Americans Report Surging Spirituality: 43% Say Faith Has Grown Amid National Revival

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Fresh data shows that 43 percent of U.S. adults have grown more spiritual over their lives, compared to just 11 percent who say they’ve become less so. This shift highlights a broader rejection of the moral vacuum left by ‘progressive’ policies, with Americans of all ages leaning into deeper faith as society grapples with division and decay.

Large majorities cling to core beliefs: 86 percent affirm the existence of a soul, 83 percent believe in God or a universal spirit, 79 percent sense something spiritual beyond the natural world, and 70 percent expect an afterlife.

These numbers, drawn from a Pew Research Center survey, underscore a resilient spiritual foundation that defies the left’s attempts to dismantle traditional values.

You will find more infographics at Statista

“The long-term decline in Christian affiliation in the United States appears to be leveling off, at least for now,” according to the analysis, with Christian identification stabilizing around 63 percent after years of erosion.

The religiously unaffiliated—atheists, agnostics, and “nones”—have plateaued at about 28 percent, halting their expansion.

This stabilization mirrors a massive resurgence in Christianity, with recent data revealing Bible sales skyrocketing by 41.6 percent since 2022, reaching 14.2 million copies in 2023 and 13.7 million in the first ten months of 2024—far outpacing the stagnant overall book market.

Religion and spirituality app downloads exploded by 79.5 percent since 2019, with tools like YouVersion Bible and Hallow drawing users for Scripture, prayer, and meditation. Contemporary Christian music streams on Spotify jumped 50 percent in the same period, boosted by artists like Forrest Frank, Brandon Lake, and Elevation Worship.

This momentum is fueled by young people, especially Gen Z, showing heightened curiosity about Jesus and the Bible per the American Bible Society’s 2024 “State of the Bible” survey. Young men, in particular, are seeking the structure and community faith provides amid uncertainty.

The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk amplified this trend last year, sparking reports of overflowing churches and mass baptisms.

Religious leaders point to a spiritual awakening, where Americans turn to faith for answers amid political upheaval and social chaos.

This spiritual uptick also echoes President Trump’s vision to restore faith. Speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast last year, Trump declared, “We have to bring religion back.”

He elaborated: “From the earliest days of our republic, faith in God has been the ultimate source of strength that beats in the hearts of our nation.” Urging a stronger return, he added, “We have to bring [religion] back much stronger. It’s one of the biggest problems that we’ve had over the last fairly long period of time. We have to bring it back.”

Trump’s own renewed faith, post-assassination attempt, resonates deeply: “It changed something in me. I feel even stronger. I believed in God, but I feel much more strongly about it.” He credited divine intervention for his survival.

Emphasizing faith’s role in happiness, Trump stated, “I really believe you can’t be happy without religion, without that belief, I really believe that. I just don’t see how you can be.”

Trump’s message aligns with the data: younger adults report decreased religiousness over time (more so than increased), but older ones see growth—yet spirituality overall trends upward across ages.

As excessive woke ideology crumbles, Americans are reclaiming their spiritual heritage, turning to faith, the ultimate safeguard for liberty and moral clarity.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 21:00

Housing Market's Deep Freeze May Finally Begin To Thaw

Realtors, mortgage lenders, and other industry professionals: if three years of depressed transaction activity have you thinking about exiting, it may be worth holding that thought for now. A new Goldman note suggests that policy maneuvering by the Trump administration could partially unfreeze the housing market in the upcoming selling season, potentially reviving some activity.

The Trump administration is attempting to unfreeze a housing market paralyzed by elevated mortgage rates and high home prices, which have pushed affordability to generational lows.

Goldman analyst Arun Manohar penned a note on Wednesday asking clients: All hands on deck to fix US housing affordability?

Manohar highlighted several key housing policies under the Trump administration: a recently announced $200 billion MBS purchase program aimed at lowering mortgage rates, a proposed ban on institutional investors buying single-family homes, and additional measures designed to reduce the cost of homeownership.

