Zero Hedge

IRS Probing $100 Billion In Potential COVID-19 Loan Fraud

IRS Probing $100 Billion In Potential COVID-19 Loan Fraud

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Roughly $100 billion in loans given for COVID-19 programs have been identified as suspected fraud by tax authorities.

Earlier this year, the Small Business Administration (SBA) referred more than $200 billion in suspected COVID loan fraud to the IRS.

The tax agency then compared the information that the borrowers submitted to the SBA when applying for the loans with the information they declared to the IRS.

Analysis identified discrepancies associated with approximately $100 billion in loans, the SBA said in a Sept. 23 statement.

The IRS will determine whether additional taxes and penalties apply, including penalties for committing fraud, according to the SBA.

The suspected fraud pertains to the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and COVID Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) initiatives.

PPP was aimed at helping businesses keep their workforce during the pandemic, while EIDL provided loans and advances to help businesses recover from the economic impacts of the crisis.

In 2023, the SBA judged that 20 percent of the $1.2 trillion pandemic relief program could have been obtained by fraud.

SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler said:

"The IRS's identification of approximately $100 billion in suspected tax fraud sends a clear message: fraudsters who stole from SBA's COVID-relief programs will ... face accountability at the SBA.

"If they inflated payroll, fabricated employee counts, falsified business records, or otherwise lied to obtain taxpayer-funded loans, they will also face scrutiny from the IRS."

The federal government is estimated to lose $233 billion to $521 billion annually to fraud, the Government Accountability Office said in an April 2024 report.

Tackling COVID Fraud

The Trump administration has taken several steps to crack down on COVID-19 loan fraud.

In an April 24 statement, the SBA said it had referred 562,000 suspect loans to the Department of the Treasury for collection. These were PPP and COVID EIDL loans.

The SBA is legally obligated to refer delinquent debts to a Treasury bureau when they are deemed to be sufficiently past due.

However, under the prior administration, the SBA failed to refer the 562,000 loans to authorities for investigation and collection, the statement said.

On Sept. 14, task force head Vice President JD Vance announced that the administration would permanently suspend 870,000 people from receiving any more federal loans, as they are suspected of having defrauded $39 billion from COVID-19 small business programs.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 17:30

New Jersey Microsoft-Linked Data Center Hit With Record Fine Over Unpermitted Gas Generators

New Jersey Microsoft-Linked Data Center Hit With Record Fine Over Unpermitted Gas Generators

A New Jersey AI infrastructure project has been slapped with a $1.07 million environmental penalty after state officials determined that dozens of large natural-gas generators had been running without the necessary air permits, according to The Guardian. 

The fine against DataOne is the biggest New Jersey regulators have imposed on a data center. The generators were being used at the company’s Vineland complex, a large computing facility about 40 miles from Philadelphia that is expected to support Microsoft’s growing demand for AI capacity through its $17 billion arrangement with infrastructure provider Nebius.

The Guardian writes that the equipment apparently wasn’t present when environmental officials inspected the property in December. By July, however, regulators found the generators at the site. Independent reporting later used thermal-drone footage to show that 45 of the facility’s 62 generators appeared to be operating.

That raised a significant permitting issue because the state had not authorized the generators under its air-quality program. The units produce emissions that can contribute to harmful air pollution, particularly when large numbers are operated simultaneously.

DataOne has now been given 45 days to bring the equipment into compliance by applying for the appropriate permits. If it fails to do so, the company could be forced to stop using the generators. For now, New Jersey is permitting them to continue operating while that process plays out.

The decision has frustrated some environmental advocates, who argue that the financial penalty is relatively small compared with the scale of the project.

They have also questioned why operations were allowed to continue after regulators determined the required approvals were missing.

The controversy adds to earlier friction surrounding the Vineland development, including complaints from nearby residents about noise and disputes over construction and zoning.

DataOne says the generators were only intended as an interim source of electricity and disputes the state’s interpretation of the permitting requirements. Nevertheless, the company says it will submit the necessary applications while moving ahead with plans to replace the generators with quieter, lower-emission fuel cells.

The company has not indicated whether it will contest the $1.07 million penalty.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 16:55

10 Unexpected Consequences Of An Economic Crisis Nobody Is Talking About

10 Unexpected Consequences Of An Economic Crisis Nobody Is Talking About

Authored by John Walter via Substack,

I need to be honest with you before we begin. I don't have all the answers. Anyone who claims to understand exactly how economic systems collapse, or precisely when, is either lying or selling something. What I have done is spend years reading, observing, and talking to people who lived through crises that most of us only read about in history books.

My grandmother kept cash sewn into the lining of her coat because she remembered 1929. My grandfather refused to invest in the stock market his entire life because he watched his father's bakery fail during a banking panic in 1931. They taught me that stability is a story we tell ourselves, not a permanent condition. That lesson took decades to sink in.

What follows is based on verified data and historical patterns. I have tried to avoid the confident predictions that make for good television but bad analysis. Instead, I have focused on mechanisms - how things break, why they break, and what happens to ordinary people when the assumptions they built their lives upon suddenly shift.

Some of this will disturb you. It should. But my goal is not to frighten you into buying gold or moving to a bunker. My goal is to help you see the patterns that emerge when economic stress moves from the financial pages into daily life. These patterns repeat across centuries because human psychology and institutional behavior follow predictable paths when pressured.

I have made mistakes in my analysis before. I underestimated the resilience of certain systems and overestimated the fragility of others. I have learned that timing is nearly impossible to predict, but direction is often visible years in advance. What I offer here is not prophecy. It is observation, carefully sourced, about what happens when the machinery we depend on begins to grind rather than hum.

Read this with skepticism. Verify the data. Check my sources. But do not dismiss the underlying reality because you find it uncomfortable. My grandparents taught me that the people who survive crises are not necessarily the ones who saw them coming first. They are the ones who took the warning signs seriously enough to prepare while others continued assuming tomorrow would look like yesterday.

That preparation begins with understanding.

The most dangerous economic crises rarely arrive with the fanfare we expect. There are no burning buildings on the first day. No immediate shortages. No government announcements that the old order has ended.

Instead, the transformation begins through decisions that appear rational when viewed individually. A company reduces its workforce to protect quarterly earnings. A government delays infrastructure maintenance because budgets are constrained. A family postpones major purchases because the future feels uncertain. Each decision makes sense in isolation.

The danger emerges when millions of similar decisions begin happening simultaneously, creating feedback loops that institutions struggle to control and individuals struggle to recognize until they are already caught in the current.

Throughout history, economic systems have appeared strongest precisely when underlying weaknesses accumulated most dangerously. Periods of prosperity create institutional expansion, debt accumulation, and consumer confidence that gradually forgets stability is never guaranteed. The prosperity itself generates the conditions that later make adjustment more painful. Businesses optimize for efficiency until redundancy disappears. Governments become comfortable with increasing obligations. Households adapt to living standards that depend on economic conditions which cannot continue indefinitely.

What concerns me is not the dramatic collapse that captures headlines. It is the quiet erosion of capacity that precedes visible breakdown - the gradual subtraction of options that masquerades as continuity until the day arrives when systems can no longer absorb stress.

Consider these developments:

1. Financial markets have become increasingly disconnected from underlying economic productivity, with asset prices rising while real wages stagnate and infrastructure deteriorates.

2. Global supply chains, optimized for maximum efficiency and minimal inventory, lack the redundancy to absorb shocks that would have been manageable decades ago when businesses maintained larger reserves.

