial lenders, institutional investors, or high-yield bonds.

But the actual borrower is the provider. The hospital or physician practice takes on the debt and must repay it, often paying management fees to the equity firm as well.

And because the investors typically convert the provider from nonprofit to for-profit status, the provider is also liable for taxes.

When the provider is eventually resold, the debt will likely be paid off from the proceeds. But the new owner, often another private equity firm, may finance its purchase with debt, too.

So hospitals and physician practices can be left with ongoing debt for the sake of generating a profit for private investors.

There's evidence that debt loading negatively impacts the long-term financial health of these institutions.

A 2025 study of more than 200 hospitals owned by private equity firms found that those re-resold to another private equity group saw operating margins decrease more than 8 percent compared to those sold to other for-profit owners.

Yet even some critics agree that private investment in healthcare can be useful if done responsibly.

"Private investments can sometimes be an important source of capital, especially for small to mid-sized companies that can benefit from the access that this financing provides," Lina M. Khan, former chair of the Federal Trade Commission, wrote in 2024.

Staff Cuts

Private-equity investment in healthcare came under scrutiny by Congress following the 2024 bankruptcy of Steward Health Care, a chain of 31 hospitals. Many attributed Steward's collapse to its years under ownership by private equity.

Yet overall, hospitals owned by private investors are not more likely to close than are other hospitals, research shows.

A more consistent problem is significant staff reductions, which affects physician morale and patient satisfaction, according to a 2025 report by a team of academic researchers.

After private-equity takeover, provider staffing was reduced by 6 percent over four years and stayed that way longterm, according to a study of hospital acquisitions.

While the number of doctors, nurses, and other care providers did bounce back, support staffing did not. It was cut an overall 20 percent.

That saved money on wages: about 7 percent in the first four years, and up to 9 percent after eight years.

That focus on efficiency has changed the dynamics of the workplace.

"I think where private equity has struggled the most is in dealing with a lot of professional services providers. So that would be physician practices," Arduino said.

Patients complain of doctors who are overly busy, long wait times for appointments, driving farther for care, and being rushed through their brief visits with physicians.

More than four in 10 doctors reported symptoms of burnout in 2025, according to the American Medical Association. That's despite a recent decline in job stress since the COVID-19 era.

One reason is the increased pace of work, said Robert Andrews, CEO of the Health Transformation Alliance.

"The doctor who's had four or five appointments per hour ... now has seven," Andrews told The Epoch Times. That leads to long days catching up on paperwork and feeling fatigued, he told The Epoch Times.

Beyond that, physicians often feel handcuffed by the clock, prevented from spending the extra minutes with a patient that might improve patient care, Andrews said. "They feel like their professional autonomy has been robbed from them," he said.

That problem is not unique to private equity-owned hospitals and physician practices.

But it has roots in the rapid consolidation of the healthcare industry that began in the 2010s, which some analysts call a "glorious time" for private investment.

This focus on efficiency changed the mindset of entire hospital systems, said Dr. Patricia Martin, an anesthesiologist in practice for more than 20 years.

"They're not in the business of providing the best medicine. They're in the business of providing good-enough medicine for the largest number of people," Martin told The Epoch Times.

Supporters of private investment say there is no evidence that mortality rates increase under private equity ownership.

Yet hospitals owned by private investors were found to have higher rates of falls and hospital-acquired infections, lower patient satisfaction, and lower scores in standardized quality ratings.

Asset Stripping

One reason the Steward Health Care bankruptcy drew criticism was the allegation that former owner Cerberus Capital Management had sold some of its real assets before selling it in 2020.

Cerberus created Steward Health Care, starting with six financially troubled hospitals acquired from the Catholic Archdioceses of Boston, in 2010.

Cerberus stated that the hospital system was financially sound with more than $400 million in cash when sold to other investors in 2020.

However, critics noted that Steward had earlier sold 13 medical office buildings and the campus of one hospital to a real estate trust, then leased them back.

That tactic is common among private equity investors and is not unique to healthcare.

Many real-estate intensive businesses do this to raise capital and to make the cost of occupying the property more predictable.

While this practice does not affect the provider's immediate financial picture, researchers found that it does have a longer term impact.

Hospitals that sold their real estate to a real estate investment trust had a significant decrease in fixed asset value, and were about six times more likely to close or file bankruptcy than other hospitals, according to a 2025 study.

Yet the Center for Economic and Policy Research found a pattern of private equity companies using the proceeds from hospital and nursing home real estate sales to pay dividends to investors rather than making capital improvements. At the same time, the new real estate owners sometimes charged the healthcare providers inflated rents.

Better Incentives

While the dangers of private equity investment in healthcare are real, industry insiders warn against applying blanket solutions.

Not all hospital failures can be laid at the feet of investors, Arduino said.

"When I look at the hospitals that have struggled or failed, it's not a function of private equity. It's a function of long-term mismanagement, operational challenges, disconnected systems, and poor reimbursement," she said. "The hospital business is super hard."

Kahn was critical of what she called "strip and flip" tactics used by some private investors. But, she said, "some private equity firms take a more long-term view and focus on creating real operational improvements to generate value in ways that provide broader benefits."

Andrews, whose firm works with more than a dozen physician groups owned by private-equity firms, said the ownership structure is far less important than the rules by which they operate.

"If you incent primary care practices to rush people in and out the door, that's what they'll do," Andrews said. "If you incent them to spend time, understand what's going on with the patient, and reward them when the patient's healthier, that's what they'll do."

Nine states have enacted legislation regarding private-equity investment in hospitals since 2024. Most involve notification requirements regarding changes of hospital ownership.

A Connecticut law bars private-equity owners from having a majority stake in a hospital or interfering with clinical decision making, and prohibits hospital sale-and-lease-back transactions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:40

More Hospitals Are Being Bought By Private Equity; Here's How It's Changing Healthcare...

Authored by Lawrence Wilson and Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times,

There's a greater than one in 10 chance your hospital is owned by someone who's trying to double their money in seven years.

If you live in Kentucky, your chances are one in six. In New Mexico, more than one in three.

Walk into an emergency room, and there's a 40 percent chance the doctor who stitches you up works for a staffing company owned by private investors, not the hospital.