Here's the note:

Affordability, particularly in the context of housing, has recently been a central focus for the Trump administration. In a national televised address delivered in December, the President announced forthcoming plans which he described as "the most aggressive housing reform plans in American history." According to media reports, President Trump is expected to introduce several initiatives aimed at enhancing housing affordability during his upcoming speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos. To date, two policies have been previewed, each of which has already had market moving impacts. In today’s Global Markets Daily, we discuss the impact of recently introduced policies and outline additional measures that may be under consideration.

GSE MBS purchase program has already pushed mortgage rates lower by 15bp

On January 8th, President Trump posted on social media that he has instructed his representatives to buy $200 billion of mortgage bonds. Subsequently, Director Pulte and Secretary Bessent have essentially confirmed that the buying is being carried out by the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) – Fannie and Freddie. Although very limited details about the program are available so far, the agency MBS market has quickly priced in the program with production coupon spreads tightening around 14-15bp so far. We believe the spread tightening so far is consistent with a program of this magnitude and hence believe that it is fully priced-in. Mortgage rates have also declined in tandem and are now close to the lowest levels since September 2022 (Exhibit 1). This should improve affordability and improve sentiment in the housing market ahead of the key spring homebuying season. We believe that the cumulative decline of around 80bp in mortgage rates since June 2025 could boost existing home sales by at least 5-7% in 2026 vs. 2025. Moreover, it is possible that the administration could push new Fed leadership to provide additional support to housing by reinvesting monthly run-offs from the Fed’s portfolio back into MBS. However, as we noted recently, if the $200 billion purchase program is a one-off, and there are no other MBS purchase programs from the GSEs/Fed/Treasury, then MBS spreads are likely to end the year wider vs. current levels. Agency MBS nominal spreads are already tighter vs. their longer-term average, and OASs are at levels last observed during the Fed’s QE purchase program (Exhibit 2). Therefore, the key risk for the housing market is that the decline in mortgage rates over the past two days reverses by the end of the year.

Proposed ban on institutional investors from purchasing single family homes

The other major housing policy announcement from last week was President Trump’s intention to ban institutional investors from buying single-family homes. While the goal of this policy is to reduce competition from institutions and increase supply/reduce prices for individuals, we believe the national impact will be quite small. In aggregate, industry estimates show that institutional investors own less than 0.5% of total housing stock and around 2-3% of rental housing stock (Exhibit 3). Estimates from Cotality show that institutions owning 100+ units account for about 5% of recent home purchase activity. The rental housing market is largely dominated by smaller investors, who own around 79% of the total rental units. The impact could be slightly larger in some of the sunbelt metros where institutional investors have a greater presence. As prices of existing homes have soared in recent years, large single-family rental (SFR) operators have shifted towards built-to-rent homes, where they have better control over unit economics, rather than buying homes from MLS. These homebuilding operations provide much-needed supply, and we believe will not be included in any potential institutional purchase ban. Built-to-rent home volumes have averaged approximately 15k per quarter over the past year. Finally, Secretary Bessent spoke about the institutional SFR ban during an interview at the Economic Club of Minnesota last week and his comments suggest that the institutional SFR ban would not apply retroactively. While we need to see the actual language when and if Congress approves the legislation, it appears the administration would be comfortable with institutional SFR operators retaining the properties they already own. This removes a major headwind to the housing market.

Related:

• Goldman Reveals Housing "Affordability Illusion" When Factoring Other Costs

Whether the Trump administration can solve the U.S. housing affordability crisis, which largely emerged during the Bidenomics era, remains an open question. Lower mortgage rates would clearly provide a tailwind as the selling season typically begins in late February or early March, when buyers reemerge after winter, weather conditions improve, and house-hunting activity accelerates. As for the 50-year mortgage rate idea, that Trump administration proposal appears to have been shelved for now.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 20:25

Face Reality: Two-Party Politics Has Failed!

Authored by John Halpin via The Liberal Patriot,

National Politics Is A Graveyard

It’s time to face reality: two-party politics has failed. Americans want more and better choices than the ones Republicans and Democrats currently provide. Whether the two-party system stands or gets radically transformed in the future remains an open question, however.