What follows examines ten consequences that receive insufficient attention in mainstream discussions of economic crisis. These are not speculative fantasies. They are patterns observed in historical crises, visible in current data, and likely to manifest in ways that reshape daily life for billions of people.

1. Universities Face Reckoning as the Degree-to-Debt Equation Collapses

Higher education has operated for decades on a simple promise: borrow money now, earn more later. This equation worked reasonably well when tuition costs remained proportionate to expected earnings. It has broken down as costs exploded while graduate earnings stagnated in real terms.

One statistic surprised me more than I expected: American student debt now exceeds $1.7 trillion, larger than credit card debt and auto loans combined. The average bachelor's degree recipient in 2023 graduated with approximately $37,000 in debt, though this figure masks enormous variation - medical and law students often carry $200,000 or more, while dropouts carry debt without degrees. Default rates have risen steadily, particularly at for-profit institutions where outcomes prove worst.

During an economic crisis, this pressure intensifies from both directions simultaneously. Families facing declining purchasing power become less willing or able to commit to expensive degrees. Employers facing their own financial challenges reconsider whether traditional qualifications provide sufficient value compared with practical experience, professional certifications, or technology-based training. Meanwhile, universities still carry costs accumulated during years of expansion - administrative staff, facilities, debt service, pension obligations - that cannot be reduced quickly.

Institutions begin showing stress through program consolidations, delayed investments, and fundamental questioning of models that seemed permanent. Small private colleges close at accelerating rates - over 100 since 2016, with dozens more on accreditation probation. Large public universities face state funding cuts precisely when demand for retraining increases. Graduate programs in humanities shrink while coding bootcamps expand, not because Shakespeare became less valuable, but because employment markets no longer subsidize the study of literature with guaranteed middle-class incomes.

Artificial intelligence accelerates this disruption. For centuries, universities held near-monopolies over access to advanced knowledge. Students traveled to campuses because expertise concentrated physically. That relationship is changing rapidly. AI systems, digital platforms, and specialized online training allow individuals to acquire valuable skills without following traditional academic pathways. A teenager in Lagos can now access lectures from MIT, programming courses from Google, and AI tools that would have required university laboratories a decade ago.

This does not mean universities disappear. Research institutions with laboratories, scientific contributions, and intellectual networks remain valuable. The disruption affects the assumption that every institution, every degree, and every traditional educational path carries equivalent economic value. A crisis forces society to confront a question avoided for decades: what happens when an institution built around the promise of future opportunity must operate in a world where that promise is no longer guaranteed?

Historical parallels exist. During the Great Depression, university enrollment initially dropped as families could not afford tuition. Enrollment then rose as unemployed workers sought retraining and young people delayed entering weak job markets. But the institutions that survived were those that adapted - offering night classes, developing vocational programs, cutting costs. Those that maintained business-as-usual approaches often failed.

The demographic cliff approaching American higher education makes this particularly urgent. The number of 18-year-olds peaks in 2025 then declines through 2030 due to low birth rates during the 2008 crisis. Universities have built infrastructure and staffing for growing populations that will not materialize. Competition for students intensifies just as family ability to pay decreases. Something has to give.

Over time, we see not the death of higher education but its transformation into something more differentiated - research universities for the elite, vocational training for the majority, and a vast middle ground of institutions struggling to justify costs against outcomes. The crisis accelerates a sorting that prosperity had delayed.

2. Agricultural Efficiency Reveals Hidden Fragility

Modern agriculture represents one of humanity's greatest achievements and one of its most dangerous vulnerabilities. We have built systems capable of feeding 8 billion people through technological sophistication that would astonish previous generations. We have also created dependencies so complex that few understand them and fewer could rebuild them if they faltered.

The cost structure tells the story. Consider the inputs required for high-yield farming. Nitrogen fertilizer, produced through the Haber-Bosch process, consumes 1-2 percent of global energy supply - primarily natural gas. Without continuous application, yields on modern farmland drop 40-60 percent. Phosphate reserves concentrate in Morocco, Western Sahara, China, and Russia - nations not always aligned with Western interests. Potassium comes largely from Belarus, Russia, and Canada. These are not commodities that can be easily substituted or quickly replaced.

A prolonged economic crisis places pressure on farmers operating under increasingly narrow margins. Every season requires significant investment before any income arrives. Fuel must be purchased, equipment maintained, seeds secured, loans repaid regardless of harvest outcomes. During stable periods, these challenges are absorbed. Credit remains available, supply chains function, producers plan years ahead.

The situation changes when multiple pressures arrive simultaneously. Higher borrowing costs increase debt service. Rising energy prices affect fuel, fertilizer, and processing. Trade disruptions block export markets or input supplies. Declining consumer purchasing power reduces demand for premium products. Farmers face impossible choices: reduce fertilizer use and accept lower yields, or maintain inputs and risk bankruptcy if prices drop.

The delayed nature of agricultural decisions makes this particularly dangerous. Choices made today reveal consequences months or years later. A farmer who reduces fertilizer in spring faces lower yields in fall. A nation that fails to maintain irrigation infrastructure faces drought vulnerability years later. By the time consumers notice significant changes in availability or prices, underlying problems have developed for multiple seasons.

Historical food crises rarely stem from single causes. The 2007-2008 price spike resulted from drought in Australia, biofuel mandates in the United States, export bans in India and Vietnam, financial speculation, and energy price increases interacting unpredictably. Prices doubled in six months. Riots erupted in 30 countries. Governments fell in Haiti and Madagascar. The system appeared robust until it wasn't.

Modern agriculture faces additional pressures previous generations did not. Soil degradation affects 40 percent of global farmland according to FAO estimates. Aquifers deplete - India's Punjab, America's Ogallala, China's North China Plain. Climate change shifts growing zones and increases extreme weather. Four companies control 60 percent of global seed sales. Three companies control 70 percent of phosphate fertilizer. Five trading houses handle 90 percent of grain exports. Concentration creates efficiency and fragility simultaneously.

When Ukraine's grain exports faced blockade in 2022 - 9 percent of global wheat, 13 percent of barley, 15 percent of maize - prices spiked immediately. Alternative suppliers could not quickly scale production. Importing nations imposed export bans. The fragility of just-in-time systems, optimized for efficiency rather than resilience, became visible.

A deeper crisis would test these systems more severely. If multiple breadbaskets face simultaneous stress - drought in North America, floods in Europe, heat in India, export restrictions in Russia - the global food system lacks reserves to absorb shocks. Strategic grain reserves have declined globally as just-in-time logistics replaced storage. The buffer is gone.

The political implications extend beyond economics. Food insecurity has triggered revolutions throughout history. The French Revolution followed wheat shortages. The Arab Spring followed price spikes in 2011. When people cannot feed their families, political stability becomes impossible regardless of other factors. Governments understand this. China's obsession with food security, India's export bans, Saudi Arabia's purchases of foreign farmland - all reflect recognition that agricultural dependence creates strategic vulnerability.

In practice, we see not necessarily famine in wealthy nations, though that remains possible. More likely is persistent food price inflation that consumes household budgets, forces dietary changes, and creates political pressure for interventionist policies that further disrupt markets.

3. Social Cohesion Dissolves as Economic Confidence Evaporates

Economic crises damage more than balance sheets. They erode the psychological foundations of social order - the shared assumptions that allow strangers to cooperate, institutions to function, and political disagreement to remain bounded.