At a time when less than half of Americans report being consistently able to afford healthcare, private investors are looking to hospitals and physician practices as a source of profit.

Private equity firms, which invest money on behalf of pension funds, universities, sovereign wealth funds, and wealthy individuals, buy healthcare providers expecting them to produce a better return than the stock market.

That may be no surprise to the 82 million Americans who make tradeoffs such as choosing between buying food and going to the doctor, nor to the nearly half of Americans with healthcare debt who have drained their savings to pay medical bills.

Providers are attractive targets for private investors for the same reasons any business might be, according to analysts.

Hospitals and physician practices are virtually recession-proof. They're fueled by a steady supply of aging customers. Historically, there have been lots of small, independent operators in the healthcare industry, ripe for consolidation. And they need vast amounts of capital to expand or even maintain complex facilities.

Private investors bring the business savvy and operational know-how that many healthcare providers lack. That has made physician offices and hospitals more efficient and productive, analysts say.

"Private equity has made a tremendous amount of investments in health technologies," Kelly Arduino, an executive with 25-years' experience in healthcare management, told The Epoch Times. "That's where we would see the biggest success."

But that success comes at a price.

Gains in efficiency and value to investors have left some hospitals bereft of real assets, loaded with debt, and struggling to maintain quality care, some studies indicate.

Private investors are buying into the healthcare system to extract profit, which can permanently change the structure of a healthcare institution, sometimes for the worse.

Debt Loading

When private equity firms buy an independent hospital or physician practice, they finance the deal mostly with borrowed money.

Investors typically put in between 10 percent and 40 percent of the funding and get the rest from commercial lenders, institutional investors, or high-yield bonds.

But the actual borrower is the provider. The hospital or physician practice takes on the debt and must repay it, often paying management fees to the equity firm as well.

And because the investors typically convert the provider from nonprofit to for-profit status, the provider is also liable for taxes.

When the provider is eventually resold, the debt will likely be paid off from the proceeds. But the new owner, often another private equity firm, may finance its purchase with debt, too.

So hospitals and physician practices can be left with ongoing debt for the sake of generating a profit for private investors.

There's evidence that debt loading negatively impacts the long-term financial health of these institutions.

A 2025 study of more than 200 hospitals owned by private equity firms found that those re-resold to another private equity group saw operating margins decrease more than 8 percent compared to those sold to other for-profit owners.

Yet even some critics agree that private investment in healthcare can be useful if done responsibly.

"Private investments can sometimes be an important source of capital, especially for small to mid-sized companies that can benefit from the access that this financing provides," Lina M. Khan, former chair of the Federal Trade Commission, wrote in 2024.

Staff Cuts

Private-equity investment in healthcare came under scrutiny by Congress following the 2024 bankruptcy of Steward Health Care, a chain of 31 hospitals. Many attributed Steward's collapse to its years under ownership by private equity.

Yet overall, hospitals owned by private investors are not more likely to close than are other hospitals, research shows.

A more consistent problem is significant staff reductions, which affects physician morale and patient satisfaction, according to a 2025 report by a team of academic researchers.

After private-equity takeover, provider staffing was reduced by 6 percent over four years and stayed that way longterm, according to a study of hospital acquisitions.

While the number of doctors, nurses, and other care providers did bounce back, support staffing did not. It was cut an overall 20 percent.

That saved money on wages: about 7 percent in the first four years, and up to 9 percent after eight years.

That focus on efficiency has changed the dynamics of the workplace.

"I think where private equity has struggled the most is in dealing with a lot of professional services providers. So that would be physician practices," Arduino said.

Patients complain of doctors who are overly busy, long wait times for appointments, driving farther for care, and being rushed through their brief visits with physicians.

More than four in 10 doctors reported symptoms of burnout in 2025, according to the American Medical Association. That's despite a recent decline in job stress since the COVID-19 era.

One reason is the increased pace of work, said Robert Andrews, CEO of the Health Transformation Alliance.

"The doctor who's had four or five appointments per hour ... now has seven," Andrews told The Epoch Times. That leads to long days catching up on paperwork and feeling fatigued, he told The Epoch Times.

Beyond that, physicians often feel handcuffed by the clock, prevented from spending the extra minutes with a patient that might improve patient care, Andrews said. "They feel like their professional autonomy has been robbed from them," he said.

That problem is not unique to private equity-owned hospitals and physician practices.

But it has roots in the rapid consolidation of the healthcare industry that began in the 2010s, which some analysts call a "glorious time" for private investment.

This focus on efficiency changed the mindset of entire hospital systems, said Dr. Patricia Martin, an anesthesiologist in practice for more than 20 years.

"They're not in the business of providing the best medicine. They're in the business of providing good-enough medicine for the largest number of people," Martin told The Epoch Times.

Supporters of private investment say there is no evidence that mortality rates increase under private equity ownership.

Yet hospitals owned by private investors were found to have higher rates of falls and hospital-acquired infections, lower patient satisfaction, and lower scores in standardized quality ratings.

Asset Stripping

One reason the Steward Health Care bankruptcy drew criticism was the allegation that former owner Cerberus Capital Management had sold some of its real assets before selling it in 2020.

Cerberus created Steward Health Care, starting with six financially troubled hospitals acquired from the Catholic Archdioceses of Boston, in 2010.

Cerberus stated that the hospital system was financially sound with more than $400 million in cash when sold to other investors in 2020.

However, critics noted that Steward had earlier sold 13 medical office buildings and the campus of one hospital to a real estate trust, then leased them back.

That tactic is common among private equity investors and is not unique to healthcare.

Many real-estate intensive businesses do this to raise capital and to make the cost of occupying the property more predictable.

While this practice does not affect the provider's immediate financial picture, researchers found that it does have a longer term impact.

Hospitals that sold their real estate to a real estate investment trust had a significant decrease in fixed asset value, and were about six times more likely to close or file bankruptcy than other hospitals, according to a 2025 study.

Yet the Center for Economic and Policy Research found a pattern of private equity companies using the proceeds from hospital and nursing home real estate sales to pay dividends to investors rather than making capital improvements. At the same time, the new real estate owners sometimes charged the healthcare providers inflated rents.