As reported by Gallup, a record-high percentage of American adults at the end of 2025 self-identified as political independents, 45 percent, including majorities of both millennials and Generation Z plus a plurality of Generation X. In comparison, less than three in ten Americans self-identified as either a Republican or a Democrat in 2025, respectively.

People who cling to a fading notion of partisanship often assert that political independence is a youthful phase and that people’s party affinities deepen with age. While this may have been true in the past, Gallup’s numbers challenge the notion going forward—political independence tops partisan identification among every age cohort born from 1965 on.

The recent increase in independent identification is partly attributable to younger generations of Americans (millennials and Generation X) continuing to identify as independents at relatively high rates as they have gotten older. In contrast, older generations of Americans have been less likely to identify as independents over time. Generation Z, like previous generations before them when they were young, identify disproportionately as political independents.

As political independence increases steadily, the desire for a major third party has also climbed. Sixty-two percent of American adults in 2025 said that a new party is needed compared to only three in ten adults who feel that the “Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job of representing the American people.” In contrast, 56 percent of U.S. adults felt the two parties adequately represented Americans in 2003.

The desire for a third party makes sense when you examine the sharp declines in public favorability towards both Republicans and Democrats. In the early 2000s, more than six in ten Americans held a favorable opinion of both parties at some point. By the end of 2025, only four in ten felt favorably about Republicans, and only 37 percent felt that way about Democrats.

If you look at the trajectories of the last three presidential terms, Trump-Biden-Trump, you can see how disdain for partisanship plays out. In each instance, the incumbent party’s president lost overall public support rapidly as independent supporters sided with the opposition against the incumbent, leading to frequent switches in party control of both the Congress and the presidency. Trump and Republicans came into office in 2017 with unified control of government only to lose the House in 2018 and both the presidency and Senate after the 2020 election. Biden came into office in 2021 with unified control of Congress and promptly lost the House in 2022, and then Democrats lost both the presidency and the Senate in 2024. Trump again started his second term with unified control of government yet looks on track to at least lose the House in 2026.

Who knows what will happen in 2028 at the end of the Trump era? Stability seems unlikely, however.

Neither party seems capable of building nor sustaining durable national majorities. Republican and Democratic leaders and their policy programs are widely disliked by both political opponents and many independents, as they each pursue purely partisan objectives when in power that further polarize and alienate the electorate. Since voters are essentially forced to choose between two failed parties every cycle, the system chugs along with Americans growing increasingly cynical about government and politics.

But if voters were offered an option beyond the two major parties, many Americans would gladly take it up.

Given the amount of money and anger floating around politics today, it’s genuinely puzzling why a viable third party has not started. Of course, with the stranglehold of Republicans and Democrats over election laws and regulations, third parties face enormous hurdles. Likewise, except for Libertarians, third parties tend to organize around mercurial figures like Ross Perot, RFK Jr., or Elon Musk rather than around a concrete set of ideas or a coalition of voting blocs united behind a common purpose pursued over time.

Perhaps the viability of third parties will change in the not-too-distant future. For example, one could imagine a mostly moderate, pro-business, anti-deficit, anti-culture war party emerging to appeal to disgruntled centrists. Perhaps an old-school conservative party might rise to attract ex-Republicans who dislike Trump’s transformations of the GOP, or perhaps a truly social-democratic, pro-labor party could bring together working-class ex-Democrats who disagree with the party’s cultural and economic turn. One could also imagine two fiery left- or right-populist parties cropping up separately (or combined) to challenge the two-party duopoly.

For any of these third parties to have a chance, however, America first needs a strong independent movement dedicated to changing state and federal laws that enshrine two-party politics. As Jesse Wegman and Lee Drutman argue, this means a switch from winner-take-all to proportional representation in national legislative elections, with the creation of multimember districts and the elimination of partisan gerrymandering (and U.S. Senate and presidential elections remaining constitutionally the same).