How do individuals respond to prolonged uncertainty? Temporary recessions can be endured because people assume recovery approaches. They continue making plans, accepting short-term sacrifice for long-term gain. The psychology changes when uncertainty becomes permanent - when an entire generation enters adulthood during stagnation, when parents watch children face worse prospects than they enjoyed, when the future promised by education and effort fails to materialize year after year.

Millions of individual decisions aggregate into broader social changes. Families delay major purchases. Businesses postpone expansion. Workers accept precarious employment rather than hold out for stability. Young professionals view traditional pathways to success with skepticism. Over time, these adaptations create a society operating on different assumptions than the one that preceded the crisis.

The fictional scenario of social dissolution is not necessarily dramatic. It does not require civil war or revolution, though those remain possible. More commonly, it manifests as gradual withdrawal from collective institutions and increased reliance on personal networks. Trust in government, media, science, and expertise declines. People seek information that confirms existing beliefs rather than challenges them. Conspiracy theories flourish because they offer explanations when official narratives fail to match lived experience.

History suggests examples. Weimar Germany's hyperinflation did not directly cause Nazism, but it destroyed the middle-class savings that had supported democratic institutions. The psychological cost of watching lifetime accumulation evaporate created receptivity to radical alternatives. Argentina's repeated crises transformed a wealthy nation into one where institutional trust disappeared and personal networks became the only reliable form of security.

The danger emerges when economic hardship transforms political disagreement into permanent distrust. Healthy societies contain competing ideas. The risk is that crisis makes those disagreements existential - each side convinced the other threatens survival itself. Social media accelerates this by creating echo chambers where opposing views become not merely wrong but evil.

Institutional legitimacy becomes a scarce resource. Governments struggle to communicate effectively when populations no longer believe official statements. Traditional media faces skepticism that alternative narratives exploit. Experts find themselves competing with influencers who offer simpler explanations and more emotionally satisfying villains.

This is not irrational. If institutions failed to predict the crisis, failed to prevent it, and appear unable to resolve it, why should citizens continue trusting them? The loss of confidence becomes self-fulfilling - institutions that lack public support cannot implement solutions that require sacrifice, so problems worsen, so confidence falls further.

What replaces institutional trust varies. Sometimes local organizations gain importance - churches, neighborhood associations, mutual aid networks. Sometimes ethnic or tribal identities strengthen as broader national identity weakens. Sometimes criminal organizations provide services that legitimate institutions cannot, buying loyalty through protection and employment. The specific form matters less than the underlying shift from formal to informal structures of authority.

The emotional cost falls heaviest on those who remember stability. Young people who never experienced prosperity adapt more easily; they have no reference point for loss. Older workers who built careers during growth face despair as skills become obsolete and savings dwindle. The generation gap widens not just economically but culturally, as different experiences create incompatible worldviews.

Mental health deteriorates under sustained stress. Substance abuse increases. Family violence rises. These are not separate issues from economic policy - they are direct consequences of insecurity that create additional costs for healthcare, criminal justice, and social services precisely when those systems face budget pressures.

The social fabric does not tear all at once. It frays gradually, in small ways that accumulate until suddenly the center cannot hold. By then, the habits of cooperation have atrophied and rebuilding becomes vastly more difficult than maintaining would have been.

4. Healthcare Systems Strain Under Compound Pressures

Modern healthcare is simultaneously one of civilization's greatest achievements and one of its most fragile systems. Hospitals appear permanent, their existence so essential that questioning their reliability seems absurd. Yet they operate within the same financial constraints as every other institution, and those constraints tighten dangerously during economic crisis.

I kept coming back to one uncomfortable question: how does a system already consuming $4.3 trillion annually - over $12,900 per person, nearly double the OECD average - face crisis when budgets contract? The answer is that American healthcare is optimized for revenue generation rather than health outcomes, creating perverse incentives that resist reform.

During crisis, pressure arrives from multiple directions simultaneously. Rising operational costs affect everything - energy for facilities, pharmaceutical supplies, equipment maintenance, staffing. Shortages of medical personnel intensify as burnout drives experienced workers from the profession. Aging populations increase demand precisely when resources contract. Financial difficulties affect both public programs facing budget cuts and private providers facing declining insured populations.

The first consequences are subtle. Hospitals delay modernization projects. Maintenance schedules slip. Smaller facilities close or merge. Medical professionals experience increasing workloads as institutions attempt to operate with limited resources. None of these developments creates immediate catastrophe, but together they reduce flexibility - the margin that healthcare systems need during periods of extraordinary demand.

A severe economic crisis changes the equation because it affects both supply and demand simultaneously. Institutions have fewer resources for expansion, staffing, and technology. Meanwhile, economic hardship contributes to declining public health as people delay medical appointments, reduce preventive care, or experience stress-related conditions. Unemployment often means loss of insurance coverage in American-style systems, creating a population that needs care but cannot afford it.

The pandemic provided a preview. COVID-19 killed an estimated 20 million people globally despite modern medicine. It revealed supply chain vulnerabilities - personal protective equipment, ventilators, basic pharmaceuticals - that had accumulated during years of just-in-time optimization. Hospitals faced impossible triage decisions. Elective procedures were delayed, creating backlogs that persist years later. Healthcare workers experienced trauma that drove many from the profession.

A prolonged economic crisis would compound these pressures without the temporary emergency mobilization that pandemics trigger. Instead of unity and sacrifice, institutional responses would face political resistance and budget constraints. Hard choices about rationing care, limiting services, or denying expensive treatments would become routine rather than exceptional.

The technological dimension adds complexity. AI and automation promise efficiency gains - diagnostic algorithms, robotic surgery, predictive analytics. They also require investment that cash-strapped systems cannot afford. They create new vulnerabilities when software fails or networks are compromised. They potentially reduce employment for medical professionals at a time when human connection becomes more valuable precisely because it is scarce.

Mental health demands special attention. Economic crises increase depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and suicide. These conditions require treatment that strained systems struggle to provide. The combination of increased need and decreased capacity creates human suffering that statistics capture poorly but society feels acutely.

Historical precedents suggest healthcare systems adapt slowly to crisis. The Soviet Union maintained universal healthcare formally while actual provision deteriorated dramatically during the 1990s. Venezuela's health system collapsed alongside its economy, with preventable diseases returning and infant mortality rising. These are extreme cases, but they demonstrate that healthcare is not immune to institutional failure.

Over time, we see likely tiered care - excellent service for those with resources, declining access for the middle class, and crisis conditions for the poor. This violates ethical principles that healthcare systems claim to uphold, but economic constraints force uncomfortable choices. Rationing by price replaces rationing by need. The social contract frays.

The long-term consequences extend beyond immediate health outcomes. Populations in poor health are less productive, creating feedback loops that worsen economic conditions. Children who miss developmental milestones due to inadequate care face lifetime disadvantages. The costs of short-term savings become long-term burdens that compound across generations.

5. Mobility Becomes a Luxury as Transportation Networks Decay

For generations, mobility has defined modernity itself. The ability to travel across cities, countries, and continents became a birthright of developed world citizenship. Cheap fuel, global aviation, extensive road networks, and international shipping transformed how people worked, migrated, vacationed, and imagined their possibilities.

This mobility depended on conditions that are not permanent: abundant energy, stable trade relationships, public investment in infrastructure, and consumer purchasing power sufficient to justify travel costs. When these conditions shift, mobility contracts in ways that reshape daily life and economic geography.