Better Incentives

While the dangers of private equity investment in healthcare are real, industry insiders warn against applying blanket solutions.

Not all hospital failures can be laid at the feet of investors, Arduino said.

"When I look at the hospitals that have struggled or failed, it's not a function of private equity. It's a function of long-term mismanagement, operational challenges, disconnected systems, and poor reimbursement," she said. "The hospital business is super hard."

Kahn was critical of what she called "strip and flip" tactics used by some private investors. But, she said, "some private equity firms take a more long-term view and focus on creating real operational improvements to generate value in ways that provide broader benefits."

Andrews, whose firm works with more than a dozen physician groups owned by private-equity firms, said the ownership structure is far less important than the rules by which they operate.

"If you incent primary care practices to rush people in and out the door, that's what they'll do," Andrews said. "If you incent them to spend time, understand what's going on with the patient, and reward them when the patient's healthier, that's what they'll do."

Nine states have enacted legislation regarding private-equity investment in hospitals since 2024. Most involve notification requirements regarding changes of hospital ownership.

A Connecticut law bars private-equity owners from having a majority stake in a hospital or interfering with clinical decision making, and prohibits hospital sale-and-lease-back transactions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:40

Suspects Accidentally Set Themselves On Fire During Seattle Fuel Theft Attempt

The free market responds to rising gas prices in many ways...

Two suspects in Seattle appear to have discovered one of the more obvious drawbacks of stealing fuel: it is extremely flammable.

Police say the pair accidentally set themselves on fire early Friday while allegedly trying to siphon fuel from box trucks in Seattle’s SODO neighborhood, according to KIRO 7.

Around 1:30 a.m., multiple callers reported several box trucks burning near the 3400 block of 1st Avenue South. Firefighters and Seattle police responded, and officers initially detained a 37-year-old man who was found near the rental truck lot smelling strongly of smoke and carrying a lighter.

A witness identified him as someone seen leaving the area shortly before the fire, and police arrested him on suspicion of felony property damage. Three rental trucks suffered an estimated $150,000 in damage.

But security footage reviewed by Arson and Bomb Squad detectives quickly changed the story.

According to police, video showed a vehicle arriving with two people inside who appeared to begin stealing fuel from the trucks. Somewhere along the way, their criminal master plan encountered the minor complication of combustion.

The report says that the fuel ignited, engulfing both suspects and their vehicle in flames. Despite apparently catching themselves on fire, the pair managed to get back into their vehicle and drive away onto 1st Avenue South.

Police subsequently determined the 37-year-old man they had arrested was not responsible for starting the blaze and released him Friday morning.

Investigators are now searching for the actual suspects, noting that at least one may be walking around with burns, singed hair or missing eyebrows...which, conveniently, may narrow the field.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:20

Suspects Accidentally Set Themselves On Fire During Seattle Fuel Theft Attempt

The free market responds to rising gas prices in many ways...

Two suspects in Seattle appear to have discovered one of the more obvious drawbacks of stealing fuel: it is extremely flammable.

Police say the pair accidentally set themselves on fire early Friday while allegedly trying to siphon fuel from box trucks in Seattle’s SODO neighborhood, according to KIRO 7.

Around 1:30 a.m., multiple callers reported several box trucks burning near the 3400 block of 1st Avenue South. Firefighters and Seattle police responded, and officers initially detained a 37-year-old man who was found near the rental truck lot smelling strongly of smoke and carrying a lighter.

A witness identified him as someone seen leaving the area shortly before the fire, and police arrested him on suspicion of felony property damage. Three rental trucks suffered an estimated $150,000 in damage.

But security footage reviewed by Arson and Bomb Squad detectives quickly changed the story.

According to police, video showed a vehicle arriving with two people inside who appeared to begin stealing fuel from the trucks. Somewhere along the way, their criminal master plan encountered the minor complication of combustion.

The report says that the fuel ignited, engulfing both suspects and their vehicle in flames. Despite apparently catching themselves on fire, the pair managed to get back into their vehicle and drive away onto 1st Avenue South.

Police subsequently determined the 37-year-old man they had arrested was not responsible for starting the blaze and released him Friday morning.

Investigators are now searching for the actual suspects, noting that at least one may be walking around with burns, singed hair or missing eyebrows...which, conveniently, may narrow the field.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:20

Walmart Boss Rules Out Personal Pricing In Stores As It Rolls Out Digital Price Labels

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,

Walmart's boss has ruled out personal pricing in a bid to alleviate customers' concerns about new pricing technology at its stores.

In a statement posted on the company's website on July 25, Walmart CEO John Furner claimed that the retail giant isn't using personal information to set prices as it rolls out digital shelf labels.

Digital pricing, driven by electronic shelf labels and artificial intelligence (AI), is increasingly enabling retailers to quickly update in-store prices rather than relying on staff to change traditional paper price signs.

"Digital price labels are rapidly replacing paper shelf tags at U.S. supermarkets," said Furner.

Some campaigners are concerned that algorithms and data-led "dynamic pricing," a pricing strategy that adjusts food prices in real time, will be used.

"We don't set different prices based on who you are or the time of day, and we won't," Furner said.

"Whether you're buying groceries or electronics on a hot afternoon or in a sudden rush for an item, it's never a reason to charge you more.

"We don't set different prices based on who you are or the time of day, and we won't."

He also said that the company won't use the information consumers share with it, whether through its agentic AI-powered shopping assistant "Sparky" or otherwise, to raise your price or hide lower-priced options that meet your needs.

Walmart said in March that 2,300 Walmart U.S. locations already use digital shelves, and it expects this technology to be chain-wide within the next year.

According to a 2024 Harvard Business School post on dynamic pricing, long used in air travel and hospitality, companies lacking transparent pricing models have faced backlash for "hidden" surge pricing.

"This happens when digital platforms raise prices dynamically based on real-time demand without giving customers clear, upfront explanations," it said.

Democratic lawmakers are pushing for legislation to ban what it characterizes as "surveillance pricing."

In August 2025, Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced H.R. 4966, the Stop Price Gouging in Grocery Stores Act, to ban surveillance pricing at the federal level.