Proportional representation models vary by country, but basically all of them create a situation where political parties get legislative seats based on the percentage of the vote they receive in a given election, thus encouraging and rewarding multiparty competition. In the American House of Representatives under this scenario, you could hypothetically vote for the populist-right Patriot Party, the centrist Liberal Party, the enviro Greens, or the Christian conservative Family Party, and each would get seats if they meet certain thresholds of support. The House, in turn, would be required to form some coalition of parties to enact laws to send to their Senate counterparts and eventually the president, who would also have to work with more than his own party and the traditional opposition to get things done.

It’s not a perfect system and potentially creates its own problems with stability. But a politics based on proportional representation would certainly meet the American public where they are in terms of their own often complicated views and the limited party choices they get every election cycle.

Change of this nature would require sitting or future members of both parties voting to reform state and federal election laws to allow for proportional representation in the House. America does not need to become a parliamentary democracy to do this or go through elaborate constitutional amendments. Reformers just need some willpower and solid organization to overcome partisan strong-arming and resistance to change.

At some point, a dedicated group of independents and like-minded members of the two parties need to put their heads together, with serious philanthropic backing, to develop a real movement to create proportional representation in America—with policy designs, model legislation, federal and state lobbying efforts, and public communications and voter outreach.

This is a tall order, for sure, but not impossible given the rising public hatred of existing partisanship and politicians themselves seeing the writing on the wall about dysfunctional government. The U.S. Constitution does not mandate a two-party system. Legislative elections can be changed to support multiple parties if Americans and a new generation of leaders choose to do so. Any takers?

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 19:50

Catch-Up Contributions: Maximizing Your Savings If You're Over 50 In 2026 And Beyond

Authored by John Rampton Via The Epoch Times,

If you’re over 50 and feel behind on retirement savings, you’re not alone—and you’re not out of options. There is a powerful tool that the government provides to help you close the gap: catch-up contributions.

Ground Picture/Shutterstock

This extra contribution is designed to help older workers boost their retirement savings during their peak earning years. Its importance has never been greater than it is today because of rising inflation, higher living costs, and longer life expectancies. In addition, the SECURE 2.0 Act (SECURE refers to Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement) has added more opportunities by 2025, especially for those between the ages of 60 and 63.

Let’s take a look at what’s new, how much you can contribute, and what the updates mean for your retirement plan.

Why Catch-Up Contributions Matter

It is a struggle for many Americans to save enough for retirement. For people 55–64, the median retirement savings are $185,000, which is much lower than the $1.26 million “magic number.”

A catch-up contribution gives you a chance to make up for lost time. If you started saving late, took time off work, or simply couldn’t save as much as you hoped, these contributions let you go beyond 401(k) and 403(b) limits.

With the average life expectancy now in its 80s, a larger nest egg allows you to maintain your lifestyle, cover healthcare expenses, and reduce financial stress as you age.

Standard Catch-Up Contribution Rules

The Internal Revenue Service allows you to contribute more to your retirement accounts if you’re over 50.

• 401(k), 403(b), and similar plans. In 2025, you can contribute an additional $7,500.
• Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) (Traditional or Roth). An additional $1,000 can be added each year.

If you’re over 50, you could contribute up to $31,000 to your 401(k) and $8,000 to your IRA in 2025, assuming you have the income and plan flexibility.

In addition to boosting your savings, pre-tax contributions can also cut your taxable income or boost tax-free retirement income—if contributions are made to a Roth.

What’s New in 2025: Key Retirement Contribution Limits

Always check your plan details with your employer or plan administrator, as contribution limits and eligibility may vary.

Standard Workplace Plan Limits

• Employee deferral limit. The maximum amount for 2025 is $23,500.
• Standard catch-up (Age over 50). For those 50 or older, an additional $7,500 can be contributed, bringing the total to $31,000.

SECURE 2.0 ‘Super Catch-Up’

As a result of SECURE 2.0, retirees will experience a powerful—but temporary—boost.