The transformation does not begin with closed borders or empty airports. It begins with rising costs and declining reliability. Fuel prices increase as extraction becomes more difficult and geopolitical instability disrupts supply chains. Transportation companies reduce operations as margins compress. Insurance becomes more expensive as climate risks intensify. Infrastructure maintenance is delayed because governments face competing priorities.

The first people affected are not the wealthy. They can afford private aviation and premium services. The impact falls on ordinary workers, families, and small businesses that depend on affordable transportation. A delivery company struggling with diesel prices raises prices or reduces service areas. A rural community with reduced bus service becomes more isolated. A worker who accepted employment far from home faces impossible commuting costs. A family postpones the vacation that would have supported jobs in a tourist destination.

Economic activity depends heavily on movement. Goods must be transported, employees must reach workplaces, tourists must spend money, businesses must maintain supplier relationships. When mobility becomes expensive or unreliable, economic activity slows in ways that statistics capture only partially. The qualitative change - loss of opportunity, narrowing of horizons, contraction of possibility - is felt but hard to measure.

The psychological shift is equally significant. Globalization was not merely an economic system; it was a cultural expectation. People built identities around cosmopolitanism, international experience, global networks. They assumed distance mattered less than it had for any previous generation. A prolonged crisis challenges that assumption.

Travel decisions that once involved only cost and convenience begin involving concerns about uncertainty, disruption, and reliability. Businesses reduce unnecessary travel, discovering that video conferencing can substitute for many purposes. Families postpone vacations, discovering that local recreation can substitute for distant destinations. Communities become more focused on local resources and relationships.

This is not necessarily negative. Some argue societies became excessively dependent on global networks and ignored local resilience. The reduction in aviation emissions addresses climate concerns. The rediscovery of local community addresses isolation. But the transition is painful for those whose livelihoods and identities depended on mobility.

Geographic mobility - migration for opportunity - also contracts. Young people who might have moved to distant cities for employment find those cities no more promising than home. International migration faces political resistance as destination countries face their own economic pressures. The result is increased geographic stratification, with some regions experiencing decline while others maintain prosperity, and reduced social mobility as birth location increasingly determines life outcomes.

The 1970s oil shocks provide historical precedent. Prices quadrupled. Economies entered recession. Inflation soared. Car-free Sundays in Europe. Gas lines in America. The crisis eventually passed, but it transformed energy policy, automotive design, and geopolitical strategy. Current challenges involve more complex energy systems and more constrained alternatives.

The infrastructure dimension deserves attention. American roads, bridges, and transit systems face maintenance backlogs measured in trillions of dollars. Airports designed for growth face congestion and delay. The assumption that infrastructure automatically expands to meet demand proves false when budgets constrain and priorities shift. What exists is maintained poorly; what is needed is not built.

Over time, we see a more geographically rooted society, for better and worse. Local economies strengthen as global connections weaken. Community ties deepen as cosmopolitan networks fray. Opportunities narrow but belonging intensifies. The world becomes larger again, distance mattering more than it had in an era of cheap jet fuel and container shipping.

6. Technology Accelerates Disruption While Promising Solutions

Economic crises rarely affect only financial systems. They become catalysts for broader transformations because they force reconsideration of methods that prosperity made unquestionable. Technology moves from innovation to necessity when resources become scarce and survival demands efficiency.

Artificial intelligence, automation, digital platforms, and data analytics promise solutions to problems that crises intensify. AI improves medical diagnosis, optimizes supply chains, increases manufacturing productivity, and allows individuals to access services remotely. Automation reduces labor costs when labor becomes expensive. Digital platforms create new economic opportunities when traditional employment contracts.

The same technologies raise difficult questions about employment, inequality, and power. When technological systems become capable of performing tasks that previously required large workforces, societies must redefine the role of human labor. The issue is not simply whether machines replace people - historically, technology has created more employment than it destroyed - but whether institutions can adapt quickly enough to ensure that productivity gains benefit broad populations rather than concentrating among technology owners.

During crisis, this dynamic intensifies. Companies facing revenue decline and cost pressure adopt automation rapidly. Workers displaced by technology cannot easily retrain when education systems are themselves in crisis. The result is structural unemployment that persists even when economic conditions improve, creating a class of technologically displaced workers whose skills no longer match market demands.

The financial technology dimension is equally significant. Cryptocurrencies, decentralized finance, and digital payment systems offer alternatives when traditional banking proves unreliable or exclusive. They also create new vulnerabilities - fraud, collapse, regulatory arbitrage - that affect people least equipped to evaluate risks. The 2022 FTX implosion demonstrated how quickly digital financial systems can fail, destroying savings of ordinary investors who believed they were participating in the future of finance.

Surveillance capabilities expand during crisis as governments seek to monitor populations, enforce regulations, and maintain order. Digital payment systems create records of every transaction. Facial recognition tracks movement. Social media monitoring identifies dissent. These capabilities can improve governance and security. They can also enable authoritarian control that persists after the crisis that justified it.

Historical precedents suggest technological transformation accelerates during crisis. The Great Depression drove adoption of radio, cinema, and electrical appliances that changed domestic life. The 2008 crisis accelerated digital transformation - cloud computing, mobile platforms, gig economy work - that reshaped employment. Crises force adoption of efficiency measures that prosperity delays.

What differs today is the scale and speed of technological change, and the concentration of control. Previous technological revolutions distributed power more broadly - mechanization affected agriculture, electrification affected manufacturing, automobiles affected geography. Current technologies concentrate power in platforms and algorithms that few understand and fewer control. The benefits are real but unevenly distributed. The costs are borne by those who lack voice in how technologies are deployed.

People feel this most acutely in the pressure to constantly adapt. Populations already stressed by economic uncertainty face additional burden to learn new systems, new interfaces, new requirements. Digital literacy becomes essential for basic functioning - banking, healthcare, employment, education - yet many lack access or ability. The elderly, the poor, the rural face exclusion that compounds other disadvantages.

Over time, we see likely a bifurcated society: technologically adept populations enjoying new capabilities, and technologically excluded populations struggling with systems that no longer accommodate human interaction. The divide is not merely economic but existential - affecting identity, community, and meaning.

7. Housing Markets Transform from Wealth Engine to Burden

Housing has become the primary store of wealth for middle-class families in developed nations, and simultaneously the primary source of financial stress. This contradiction creates fragility that economic crises expose brutally.

The numbers tell a stark story. American home prices rose 47 percent between 2019 and 2023, while wages stagnated. The median home now costs over $400,000, requiring incomes that most families do not earn. Renting has become equally unaffordable - the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment exceeds $1,300 monthly, consuming over 30 percent of median income in most cities. Homelessness has increased in virtually every major American city.

This situation resulted from policy choices over decades: zoning restrictions that limit supply, tax advantages that subsidize ownership, financialization that treats housing as investment rather than shelter, and NIMBY politics that prioritize existing homeowner property values over accessibility for newcomers. The result is a system that generates wealth for those who bought decades ago while excluding younger generations and lower incomes.

Economic crisis transforms housing from asset to liability rapidly. Homeowners with mortgages face unemployment that makes payments impossible. Values drop, leaving underwater mortgages where debt exceeds worth. Foreclosures increase, destroying credit and displacing families. Renters face eviction when income disappears, creating homelessness that strains social services.

The 2008 crisis provided a preview. American home values dropped 30 percent nationally, more in some markets. Foreclosures exceeded 3 million annually at the peak. Construction employment collapsed. The psychological impact extended beyond economics - homeownership, the cornerstone of middle-class identity, proved fragile. Communities hollowed out as residents departed.