The bill directs the Federal Trade Commission to enforce a ban on price gouging by grocery stores. Specifically, H.R. 4966 says "an operator of a retail food store may not sell or offer for sale an item at a grossly excessive price," with a metric yet to be set.

This includes a ban on electronic shelf labels in stores larger than 10,000 square feet. Instead, those stores would be required to rely on a physical sticker, stamp, or label that is attached to the item, shelf, or sign.

"Companies should not be allowed to use electronic labeling or your personal information to charge you a higher price. We need to ban corporate price gouging and surveillance pricing," said Tlaib.

Milton Jones, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, said his labor organization is among those that have endorsed the bill.

"Technologies like electronic shelf tags threaten to usher in a new era where the price of an item you pick up from the shelf can change within the amount of time it takes to walk to the register," Jones said at the time.

The bill has not passed and remains in committee.

In a Sept. 14 report, the Washington Legal Foundation, a conservative, pro-business public-interest law firm and legal policy center, claimed that "surveillance pricing doesn't actually raise prices."

It said that because grocery stores "compete vigorously" with each other, they can't raise their prices above the market level, and if they do, customers will immediately walk across the street and buy for less.

The report said that a grocery store's ability to "discriminate" against "even high-income consumers is extremely limited."

"So when they do look at personal data, they almost always use it to target discounts," it said.

"High grocery prices have nothing to do with surveillance pricing. High prices instead reflect economy-wide pressures, like tariffs, high labor costs, and general inflation."

The report said that there is a "vision of the grocery industry" that is "basically fictional" as it imagines grocery firms as "quasi-monopolies feasting on fat profit margins."

It said that grocery retailers' margins are "razor thin" and that, on average, they earn only 1.7 percent, some of the "thinnest in the economy."

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:00

Walmart Boss Rules Out Personal Pricing In Stores As It Rolls Out Digital Price Labels

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,

Walmart's boss has ruled out personal pricing in a bid to alleviate customers' concerns about new pricing technology at its stores.

In a statement posted on the company's website on July 25, Walmart CEO John Furner claimed that the retail giant isn't using personal information to set prices as it rolls out digital shelf labels.

Digital pricing, driven by electronic shelf labels and artificial intelligence (AI), is increasingly enabling retailers to quickly update in-store prices rather than relying on staff to change traditional paper price signs.

"Digital price labels are rapidly replacing paper shelf tags at U.S. supermarkets," said Furner.

Some campaigners are concerned that algorithms and data-led "dynamic pricing," a pricing strategy that adjusts food prices in real time, will be used.

"We don't set different prices based on who you are or the time of day, and we won't," Furner said.

"Whether you're buying groceries or electronics on a hot afternoon or in a sudden rush for an item, it's never a reason to charge you more.

"We don't set different prices based on who you are or the time of day, and we won't."

He also said that the company won't use the information consumers share with it, whether through its agentic AI-powered shopping assistant "Sparky" or otherwise, to raise your price or hide lower-priced options that meet your needs.

Walmart said in March that 2,300 Walmart U.S. locations already use digital shelves, and it expects this technology to be chain-wide within the next year.

According to a 2024 Harvard Business School post on dynamic pricing, long used in air travel and hospitality, companies lacking transparent pricing models have faced backlash for "hidden" surge pricing.

"This happens when digital platforms raise prices dynamically based on real-time demand without giving customers clear, upfront explanations," it said.

Democratic lawmakers are pushing for legislation to ban what it characterizes as "surveillance pricing."

In August 2025, Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced H.R. 4966, the Stop Price Gouging in Grocery Stores Act, to ban surveillance pricing at the federal level.

The bill directs the Federal Trade Commission to enforce a ban on price gouging by grocery stores. Specifically, H.R. 4966 says "an operator of a retail food store may not sell or offer for sale an item at a grossly excessive price," with a metric yet to be set.

This includes a ban on electronic shelf labels in stores larger than 10,000 square feet. Instead, those stores would be required to rely on a physical sticker, stamp, or label that is attached to the item, shelf, or sign.

"Companies should not be allowed to use electronic labeling or your personal information to charge you a higher price. We need to ban corporate price gouging and surveillance pricing," said Tlaib.

Milton Jones, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, said his labor organization is among those that have endorsed the bill.

"Technologies like electronic shelf tags threaten to usher in a new era where the price of an item you pick up from the shelf can change within the amount of time it takes to walk to the register," Jones said at the time.

The bill has not passed and remains in committee.

In a Sept. 14 report, the Washington Legal Foundation, a conservative, pro-business public-interest law firm and legal policy center, claimed that "surveillance pricing doesn't actually raise prices."

It said that because grocery stores "compete vigorously" with each other, they can't raise their prices above the market level, and if they do, customers will immediately walk across the street and buy for less.

The report said that a grocery store's ability to "discriminate" against "even high-income consumers is extremely limited."

"So when they do look at personal data, they almost always use it to target discounts," it said.

"High grocery prices have nothing to do with surveillance pricing. High prices instead reflect economy-wide pressures, like tariffs, high labor costs, and general inflation."

The report said that there is a "vision of the grocery industry" that is "basically fictional" as it imagines grocery firms as "quasi-monopolies feasting on fat profit margins."

It said that grocery retailers' margins are "razor thin" and that, on average, they earn only 1.7 percent, some of the "thinnest in the economy."

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 17:00

$4 Billion Startup 'Corgi' Melts Down Into Real Life Social Media 'Mean Girls'

San Francisco insurance startup Corgi has found itself in the spotlight for reasons that have little to do with insurance, after controversial social media posts by employees triggered criticism, internal disagreement and questions about the company’s unusual culture, according to the NY Post.

The latest controversy involved Nicole Clash, a Corgi marketing employee who came under fire for repeatedly using an ableist slur online and for a since-deleted post suggesting she would not police people who use the N-word.

The Post writes that another employee, partnerships manager Ella Schlaghecke, publicly pushed back, arguing there is a difference between opposing censorship and refusing to challenge dehumanizing language. Clash later said she deleted some posts after reconsidering them and emphasized that her comments did not represent Corgi.

That followed a separate blowup involving Brooke LeBlanc, Corgi’s head of community. The 29-year-old posted a lengthy list of requirements for a future husband, including that he be financially secure, hardworking, fit, sober, masculine and between 35 and 42.