• Who qualifies? Employees aged 60, 61, 62, or 63 in 2025.
• Limit. There is an enhanced catch-up of up to $11,250—the greater of $10,000 or 150 percent of the standard $7,500 limit.
• Total potential contribution. It’s possible to defer up to $34,750 in 2025, including $23,500 in standard deferral and $11,250 in super catch-up, if your plan allows it.
• Action step. Employers have the option of using this feature. Be sure to check with your HR department or plan administrator to confirm participation.

This “super catch-up” gives late-career savers a rare chance to supercharge their savings in the final years before retirement.

IRA Contribution Limits (Traditional & Roth)

• Standard IRA limit. The same as last year.
• Catch-up (Age over 50). Those 50 and older can contribute an additional $1,000, bringing the total contribution to $8,000.

Even if you’re contributing to a workplace plan, adding to an IRA can increase your investment options and tax savings.

Mandatory Roth Catch-Up for High Earners

Some older workers will soon be able to make catch-up contributions under a new rule called SECURE 2.0.

• Who is Affected. Participants aged 50 or older and who earned more than $145,000 in Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) wages from the employer in the previous calendar year.
• The Rule. Catch-up contributions must be made on an after-tax Roth basis. Pre-tax catch-up contributions will no longer be an option for this group.
• Who is Exempt. Individuals earning $145,000 or less, or those contributing only to IRAs/SIMPLE (savings incentive match plan for employees) IRAs.

Ultimately, starting in 2026, high earners aged over 50 will pay taxes on their catch-up contributions upfront (Roth), but can withdraw their money in retirement tax-free. If their plans offer it, all other eligible employees can continue to choose between pre-tax and Roth options.

How to Think About This Emotionally

Behavior isn’t driven by numbers alone—it’s driven by feelings. For you to make this real, here are a few mindset pivots:

• From “Am I too late?” to “I’m on the home stretch and I can sprint.” You may not have decades ahead of you, but you do have years—and that can translate into meaningful savings.
• From “I can’t make up for lost time” to “Let’s make the next 10–15 years count.” Rather than lamenting what you missed, think about what you can still gain. You can use this catch-up window to your advantage.
• From “Retirement is far away” to “Every dollar now has more impact.” The later you start, the greater the impact of every incremental dollar saved. In other words, boosting contributions is not optional—it’s strategic.
• From “Saving is painful” to “Saving is freedom.” The more you contribute, the fewer worries you’ll have later on. In the long run, it’s more about peace than immediate sacrifice.

How to Make Catch-Up Contributions Work for You

For those numbers to become results, here are some actionable steps:

Confirm Your Plan Allows for Catch-Ups

There is no guarantee that your plan will provide it just because you are over 50. If you are unsure of your plan’s details, check with HR or benefits. There must be a provision for catch-up contributions in the plan.

Decide Whether to Use Pre-Tax or Roth

If your retirement plan allows Roth contributions, consider your tax strategies: paying tax now versus paying tax later. Beginning in 2026, high earners may be required to follow Roth catch-up rules. In other words, this is a strategic moment.

Automate Your Contributions

Be sure to set your payroll deferral to capture the full limit, or as much as you can comfortably afford. As a result, decision fatigue and “out of sight, out of mind” barriers are removed.

Prioritize if Balancing Other Needs

Depending on how you balance savings, debt, and lifestyle costs, you may not reach the full catch-up limit at once. That’s okay. Decide what you can contribute now and then increase it incrementally.

Pair This With the Broader Retirement Plan

While catch-up contributions alone cannot guarantee retirement success, they can certainly enhance it. In addition to asset allocation, spending targets, withdrawal strategies, and other late-career considerations, make sure you consider other factors as well.

Work Until You’re Ready

Adding a working year increases savings, contributions, compound growth, and reduces the number of years of drawdown. With the right health and circumstances, staying in the workforce longer can be a perfect combination with catch-up strategies.