A deeper crisis would compound these effects with additional pressures. Rising interest rates make mortgages unaffordable even for employed buyers. Construction costs increase as materials and labor become scarce. Climate risks make some areas uninsurable, destroying property values regardless of location desirability. Remote work, normalized during COVID, allows geographic dispersion that reduces demand for expensive urban housing while increasing it elsewhere.

The generational dimension is stark. Baby boomers who bought homes when prices were low and mortgages deductible now own assets worth fortunes. Millennials and Gen Z face prices that require dual incomes, family support, or extreme sacrifice. Homeownership rates for young adults have declined to levels not seen since before World War II. The wealth transfer from young to old through housing markets creates resentment that political systems struggle to address.

International comparisons reveal alternatives. Germany maintains robust rental markets with tenant protections that make renting secure and desirable. Singapore builds public housing that maintains quality and accessibility. Vienna's social housing houses over 60 percent of residents in well-maintained, community-oriented developments. These models require political will that American systems lack, but they demonstrate that alternatives exist.

Over time, we see likely a housing market transformed by necessity. Remote work enables geographic arbitrage - workers moving to cheaper locations while maintaining employment. Tiny homes, accessory dwelling units, and co-living arrangements proliferate as conventional housing becomes inaccessible. Some cities experience decline as demand shifts, creating opportunities for reinvention but also blight and abandonment.

The social implications extend beyond economics. Housing instability creates stress that affects health, education, and family stability. Children who change schools frequently fall behind. Adults who commute long hours sacrifice time for relationships and community. Communities without stable populations cannot build social capital. The housing crisis is a social crisis masquerading as a market problem.

Historical precedents suggest housing transformation is slow but profound. The shift from rural to urban living in the 19th century, the suburbanization of the mid-20th century, the gentrification of recent decades - all took decades but fundamentally reshaped society. Current pressures may accelerate similar transformation, with technology and climate adding new dimensions to traditional economic forces.

8. Energy Systems Face Simultaneous Supply and Demand Pressures

Energy is the foundation of modern civilization. Not metaphorically - literally. Every aspect of contemporary life depends on abundant, affordable energy: food production, transportation, heating, cooling, manufacturing, communication, healthcare. When energy systems stress, everything stresses.

This is where the numbers stopped feeling abstract. Global energy consumption continues rising despite efficiency gains. We burn approximately 100 million barrels of oil daily, plus coal, natural gas, and growing but still modest renewable contributions. The energy return on energy invested (EROEI) for petroleum has fallen from 100:1 in early fields to roughly 15:1 today. We work harder for less net energy, a trend that cannot continue indefinitely.

Renewable energy expands rapidly but faces constraints. Solar and wind provide intermittent power requiring storage or backup generation. Battery production depends on lithium, cobalt, and nickel concentrated in specific locations - Chile, Australia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia. Processing these materials requires fossil fuel energy. Manufacturing solar panels consumes energy and creates waste. None of this means renewables cannot scale, but they scale within limits imposed by physics, geology, and existing infrastructure.

Germany's Energiewende demonstrates these limits. After investing hundreds of billions in renewable energy, Germany still relies on coal for grid stability. Electricity prices rank among Europe's highest. Emissions reductions have been modest. The transition proves more difficult than advocates assumed, requiring compromises that environmental principles resist.

Infrastructure aging compounds supply challenges. American transmission lines average 40 years of service. Transformers require 18-36 month lead times for replacement because domestic manufacturing capacity has declined. The grid experiences more outages than any other developed nation's. Meanwhile, demand grows from data centers - Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta now consume more electricity than many nations - air conditioning in warming climates, and vehicle electrification.

A prolonged economic crisis creates impossible choices. Investment in new capacity requires capital that strained budgets cannot provide. Maintenance of existing infrastructure is deferred, increasing failure risk. Transition to renewable sources accelerates in some regions while stalling in others as costs and reliability concerns dominate. Geopolitical instability disrupts fuel supplies precisely when alternatives are not yet scaled.

The 1970s oil shocks provide historical precedent. Prices quadrupled. Economies entered recession. Inflation soared. Car-free Sundays in Europe. Gas lines in America. The crisis eventually passed, but it transformed energy policy, automotive design, and geopolitical strategy. Current challenges involve more complex energy systems and more constrained alternatives.

Climate change adds urgency that economic crisis complicates. The transition away from fossil fuels is necessary for long-term survival but expensive in the short term. When budgets are constrained, long-term investments are deferred for immediate needs. The result is continued dependence on fossil fuels that worsen the climate conditions that make energy transition more urgent - a trap that resists easy escape.

Over time, we see likely an energy system more differentiated by region and wealth. Wealthy areas maintain reliable supply through premium pricing and advanced technology. Poor areas face rationing, outages, and high costs. Some regions accelerate renewable transition out of necessity; others double down on fossil fuels. The global energy market fragments as security concerns override efficiency optimization.

The social implications are profound. Energy poverty - defined as spending more than 10 percent of income on energy - affects millions in wealthy nations and billions globally. Cold homes in winter. Hot homes in summer. Limited cooking options. Restricted transportation. These conditions affect health, education, and economic opportunity. Energy is not a luxury; it is a prerequisite for modern life.

Historical energy transitions - wood to coal, coal to oil, oil to electricity - took decades and created social disruption. Current transition must happen faster while affecting more people. The friction is inevitable. The question is whether institutions can manage it without catastrophic failure.

9. Financial Complexity Creates Hidden Systemic Risks

Modern finance has become extraordinarily complex - so complex that few participants understand the systems they depend upon, and regulators struggle to monitor risks that emerge from interactions between instruments designed by different institutions for different purposes.

The scale is difficult to grasp. Global derivatives notional exposure exceeds $600 trillion, many times world GDP. These instruments - options, futures, swaps, structured products - serve legitimate purposes: hedging risk, price discovery, liquidity provision. They also create interdependencies that can propagate failure rapidly. The 2008 crisis demonstrated how problems in subprime mortgages - a relatively small market - could trigger global financial collapse through derivative exposures that amplified and transmitted risk.

Shadow banking - non-bank financial intermediaries - operates outside traditional regulatory visibility. Money market funds, private equity, hedge funds, special purpose vehicles handle credit that once flowed through regulated banks. This shadow system provides liquidity and investment that fuel economic activity. It also creates vulnerabilities that regulators understand imperfectly and that can freeze suddenly when confidence evaporates.

Algorithmic trading now accounts for 70 percent of equity market volume. Computers execute trades in milliseconds based on patterns human traders cannot perceive. This creates efficiency and liquidity under normal conditions. It also creates instability - flash crashes in 2010, 2015, and 2020 demonstrated how algorithms can amplify volatility and create liquidity evaporation precisely when needed most.

Cryptocurrency markets add new dimensions. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and thousands of other digital assets created parallel financial systems operating outside traditional regulation. Some see these as liberation from government control and inflation. Others see them as speculative bubbles vulnerable to fraud, manipulation, and collapse. The 2022 FTX implosion - $8 billion in customer funds disappearing overnight - demonstrated that cryptocurrency markets replicate traditional finance's vulnerabilities while adding new ones.

A prolonged economic crisis tests these systems in ways that normal conditions do not. Correlations that models assume remain stable suddenly spike. Liquidity that appears abundant evaporates. Counterparties that seemed reliable default. The complexity that created efficiency under growth becomes fragility under stress.