“Sorry, I don’t want to date a loser!” she wrote. The post went viral, with LeBlanc claiming it produced five potential suitors before she ultimately deleted her X account.

LeBlanc

Corgi co-founder and CEO Nico Laqua also entered the fray with a post criticizing cancel culture and arguing that startup builders should focus on creating durable businesses rather than pleasing social media personalities and venture capitalists. Corgi later stressed that Laqua’s comments came before Clash’s remarks and said neither he nor the company supported that language.

The spectacle has added to Corgi’s already unconventional reputation.

The roughly 400-person company describes itself as an AI-native insurance platform that underwrites and sells coverage directly to businesses. But it has also promoted an extreme startup work culture. Laqua has said employees should not expect every Saturday and Sunday off and has claimed he sleeps only three or four hours a night, sometimes on an office mattress.

Corgi has also faced speculation about its hiring and marketing practices. The term “Corgi girls” emerged amid claims that the startup deliberately recruits attractive, highly online women for growth and promotional roles, fueled partly by viral posts announcing female hires.

The company strongly denies that characterization, saying it hires employees for their ability to contribute to the business and calling suggestions that female staffers are a marketing tactic disrespectful and inaccurate.

Corgi’s unconventional strategy extends offline. The company has announced plans for as many as 100 round-the-clock “Corgi Cafes” aimed partly at programmers and startup employees working late hours. The employee reportedly overseeing that expansion recently departed, although Corgi says the cafe initiative remains underway.

Clash

Behind the online drama is a growing insurance business that is also expanding into additional insurance and reinsurance products.

Some Silicon Valley observers see Corgi’s provocative personality as a branding strategy designed to distinguish an otherwise unglamorous insurance company. Others argue the approach risks overwhelming the underlying business.

PR executive Chris Harihar said the danger is that Corgi becomes known for employee controversies rather than insurance. One San Francisco venture capitalist similarly described widespread eye-rolling toward the company while acknowledging that insurance and fintech ultimately depend heavily on branding.

Corgi appears to be betting that an irreverent, Gen Z-oriented identity can attract customers who might otherwise ignore an insurance startup. So far, it has certainly generated attention. Whether that attention ultimately helps sell insurance is another question.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 16:40

First, Quit Pretending...

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Clusterfuck Nation,

"The Republican party has plenty of things wrong with it, but the other side is so crazy they're celebrating our assassinations and sharia law."

- DC_Draino on X (Rogan O'Handley)

The leaves turn and the season quickens and, in a few weeks, comes an election more dreaded than all the slavering blood beasts of Halloween.

Do you suppose, as I do, that America is tired of being insane?

The pathetic part of this national nervous breakdown is how unnecessary it actually is.

Our national problems are not that difficult to understand and correct.

Here's an inventory of them:

Making a living 1.

So many blunders, starting with off-shoring our factories. So few well-paying working-class jobs. Some of the former working-class are now working three part-time gigs and still not making a living. Quite a few are just at home, on "disability," smoking drugs, flirting with suicide on fentanyl, eating too much crap snack food, getting tattoos. We've quit pretending that's all right.

Mr. Trump proposes to change that and is re-shoring industry. It takes time to build it, get it running. Meanwhile nobody can find a plumber, an electrician, because of the bad political decision to send everyone to college, including kids not really able to finish high school. Result: "elite overproduction" Translation: too many college graduates, with the situation made worse by bogus fields-of-study that were concocted to keep students busy without preparing them for the real world. Hence, they are "elite" only by certification, not superior knowledge or skills. Young people need to learn real skills. Mr. Trump issued EO 145278 (April 2025) "Preparing Americans for High-Paying Skilled Trade Jobs of the Future." Pell grants for short-term vocational training. Grants for apprenticeship positions.

Making a living 2.

Rewrite the immigration law. We don't need 1-million-plus newcomers each year. How about none for a while? Give American citizens priority for any and all jobs. Keep the border closed and deport all illegal immigrants. They have no "right" to be here. We don't need "the wretched refuse of your teeming shore" (Emma Lazarus, 1883). It's not 1883 anymore. Quit pretending we have to be "the beacon of the world." Let them make themselves free in their own lands.

Making a living 3.

America needs household servants and poor people need work. The current work-around for the well-off is to hire illegal aliens for this kind of work. It allows them to believe that putting poor Americans on the dole (out of "empathy") and allowing them to be useless is "progressive." (That's insane.) There's plenty to do, even for people of limited ability. Make menial labor okay again. These days, many people of means live in chaotic households where nothing is taken care of. It reflects their chaotic lives. (No wonder wealthy liberals are crazy.) Get poor people off welfare and off making babies they can't take care of. Give them a place to live in your 5,000 square-foot McMansion and a paycheck.

Nothing Works.

Because we automated too many transactions. Spent $XX-Billions and fifty years computerizing the US Telephone system to improve communication. Result: it's impossible to get a real human being on the phone. How is that an improvement? How is it better for Americans to get fucked around on "phone trees" for hours every week? Too many "help desks" located in foreign lands that employ people who barely speak English. Quit pretending that's okay. Start by requiring doctors' offices and hospitals to provide humans to the answer their phones.

The Horror That Is Medicine.

Get this: the situation is too dire to fix at-scale. The complexity and opportunities for racketeering are now too vast. Since failure is already well underway, and trust in doctors is broken, allow medicine to reorganize at the local clinic scale on a pay-for-service basis. Streamline medical education and the entry positions to practice. Government should not take over medicine, but can subsidize medical education. It would comprise a tiny percentage of the annual budget. Accept that there's a lot doctors will have to learn on-the-job. Forbid insurance companies from owning hospitals, clinics, and doctor practices. To restore trust, quit pretending that Covid-19 was anything but a nefarious exercise and prosecute the large number of pharma executives, hospital admins, doctors, bureaucrats, who enabled it to happen. Make personal responsibility for your body great again. Let RFKjr do his job.

Scam Education.