Watch-Outs and Potential Pitfalls

Catch-ups have caveats, as with anything:

• Plan limitations. Your employer should allow catch-ups and super catch-up contributions if you fall into the 60–63 bracket. But it is possible that some plans will not implement these new limits right away.
• Tax-treatment shifts. Beginning in 2026, many high earners will have to make catch-up contributions as Roth contributions (losing the upfront deduction). As a result, there is less immediate tax benefit through future tax-free growth.
• Cash-flow and lifestyle trade-offs. Increasing contributions means less take-home pay. If you over-stretch, you may feel deprived or be stressed about your finances. Balance is key.
• Not substituting for a full retirement plan. Contributions are powerful, but you also need to address spending habits, investment risk, and withdrawal strategies. In other words, don’t think of catch-ups as a magic wand.
• Over-reliance on employer plans. When you change jobs, your employer’s match, vesting, or plan rules may change. Be flexible and adapt your strategy as needed.

The Emotional Payoff: Why It’s Worth It

As you shift your mindset from “I’m behind” to “I’m catching up smartly,” several emotional changes occur:

• Less anxiety about “being too old to save.” It’s a matter of actively using your advantages.
• By maximizing every available lever, you’ll have more confidence in your retirement horizon.
• More control over your retirement narrative rather than resigning to “We’ll see what happens.”
• Being proactive now instead of waiting and worrying later gives you more peace of mind.

Yes, it feels good to know that you are going the extra mile. Compound growth, tax savings, and emotional resilience are all benefits of that “something extra.”

Final Thoughts

If you’re over 50 and working, don’t miss out on catch-up contributions. In 2025, you have the opportunity to boost your savings, close gaps, and reshape your retirement outlook. In certain plans, $31,000 is available (or up to $34,750 if you are 60-63) in total. Keep in mind that you still have time, you can still act, and you can still make meaningful progress.

As you move forward, make sure you check your plan’s specifics, choose pre-tax vs Roth, automate, balance lifestyle, and integrate into your larger retirement plan. By doing so, you won’t just increase your savings—you’ll change your perception of your financial future, too. In many instances, how you feel is crucial to a successful retirement.

So, let’s close the gap, own the next chapter, and make every contribution count.

By John Rampton

The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 18:40

Trump To Unveil Plan Allowing Homebuyers To Use 401(k) Funds For Down Payments

Authored by Emel Akan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump will unveil a plan next week that would allow Americans to withdraw funds from their 401(k) accounts to use for a home down payment.

A for-sale sign is posted in front of a home in Las Vegas, Nev., on Aug. 8, 2025. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett announced the plan during an interview with Fox Business on Jan. 16, adding that the details of the proposal are still being finalized.

He said Trump will announce the final plan in Davos next week.

“The Fed lifted interest rates so much that mortgage rates went through the roof,” Hassett said.

He pointed out that the average monthly payment for a typical family buying a home has nearly doubled, and the down payment required had risen from about $15,000 to around $32,000 during the Biden administration.

Hassett stated that significant progress is needed to address the housing affordability problem, and the latest plan is one of many policies introduced by the president to help achieve this goal.

“We’re still talking about the mechanics of it,” he said.

Hassett explained that homeowners could put 10 percent of their home’s equity into a 401(k) plan, and as the home’s value goes up, the 401(k) would grow too. This approach, he said, could provide more funds for retirement, solve liquidity constraints, and make it easier to buy a house earlier in life.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has introduced a range of proposals to help more Americans achieve homeownership, including bringing down mortgage rates and banning large institutional investors from buying additional residential homes.

In a Jan. 8 Truth Social post, Trump directed the purchase of $200 billion in mortgage bonds to help reduce interest rates.

“This will drive Mortgage Rates down, monthly payments down, and make the cost of owning a home more affordable,” Trump wrote.

On Jan. 7, Trump also announced that he’s taking steps to bar large investors from purchasing more single-family homes, and said he would urge Congress to codify it.

Institutional investors are defined as companies owning 1,000 or more properties. Blackstone is considered the largest private-equity owner of U.S. apartments, with more than 230,000 units, according to data from the Private Equity Stakeholder Project as of April 2025.

Affordability of homeownership has become a growing concern, especially for first-time buyers.

Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, housing costs rocketed, with median home prices rising 55 percent and rents surging more than 35 percent nationwide.

Borrowing costs also shot up in 2022 after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to combat inflation.

The American Dream is out of reach, especially for many young people. The typical age of first-time buyers climbed to 40 in 2025, the highest on record and up from 31 in 2014, according to a report by The Center for American Progress.

Andrew Moran and Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 17:30

NYC Socialists Prepare Mass Mobilization Of 4,000 Anti-ICE Army

New York City's Democratic Socialists of America are moving to train and mobilize more than 4,000 anti-ICE activists into "rapid response" units designed to interfere with federal deportation operations targeting criminal illegal aliens, according to a New York Post report.

DSA's effort to assemble a highly organized anti-ICE army of purple-haired leftists to impede federal deportation operations is particularly alarming because the planning phase was apparently being done at an upscale Midtown headquarters of the Chinese Communist Party-linked People's Forum, a venue littered with pro-Communism rhetoric.

"As we've seen in other cities, we still do anticipate a big wave of federal immigration enforcement," a DSA official who called herself Marina told the crowd of about 100 members last Thursday.

NYPost reported that the NYC chapter is preparing to train upwards of 2,000 DSA members and another 2,000 non-members, and to activate 50 additional trainers. If this story is accurate, it suggests that pressure campaigns against ICE agents on city streets, such as those seen in Minneapolis after the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE officer, are highly organized.  

"When we got the call for this ICE sighting, within minutes, we had 20 to 30 observers on foot and in vehicle, myself included. We showed up and we overwhelmed these ICE agents so much that they let this detainee go. They are scaring us, but we are scaring them right back. We have to keep going. It is working," one of these legal observers in Minneapolis admitted in a social media post.

ALERT: Woman reveals that a quick response group she’s in was able impede and obstruct an ICE operation that ended in the detainee being let loose:

“When we got the call for this ICE sighting, within minutes, we had 20 to 30 observers on foot and in vehicle, myself included.… pic.twitter.com/4rYXbWfitN

— E X X ➠A L E R T S (@ExxAlerts) January 18, 2026

Here's more from the NYPost report:

The group didn’t say what all of this will cost, but the member-funded organization repeatedly asked for money throughout the nearly two-hour long meeting – with one leader even going around the room with a red beanie soliciting cash donations in the socialist version of a collection plate.

Most concerning is that a dark-money NGO network tied to a CCP-linked communist billionaire, Neville Roy Singham, was allegedly at the center of this anti-ICE chaos and potentially seen as a command-and-control support node to organize nationwide protests.

This time around, as the Democratic Party's NGO network attempts to spark 'George Floyd 2.0', we've understood how this protest industrial complex operates, and even the Trump administration has caught on, with Trump lashing out at paid protesters, and even Scott Bessent at the Treasury talking about investigating the NGOs.

It has become clearer than ever that Democrats and their NGO networks are waging a color-revolution-style operation against the America First agenda, one that increasingly appears aimed at obstructing federal deportation efforts intended to restore national security after the Biden-Harris regime allowed an invasion.

Democrats oppose the deportation of criminal illegals because they view this population as a future voting bloc, part of a broader strategy to entrench a sinister one-party rule. In the process, national security has been sacrificed for political power.

Why Democrats and their DSA allies are coordinating with a CCP-linked communist billionaire's group to disrupt efforts to restore national security should be deeply alarming to the Trump administration. Yet amid all this chaos, one question remains: why have there been no meaningful reforms in the NGO universe?

"At this point, I have to believe that authorities and law enforcement know that the People's Forum is not just ground zero for organizing NYC protests, but for foreign influence nonprofits on a national level. For them to be collaborating with the DSA, fresh off their return from Cuba, is a huge escalation in the revolution against the West. The DSA has an estimated 11,000 members in NYC alone. I pray that we don't have another summer of protest-turned-riots in American cities, but these groups are training to do exactly that. You know the old saying: When someone tells you who they are, believe them," an NGO expert focused on the Singham network told ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/18/2026 - 16:55

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.