Historical financial crises follow patterns. Credit expands during growth, creating asset bubbles. Recognition of overvaluation triggers contraction. Leverage amplifies losses. Contagion spreads through interconnected institutions. Panic causes liquidity freezes that force fire sales, worsening declines. Government intervention eventually stabilizes systems but at enormous cost and with lasting political consequences.

What differs today is scale and speed. Global integration means problems propagate instantly. Computer trading means crashes happen in milliseconds rather than days. Derivative exposures mean small problems can become large through leverage. The system is robust until it isn't, and the transition can be sudden.

The political implications are significant. Financial crises destroy trust in institutions that appeared permanent. They create demands for regulation that powerful interests resist. They generate populist movements that blame elites, globalization, or minorities for problems that are systemic. The aftermath of 2008 - Occupy movements, Brexit, Trump, European populism - demonstrated how financial crisis becomes political crisis.

Wealth concentration exacerbates instability. The richest 1 percent own 45 percent of global wealth; the bottom 50 percent own less than 1 percent. This concentration creates demand deficiency - rich people save more - and political instability. Populist movements emerge on left and right, attacking elites, globalization, and institutions. The shared reality required for collective action fragments.

Over time, we see likely reregulation - attempts to constrain the complexity that created fragility. But regulatory capture means rules are written by those regulated. Innovation finds ways around constraints. The cycle of crisis, regulation, relaxation, and renewed crisis continues. Financial instability is not a bug of modern capitalism but a feature - creative destruction that allocates resources but destroys lives and communities in the process.

10. Institutional Legitimacy Erodes as Solutions Fail

The final consequence may prove most consequential because it affects everything else. When economic crises persist, institutions lose legitimacy. Governments, corporations, media, experts, international organizations - all face skepticism that becomes self-fulfilling as failed predictions and ineffective responses accumulate.

What do institutions require to function? They need resources, certainly - tax revenue, profits, investment. But they also need something less tangible: trust that they serve legitimate purposes, that leaders act in good faith, that following rules produces fair outcomes. This trust is earned slowly and lost quickly.

Economic crisis destroys trust in specific ways. Institutions that failed to predict crisis lose credibility as prognosticators. Institutions that failed to prevent crisis lose credibility as protectors. Institutions that fail to resolve crisis lose credibility as competent managers. Each failure compounds, creating narrative of institutional incapacity that becomes difficult to reverse.

The psychological mechanism is rational. If experts misunderstood the economy, why trust their advice on other matters? If governments cannot manage finances, why obey their regulations? If corporations destroy value while enriching executives, why participate in their systems? The loss of confidence is not irrational conspiracy thinking. It is reasonable response to demonstrated failure.

Historical examples are numerous. Weimar Germany's hyperinflation destroyed faith in democratic institutions that were then replaced by authoritarian alternatives. The Soviet Union's collapse revealed that communist planning could not deliver promised prosperity, discrediting the entire ideological framework. The 2008 crisis destroyed trust in financial regulation, central banking, and economic expertise that has not recovered.

What replaces institutional trust varies by context. Sometimes local organizations gain importance - churches, neighborhood associations, mutual aid networks. Sometimes ethnic or tribal identities strengthen as broader national identity weakens. Sometimes criminal organizations provide services that legitimate institutions cannot, buying loyalty through protection and employment. The specific form matters less than the underlying shift from formal to informal authority.

The information environment accelerates this erosion. Social media allows alternative narratives to spread rapidly, bypassing traditional gatekeepers. Conspiracy theories flourish because they offer explanations when official narratives fail to match lived experience. Filter bubbles create parallel realities where different populations cannot agree on basic facts, making collective action impossible.

The danger is not chaos immediately. It is the gradual replacement of legitimate authority by authority that serves narrower interests - corporate, ethnic, criminal, foreign. The state does not disappear; it becomes a shell manipulated by those with resources to capture its functions. Public goods become private goods. Rule of law becomes rule of power. Corruption becomes systemic rather than exceptional.

Democratic institutions face particular challenges during crisis. They require patience, compromise, and acceptance of procedural legitimacy even when outcomes disappoint. Economic stress makes these requirements harder to meet. Populations demand immediate solutions that democratic processes cannot deliver quickly. Authoritarian alternatives promise decisive action that democracy's deliberation prevents.

Over time, we see not necessarily dictatorship, though that remains possible. More commonly, it is democratic decay - formal institutions maintained but emptied of meaning, elections held but choices constrained, rights respected in theory but violated in practice. The appearance of democracy persists while substance erodes.

Reversing this erosion is extraordinarily difficult. Trust, once lost, cannot be commanded back. It must be earned through demonstrated competence and integrity over years. Institutions that have failed must reform genuinely, not cosmetically. Leaders must acknowledge mistakes rather than deflect blame. These requirements are rare during crisis when defensiveness dominates.

The long-term consequences extend for generations. Children raised during institutional failure learn skepticism that persists into adulthood. Social capital - the trust and cooperation that make collective action possible - depletes and rebuilds slowly. The habits of democracy atrophy. The skills of authoritarianism - obedience, hierarchy, suppression of dissent - develop.

What Remains

I have tried to avoid the confident predictions that make for dramatic reading but poor analysis. I do not know when these developments will manifest, or in what order, or with what severity. Timing is nearly impossible to predict because it depends on decisions not yet made, shocks not yet arrived, and interactions that cannot be modeled in advance.

What I do know, from history and from the data I have examined, is that complex systems often appear strongest precisely when they are most fragile. That prosperity creates the conditions for its own disruption. That institutions adapt slowly to changes that arrive rapidly. That human psychology is poorly suited to recognizing gradual threats that require collective response.

My grandparents survived the Great Depression not because they predicted it precisely but because they maintained habits of caution that prosperity made seem unnecessary. They saved, they diversified, they maintained skills, they valued community. These habits served them when crisis arrived.

What I offer here is not a roadmap to doom but a map of vulnerabilities. The systems we depend upon are more fragile than advertised. The assumptions we make about continuity are less reliable than we pretend. The future will likely bring challenges that current institutions are poorly prepared to meet.

How individuals and societies respond to these challenges will determine what emerges. History offers examples of resilience and collapse, adaptation and failure. The outcome is not predetermined. But it is shaped by recognition - by seeing patterns early enough to prepare, by taking warning signs seriously enough to act while others continue assuming tomorrow will resemble yesterday.

The countdown is not to a specific date but to a series of thresholds that will determine which futures remain possible. We are closer to some of those thresholds than comfortable acknowledgment allows.

Recognition comes first. Preparation is what gives that recognition value.

My grandmother's coat, with cash sewn into the lining, used to seem excessive. Now it feels like a reminder.

The structures still stand. The question is whether we will maintain them before they require rebuilding from foundations that may no longer exist.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 16:20

Kyrsten Sinema’s Former Bodyguard Arrested After Alleged Break-In

Kyrsten Sinema’s Former Bodyguard Arrested After Alleged Break-In

A bizarre dispute involving former Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and a man who once served as both her bodyguard and romantic partner has resulted in criminal charges, according to NBC.

Matthew Ammel, 39, was arrested in Arizona this month after allegedly entering Sinema’s home while she was traveling and causing an estimated $200,000 in damage.

Authorities say the Aug. 30 incident began with Ammel pressuring Sinema to upload a video to X. He allegedly warned that unless she posted it, he would begin destroying her artwork at 10-minute intervals.