It's failing at-scale as medicine is. Kids are allowed to "graduate" from high school not knowing how to read or do basic arithmetic. How did that become okay? Answer: the teachers' unions are corrupt and degenerate, dedicated to Marxist social disruption and maximizing their pensions. Manipulating kids into fake sexual crises is a criminal enterprise. Centralizing K-12 schools into gigantic buildings was as much a mistake as off-shoring industry. School's primary mission should be to produce basically literate citizens in the language of the USA, which is English. If you can't speak and read English, you're unlikely to learn anything else and unlikely to thrive in this society.

Black / White race conflict.

Failing to teach black ghetto kids to speak English correctly stigmatizes them for life. Quit pretending you can compensate for that with grievance politics. It's only made race relations worse and driven whites and blacks into separate cultures that can barely communicate with each other. That is opposite of the direction America was going in two generations ago. How did it reverse? I will tell you: By the 1980s, liberal shame over the Civil Rights movement's failure to produce perfect social "equity" inspired the "solution" of "multiculturalism," which said, let's just have different standards of language, manners, and behavior for different ethnic groups (and everybody will get along). It was a shuck and jive. To be a coherent nation requires a common culture, the same standards for all citizens. That was America's strength when we were strong, not our "diversity."

The Law.

The Woke judiciary is punking America thanks largely to appointments made by Barack Obama and "Joe Biden." It's extremely difficult to get rid of political "activist" judges with lifetime appointments. Or to wait for the SCOTUS to reverse their multitudinous noxious rulings. But it's less difficult to put out-of-business the small cadre of lawfare ninjas who bring all the lawsuits that their chosen activist judges rule on - namely, Norm Eisen, Marc Elias and their many associates. They have engaged in manifold seditions from RussiaGate to the Mar-a-Lago raid and are liable for prosecution for the roles they played. Eisen and Elias run numerous NGOs that assist their shenanigans. The funding streams to them can be turned off, especially if any of the money comes from foreign entities, such as Arabella Advisors (and its pass-through orgs) or from foreign nationals like Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss and Shanghai-based Neville Roy Singham (currently under investigation by a New York federal grand jury). George Soros's many Open Society affiliated NGOs have been busy for years pumping money into state attorney general and many county district attorney elections. In a 5-4 ruling on the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment bars the government from limiting independent spending on political speech by corporations, unions, and other associations. A later D.C. Circuit decision, SpeechNow.org v. FEC, led to the creation of "Super PACs" (political action committees) that can spend unlimited sums on activism as long as they do not give money directly to candidates or coordinate with them. Years later, there is a growing consensus that these decisions led to tremendous mischief in politics and the administration of law. They can be revisited.

Fraud and Grift.

Artificial Intelligence (or "Super Intelligence," if you like) is already pretty good. Good enough to trace money flows from the US Treasury through states such as Minnesota, New York, Illinois, and California, and further down the line into local orgs like the now-infamous Minneapolis "Learing" Center and the Feeding Our Future scam. AI can go over their books super-efficiently, too. Veep JD Vance is probably already using AI on his Task Force to Eliminate Fraud. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent estimated aggregate fraud in annual government spending at around half a trillion dollars a year.

Free and Fair Elections.

It's astounding that there's any disagreement over the provisions in the SAVE ACT: only citizens can vote. . . ID required. . . One-day only election with results next day at the latest. . . Mail-in voting only for military, voters too ill to go to the polls, and persons out-of-the-country for a good reason. It's a sign of epic dysfunction that we go into the midterms having failed to move this bill through a Republican-controlled Senate.

This is just a casual survey of a few things in our national life that need repair.

You have to ask: who is behind all the pretending.

What stands in the way of getting any of this done? I think you know.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 16:20

Boeing Extends Losses After FAA Delays 737 Max 10 Approval Over Software Glitch

Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg has been on the job for two years and over trhe weekend, we got reports that he may be facing yet another fire to put out, as a software glitch affecting the 737 MAX could complicate the rollout of the 737 MAX 10.

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday afternoon that airlines were notified in August of a previously known glitch that could cause an automated navigation function to cut out during aborted landings.

The report said some airlines have requested deliveries with an older software version that avoids the glitch.

But, now, Boeing must develop a software patch to fix the problem. 

Bloomberg reports that certification of Boeing's long-delayed 737 Max 10 variant will be held up by the Federal Aviation Administration over a new software issue, just as the US planemaker was in the final stages of winning approval to begin deliveries to airlines.

The FAA is holding off on certification of the largest member of Boeing’s best-selling narrowbody family until it has determined whether or not a recently flagged software concern constitutes a safety of flight issue, Administrator Bryan Bedford told reporters on Monday at an event near Washington.

News of the FAA approval delay sent Boeing shares down 6.1% in late-afternoon trading, the largest intraday decline since Ocotber 20, 2025.

Ortberg told investors this month that the new jet could be approved "very soon" after FAA regulators cleared the shorter 737 MAX 7 earlier this summer. 

Orders for the 737 Max 10 exceed 1,500 aircraft, making it one of the more popular Max variants.

The new MAX 10 is designed to carry more passengers and lower operating costs per seat. It can seat up to 230 passengers, compared with 220 for the MAX 9 and 210 for the highest-capacity MAX 8.

FAA Administrator Bedford said the agency certified the smaller 737 Max 7 with the latest version of the software, which fixed a known issue on the vertical navigation system but unexpectedly introduced a new, but smaller, bug.

“The pilots remain in control of the airplane. They train for these scenarios,” he told reporters. “The issue that we’re looking at right now is the workload component under these more obscure situations and how we feel about that.”

“We haven’t concluded whether this is a safety of flight issue or not,” he added. “But we will be delaying the 10 until we’re satisfied we don’t have an issue here.”

Shares are down 14% this year and have traded sideways since the twin MAX jet crashes, one in 2018 and the other in 2019.

According to Bloomberg, Wall Street analysts tracked by Bloomberg are mostly bullish, with 27 "Buy", 5 "Holds" and zero sells. The 12-month price target of those analysts is $273.58.

Time to get to work, Ortberg. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 15:40

Meta Could Face Billions In Penalties After New Mexico Facebook Verdict

A New Mexico jury has found Facebook liable for tens of millions of violations of the state's consumer protection law, potentially exposing the social media platform to billions of dollars in fines.

A Santa Fe jury on Friday found Facebook committed over 43.8 million violations of New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act through false or misleading statements to consumers, according to the state Department of Justice.

"The verdict marks a significant victory for New Mexico consumers and holds one of the world's largest technology companies accountable for its conduct," the department said.

The verdict followed a roughly two-week trial stemming from a lawsuit New Mexico filed in 2021 over Facebook's handling of user data and statements it made to consumers.

As Bill Pan reports further for The Epoch Times, the case traces back to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which the now-defunct British political consulting firm obtained personal information from as many as 87 million Facebook users and used the data for political profiling and targeted advertising.

New Mexico alleged that Facebook misled users about how their personal information could be shared with third parties and the extent of users' control over their data.

The state also challenged statements Facebook made after the Cambridge Analytica disclosures. Facebook said it would investigate applications that had obtained large amounts of user information, audit suspicious developers, ban those that misused data, and notify affected users.

Overall, the jury found 26 of the 29 Facebook statements challenged by the state to be misleading. Those statements covered Facebook's data practices as well as how it handled hate speech, misinformation, and exceptions to its platform rules.

Meta, Facebook's parent company, disputed the verdict.

"We disagree with the verdict and will continue to defend ourselves against efforts to distort our record," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

"Meta's platforms are forums for free expression. We have a First Amendment right to manage those platforms in a way we believe best serves the interests of our community.

"This means prioritizing free speech, protecting our users' information and giving them control over their data."

The size of any penalty has not yet been determined.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said the state will seek the maximum penalty of $5,000 for each willful violation.

If imposed across all violations found by the jury, the theoretical maximum would exceed $219 billion. The final amount will be determined by the judge.

The state is also seeking court-ordered changes to Facebook's practices. Torrez said those could include requiring the company to correct previous statements and undergo an audit of how it manages user data.

The verdict is Meta's second major courtroom loss in New Mexico this year.

In a separate case involving the safety of young users, a jury in March imposed $375 million in civil penalties. A judge later ordered Meta to pay an additional $567 million to address youth mental health harms and imposed court-supervised changes to Facebook and Instagram, bringing the company's total financial exposure in that case to $942 million.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 15:00

"De-Globalization Endgame": Deutsche Bank Warns Historic Copper Squeeze Could Ignite 50% Rally

London copper prices are near record highs at the start of the week, reinforcing the supercycle commodity bull-cycle thesis former Goldman Sachs commodities chief Jeff Currie outlined in August: "get long and buckle up." The convergence of tight physical markets, currency debasement and policy intervention is creating conditions for a sustained repricing of scarce resources.

From refined petroleum products and rare earths to industrial metals and certain agricultural commodities, tightening physical markets underpin our "own the bottlenecks" theme.

Deutsche Bank's head of metals research, Daniel Ghali, added urgency to that theme on Monday morning, warning that available copper inventories globally have fallen to "unprecedented lows." As US and Chinese stockpiling squeezes supplies available elsewhere, Ghali sees copper rallying roughly 50% to $22,050 a ton by the second quarter of 2027.

Ghali estimates China's strategic reserves hold about 2.05 million tons, equivalent to 43% of global above-ground inventories. Meanwhile, US tariff-driven stockpiling demand could leave 1.3 million tons tied up at warehouses by year-end. Together, the bank estimates US and Chinese stockpiling will encumber 71% of global inventories.

"The combination of de-globalization and decades of underinvestment in supply has created vulnerabilities such that, by year-end, stockpiling in the USA and China will have encumbered 71% of global inventories," he warned.

At the current stockpiling pace, Ghali forecasts that freely available inventories would approach zero by the end of 2028, adding that this would be the exact breaking point the market must prevent through demand destruction, or higher prices. 

Ghali called this the "most acute copper scarcity on record" and a "de-globalization endgame." The industrial metal's story is quickly shifting from an AI data center boom to a liquidity crisis, as free-floating copper inventories decline to unprecedented levels.

More bad news:

The risk now is a bidding war for the remaining accessible metal that ends only when demand destruction arrives. Access to metal is critical as resource nationalism engulfs the world, with China restricting rare earths and other critical metals. These materials are essential to defense and the looming rearmament theme in the West.

More evidence that readers may want to "own the bottlenecks" as critical material supplies tighten. This theme should gain traction across Wall Street.

Last week, Stifel metals analysts pointed out one mind-boggling chart:

Time to own the bottlenecks.

* * *

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 14:25

How The Data Center Debate May Shape The Midterms

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times,

Outrage over proposed data centers surged across America, from the Birthplace of Rock 'n' Roll to Kansas corn country, amid a heated U.S. - China technology race, turning server farms into one of the defining issues of the midterm elections this fall.

In some primaries, candidates who backed the artificial intelligence (AI) boom were given the boot by voters who preferred politicians encouraging guardrails - or a hard stop - before big tech turned country pastures into concrete parks.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has said AI-related development is imperative to protect U.S. interests and ensure national security.

Here's how the data center debate could weigh on some national elections this fall.

Voter Sentiment

Americans have grown protective of remaining open space after seeing acreage - larger than the size of Florida - be converted from rural or agricultural land into urbanized landscape between 1982 and 2017, according to data released by NumbersUSA's USA Sprawl project.

A lot of the development was due to population growth, but now some fear data centers will scoop up additional land.

"It's not that Americans think that all of that development was bad, but they're taking the trade-offs very seriously," Jeremy Beck, the co-president of NumbersUSA, told The Epoch Times.

"You see that in the polling. They're concerned about water. They're concerned about resources."

Voters told The Epoch Times they're worried new tech developments would strain local water resources, increase electricity bills, boost governmental surveillance, or become another abandoned building if the AI bubble bursts.

"Data centers are politically interesting because they make the national AI and energy debate a local issue," Energy policy analyst Yagiz Sullu told The Epoch Times.

"Most voters may not track data center policy, but they do notice changes in electricity bills, water use, new infrastructure, tax incentives, and development in their neighborhoods."

Voters in a handful of states, including Wyoming, told The Epoch Times that their votes during recent primary elections were swayed by a candidate's stance on data centers.

In Wyoming, local opposition helped shape the state's gubernatorial and U.S. Senate primary election in mid-August in very different ways.