When Sinema refused, Ammel allegedly went through the house removing roughly 22 paintings and tossing them into the swimming pool. Investigators say another painting was defaced with spray paint and placed near the home’s entrance. Expensive bottles of alcohol were also allegedly smashed, leaving broken glass around the property and in the pool.

NBC writes that police arrested Ammel on Sept. 17 after he left a mental health facility. He has since been charged with aggravated criminal damage and released pending an October court date.

The episode adds another chapter to an already complicated story involving Ammel and Sinema.

Ammel, a retired Army veteran, began working on Sinema’s security detail in 2022 and accompanied the senator on trips in the U.S. and abroad. He later received a national security fellowship in her Senate office while remaining involved with her security.

The two also had a romantic relationship while Ammel was married, something Sinema has acknowledged.

That relationship is now at the center of a separate lawsuit brought by Ammel’s former wife in North Carolina. The state is among the few that still recognizes “alienation of affection” claims, allowing someone to pursue damages against a third party accused of interfering with a marriage.

Sinema sought to have the case thrown out on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that her connections to North Carolina were insufficient. A federal judge disagreed, pointing in part to messages she sent Ammel while he was in the state and allowing the case to proceed.

Ammel’s ex-wife claims their marriage had been loving and stable before Sinema became involved with him and is seeking monetary damages from the former senator.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 15:45

Legal Advocacy Group Accuses Virginia Schools Of Falsifying Ideology Of 911 Terrorists

Legal Advocacy Group Accuses Virginia Schools Of Falsifying Ideology Of 911 Terrorists

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Conservative legal advocacy group America First Legal (AFL) has announced it is investigating the Fairfax County Public Schools school district in Virginia, accusing Fairfax of issuing a teacher's guide that seeks to falsify the ideological underpinnings of the 9/11 attacks.

The guide omits key historical details, while instructing teachers to obfuscate 9/11 facts, AFL said in a Sept. 23 statement.

The guide asks teachers not to associate the attacks with Islam or Muslims and instructs teachers that 9/11 commemoration must focus on lives lost and the people who sacrificed to help others rather than the attackers.

The district's guide was first published by Fox News in late August, with AFL's investigation initiated after the news coverage, the group said.

"Do not focus a commemorative learning experience about 9/11 on an examination of Islam," the guide states.

"Teachers who decide to take a deep dive into world religions as part of their 9/11 lesson unintentionally send the harmful message that Islam, or all Muslims, are responsible for these terrorist attacks."

The guide asks teachers to "intentionally include" Muslim Americans among the victims, helpers, and heroes when teaching about the event, according to the guide.

In addition, teachers are recommended to "intentionally disrupt" any implicit associations between "Muslim," "outsider," and "terrorist" in the national discourse.

When discussing the incident, teachers must make it clear that the Sept. 11 attacks were carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist group, whose actions "should not be attributed" to Islam, according to the guide.

The guide raised concerns that teaching about 9/11 without careful consideration can lead to stigmatizing Islam and encouraging acts of racism against Muslim and Middle Eastern students and those perceived to belong to these groups.

On Sept. 15, AFL sent a letter to Fairfax County Public Schools, seeking records under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

Some of the records requested in the letter include the complete and current version of the guide document; information about authors, reviewers, editors, and approving officials; and all communications concerning the guide.

"Fairfax County Public Schools is attempting to sanitize history and erase the radical Islamic terrorism that struck our nation on September 11, 2001," Will Scolinos, counsel at America First Legal, said in the statement.

"Those unforgettable attacks are a national tragedy, with effects far exceeding 'Islamophobia.' Parents and the public must have full transparency regarding who is responsible for stripping truth from our children's classrooms. AFL will continue to investigate and hold public school officials accountable," Scolinos said.

School's Response

In a statement given to Fox News, Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) said the institution has a "deeply personal connection" to the 9/11 incident because of its "proximity to the Pentagon and the many military-connected families we serve."

"On the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attacks, we remember the nearly 3,000 people who were killed, including 184 at the Pentagon. We remember the victims, their families, the survivors, and everyone whose lives were forever changed. We honor the first responders whose courage and sacrifice continue to inspire us," the school district said.

"FCPS remains committed to creating an inclusive environment in our schools where all students feel welcome and respected as we strive to provide a world-class education and workplace."

In a superintendent's message published by the school district on Sept. 11, it said that FCPS teaches events that occured on 9/11 based on the Virginia Standards of Learning for U.S. history.

In middle school U.S. History, the school district teaches how the attacks affected domestic policy, global perspectives on the war against terror and the heroic sacrifice of the passengers of Flight 93. Meanwhile, in high school Virginia and U.S. History, students are required to analyze the attacks within the broader context of terrorism and democracy.

The Epoch Times reached out to Fairfax County Public Schools for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 15:10

Larry Ellison Pledges $9 Billion More In Oracle Stock To Fund Warner Bros Deal As Price Tumbles, CDS Hits Record

Larry Ellison Pledges $9 Billion More In Oracle Stock To Fund Warner Bros Deal As Price Tumbles, CDS Hits Record

Two weeks after the Larry Ellison inexplicably pulled his plan to sell up to 50 million shares, worth about $7.5 billion news of which had sent the stock sliding the day prior, the Oracle CEO - the key figure behind Paramount Skydance’s deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery - has pledged 67 million more shares of Oracle as collateral for personal loans than he had at the same time last year, approximately 350 million shares.

The shares pledged, revealed in an Oracle Schedule 14A filing on Friday, amount to a 19% increase in the number of shares Ellison has pledged since 2025. The stock is worth about $9.2 billion at Oracle’s closing price of $137.10 on Friday.

As Bloomberg notes, Ellison has been helping his son David’s company, Paramount, acquire Warner Bros. in a transaction valued at $111 billion. The Ellisons have committed to $47 billion in equity funding for that deal, about $24 billion of which is coming from three Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds, and much of the rest now appears to be sourced from pledge ORCL shares. 

Paramount is also looking to raise debt financing.

Having negotiated a settlement earlier this week with 12 state attorneys general and the Writers Guild trade union who had sued to block the merger, Paramount is now just one step away from sealing its deal for Warner Bros.

While Oracle officers and directors are forbidden from pledging company shares as collateral for personal loans, there is one exception: Larry Ellison - who serves as the company’s executive chair and chief technology officer.

The total stock pledged now represents about 36% of Ellison’s total holdings of 1.16 billion shares; in dollar terms that amount to just over $57 billion in ORCL stock pledged. 

The regulatory filing also disclosed that Oracle’s co-chief executive officers will receive $870 million in combined stock option awards. The package of Clay Magouyrk was valued at $621.7 million, while Mike Sicilia’s was worth $248.7 million. The executives were named to the joint CEO role a year ago, taking the job from Oracle veteran Safra Catz. Ellison, who didn’t receive awards in the previous two fiscal years, got a package valued at $117.8 million.

The 82-year-old technology mogul announced plans earlier this month to sell as much as $7.5 billion in Oracle stock, but then quickly canceled those plans, which may have been the result of the stock price's precipitous drop.

Aside from the Warner Bros. deal, Oracle has been caught up in an escalating data center fiasco, having announced force mejeure on its largest data center in New Meixco, the 2.25GW Project Jupiter complex, which has advised the project developer it will be unable to meet some contractual obligations due to lack of power at the facility as a result of regulatory delays. 