President Donald Trump's endorsement fell short in the Cowboy state's gubernatorial primary when his pro-data center pick, Megan Degenfelder, lost to Republican Eric Barlow.

Some voters told The Epoch Times during the primary election that a candidate's stance on data centers played a role in how they voted.

Degenfelder, who received 29.6 percent of the vote, supported the data center boom, suggesting the United States needed to win the AI technology race against China.

Barlow, who won 45 percent of the vote, had a more cautious approach to data centers, suggesting local leaders should control their development.

In Kansas, the physics teacher who was dragged out of an Emporia City Commission meeting and arrested because he clapped when people spoke in opposition to the data center told The Epoch Times he fears the AI bubble could pop and leave his city with more empty buildings.

"I don't want them to spend, you know, 5 to 10 years building a data center, only for the AI bubble to finally burst and crash," Lux Claridge said.

Claridge and his wife, Jessica Danford, told The Epoch Times they were "all in" on Democrat Cindy Holscher to be the next governor of Kansas due to her proposed moratorium on data centers.

Holscher is facing Republican Ty Masterson in the state's gubernatorial primary.

However, while serving in the state Senate, Holscher and Masterson both supported state legislation to expand data centers.

Holscher walked back her stance after announcing her run for governor, calling for a statewide moratorium on new data centers until Kansas has "common-sense guardrails" to protect taxpayers and natural resources.

Meanwhile, Masterson said all data centers must "cover their own power and infrastructure costs."

David McGarry, research director of the government watchdog group Taxpayers Protection Alliance, does not think that citizens will vote out their representatives who have not acted swiftly on AI and data center concerns ahead of the midterm elections.

"I doubt that Congress's lack of action will overtake the kitchen table issues as voters decide which candidates and which party are best positioned to improve everyday lives for Americans," McGarry told The Epoch Times.

McGarry predicts the midterm races will be decided on larger national issues, such as the economy.

Candidates' Response

Some candidates have underscored just how important the impact of data centers and AI was to their constituents.

During the U.S. Senate primary in Wyoming, voters told The Epoch Times they backed candidates who worked to protect their communities and appreciated when U.S. Rep. Harriet Hageman, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, demanded accountability from Meta after its Cheyenne Data Center contaminated the city's wastewater system.

Hageman, a Trump-backed Republican, is saddling up to face Democratic state Rep. James Byrd, who wants a "full stop" on data center development, in the general election for the U.S. Senate seat this fall.

Some pro-data center candidates kept their name on the ticket.

In Nevada's gubernatorial primary election, incumbent Joe Lombardo, who is pro-data centers, won in a landslide and will face Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford this fall.

Lombardo promised to protect people from rising costs as he vouched for data centers, suggesting they will bring jobs, investment, and economic growth to Nevada.

Ford wants to pause new tax breaks for the centers until they can prove they will provide their own clean energy, grid upgrades, and water.

The Cook Political report ranks the race as a toss-up.

In the Texas U.S. Senate race, Attorney General Ken Paxton beat incumbent John Cornyn in the GOP primary runoff election and then pitched a "Texas First Data Center Plan" on Aug. 24, which puts guardrails on proposed centers.

"My Texas First Data Center Plan will protect our grid, our communities, and our children while ensuring America beats Communist China in the AI race," Paxton wrote in an X post on Aug. 24.

His opponent, Democrat James Talarico, also proposed guardrails and stopping "data centers from being built in our communities if they cannot meet the most basic demands of those communities."

The Cook Political report moved the U.S. Senate race's ranking in Texas from Lean Republican to Toss Up on Aug. 20.

Meanwhile in Arizona, gubernatorial candidates Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a Republican, and incumbent Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, agreed on issuing a moratorium on tax incentives and subsidies for businesses wanting to bring a data center to Arizona.

In Tennessee, Trump-backed GOP state Sen. Brent Taylor will face Democratic state Rep. Justin Pearson for the remapped District 9, which stretches all the way from the Memphis area to just south of Nashville.

Pearson has strongly opposed Elon Musk's Colossus, a supercomputer that powers Grok.

"In Congress, one of my top priorities will be to establish data center regulations to protect our families," Pearson wrote on Sept. 3.

Taylor suggested he will make "data centers pay their own way instead of passing the costs on to everyone else."

Working With Trump

The election this fall can help decide if the president's agenda during his remaining years in the White House will be a success or a standstill, including with AI.

Trump dismissed concerns about data centers and AI in a Truth Social post on Sept. 14. The president urged that expansion needs to continue in order to win the world's AI race, and especially against China.

"There is a SICK conspiracy going on against AI and Data Centers, and the only one that is happy about it is China," Trump said.

"WHOEVER WINS AI, WINS! We are leading China, and all others, and will continue to do so. Conspiracy Theorists, Treasonists, Traitors, and Leakers, BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei urged artificial intelligence companies to slow the development of their most advanced models after Jacob Coxon, a former OpenAI researcher who resigned from Anthropic, suggested on Sept. 8 that people building AI think that it could kill us all "by the end of the decade."

The calls caught the attention of Congress, prompting many proposals such as the Ratepayer Protection Act, which landed in the Senate after it passed the House 417-3.

But any new bills by U.S. representatives won't move fast, as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent members home for an early recess that will last until after the November midterm elections.

The early recess received pushback from 107 members of Congress, who urged Johnson to keep the House in session so they can address how AI risks "mass cybersecurity breaches and development of biological or chemical weapons," according to a press release shared by U.S. Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.).

Johnson mostly sides with Trump about the AI issue, telling CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union" on Sept. 13 that he worried regulation ordered by Congress would make America lose the race to the Chinese communist regime.

Some Republicans have differed from Trump's position, such as Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) and Rep. John James (R-Mich.), who both have elections this fall.

The lawmakers warned that rapid data center growth will affect their constituents, who worry about power bills rising, water issues, and control.

"I say not one more data center until we PROTECT our people," James wrote in an X post on Sept. 14.

Husted, who was appointed to fill Vice President JD Vance's U.S. Senate seat in 2025, is running in a special election on Nov. 3 to keep his position. James is the GOP nominee for Michigan governor.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/28/2026 - 14:10