The Force Majeure sent ORCL bond yields surging to a record high, despite a relatively muted reaction in the stock - which nonetheless trades near 52 week lows...

... and will likely trade even lower once it notices that ORCL CDS have also just hit a new record wide, as the company's default risk has never been higher

As such, one wonders at what stock prices does ORCL get a margin call and is forced to source liquidity, potentially leading to a collapse in the Warner Bros takeover (at a wildely inflated price) as suddenly it finds itself without the funds to do so. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 14:35

Rickards: The Real In AI Is Not 'Super-Intelligence', It's China

Rickards: The Real In AI Is Not 'Super-Intelligence', It's China

Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

It's past time to look beyond the AI hype. The stock valuations of the leading hyperscalers and frontier AI modeling companies are almost certainly in bubble territory. But the market will sort that out in time.

We all know the names of the AI stocks whether from the hardware, software or compute vectors - Apple, Microsoft, Meta, Google (Alphabet), Amazon, OpenAI, Anthropic, NVIDIA and a few others.

Some of these names have valuable core businesses independent of the AI bubble. Others are pure AI plays. All will be hurt to a greater or lesser extent when the AI bubble bursts.

Still, bubbles can get bigger before they pop and they can take far longer to pop than many market participants realize. It's not prudent to short these names but one should definitely lighten up on long positions. Moving portfolio allocations to cash and hard assets is a good way to weather the coming storm.

Valuations aside, these companies now pose serious risks to national security, critical infrastructure, the financial system and other institutions. These risks need to be considered on their own because they will affect all of us.

These dangers are not about stock bubbles. They're about social chaos.

Geopolitical Catalyst

Two threats in particular stand out.

  • The first is the use of AI models by the Chinese to attack the United States.

  • The second is rogue AI models that work autonomously to attack us on their own.

We've seen continuous headlines about the AI race going on between China and the U.S. The elements of the race include massive data centers, high-powered semiconductors and frontier AI models built by U.S. firms such as Anthropic, OpenAI and xAI and by Chinese firms Baidu, Tencent, DeepSeek and Moonshot AI. Other critical inputs in this race include massive amounts of electricity and water required to run the hardware.

The U.S.-China AI race is usually framed in existential terms. Whichever country gets to superintelligence first will control global AI and possibly the world. Even in less grandiose terms, there are critical outcomes in areas of national security, encryption, digital payments, weapons systems and curing disease that depend on the winner of the AI race.

Yet, the competition is far from fair. The U.S. relies on massive investment in fixed assets, superior technology and access to the fastest semiconductors.

China has some of these tools but they rely more on theft of intellectual property from the U.S., using output from U.S. AI apps as curated input on their own apps (to increase processing speeds) and smuggling advanced chips through third countries. China may not be leading the AI race but they are certainly keeping pace.

AI Recon

Now a new threat has emerged. China is using the most advanced AI models including Claude from Anthropic to process information scraped from a wide variety of open sources in the U.S. including military photographs, ship transponder signals, commercial satellite images and other information combined with Chinese satellite images to determine the exact locations and movements of U.S. naval vessels.

That AI-generated information is then passed to Iran, who use it to fire missiles at U.S. Navy vessels near the Strait of Hormuz and the Arabian Sea.

So far, no U.S. vessels have been hit but that may just be a matter of time. China is using U.S. AI technology to help attack the U.S. Navy at sea. Just days after this revelation, a Chinese spy satellite blew-up in space.

No one has taken responsibility for it. But it's not a stretch to infer that the U.S. used a space-based weapon to destroy the Chinese satellite that was used to help Iran attack the U.S. Navy.

The AI wars are becoming star wars in real time.

Regulatory Capture

As a separate threat, the media is flooded with stories about an AI Apocalypse in which AI apps from frontier developers like OpenAI and Anthropic achieve superintelligence, join forces and take over the world putting humans in the same position relative to the AI systems as apes are to humans. Other versions of this AI dystopia involve gangs of AI apps working together to shut down the power grid, loot banks and brokers and cause chaos in civilized society.

This wave of panicked propaganda began with an essay by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei. The Amodei essay was amplified by Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon who publicly resigned from Anthropic and issued a warning that AI could "kill all humans" within a decade. The Amodei and Coxon warnings were then taken up by the media, politicians and tech experts in what became a cascade of doom and gloom.

But let's put these warnings in perspective. Whenever you see the same talking points coming from multiple insiders at once, one should be suspicious that a psychological operation (or "psyop") is being conducted to sway public opinion. In this case, the message is that regulation is needed to protect the world against AI going rogue. This regulation would involve government rules, internal compliance departments, auditor inspections, testing and periodic safety certifications.

How convenient for Anthropic and OpenAI. The kind of regulation they envision is extremely expensive. The giant AI developers can afford it but their newer and smaller competitors cannot. Anthropic and OpenAI are planning $1 trillion plus IPOs later this regulatory moat around their franchises to keep out competition with help from the year. The scaremongering about rogue AI could be nothing more than a tactic to build a government-enforced oligopoly.

My own research indicates that superintelligence can never be achieved because it is impossible to program abductive logic (in contrast to inductive and deductive logic) which can be summarized as gut feel or common sense.

Still, AI is powerful and needs guardrails. But it is not as potentially dangerous as the scaremongers insist. Trump was smart to resist calls for more government regulation. The real enemy in the AI world is not superintelligence - it's China.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 14:00

Syria Opens Overland Fuel Transit Route To Iraq Amid Hormuz Closure

Syria Opens Overland Fuel Transit Route To Iraq Amid Hormuz Closure

Via The Cradle

Syria has begun trucking imported gasoline from its Baniyas Refinery into Iraq, adding a return leg to a route Baghdad has used to export its fuel since the US war on Iran led to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a senior Syrian oil official told Reuters on 25 September.

According to Tareq Shallash, who heads the Refining Directorate at the state-owned Syrian Petroleum Company (SPC), the first consignment – roughly 32,800 metric tons of gasoline – arrived aboard the Marshall Islands-flagged tanker Avanti and was pumped into storage at Baniyas before being loaded onto trucks this week.

Source: Reuters

Shallash said 77 tanker trucks have so far set off for the Iraqi border, with loading still in progress and more cargoes on the way.

He stressed that the fuel neither originates in Syria nor comes out of stocks earmarked for domestic consumption.

The shipments move under a transit contract between SPC and Qatar's UCC Holding, which Shallash identified as both the supplier and the firm managing transport.

Iraq's Oil Ministry confirmed the arrangement, with spokesperson Saleem al-Rikabi telling Reuters that “A contract was signed between SOMO and the Qatari company to supply Iraq with improved gasoline through the port of Baniyas by road tankers, and the supplies have in fact been delivered on a regular basis.”

Shallash said the deal is currently restricted to gasoline, though future agreements could open the route to crude, other petroleum products, and additional goods. 

Baghdad has already pledged to keep building overland alternatives through Syria even if Hormuz reopens, and Reuters reported in July that Iraqi fuel oil moved via Baniyas had reached the US for the first time. 

With Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz, Iraq - unable to ship its oil - has opened its borders to Syria. Thousands of fuel-laden tankers are being sent to the world market overland through Syria. Iraq has closed its airports to Iran's planes.

UCC Holding is also part of a consortium with Chevron and TI Capital studying the revival of a Kirkuk–Baniyas crude pipeline, after Iraq and Syria signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in Washington in July. 

Reuters reported in August that the project could take four years and cost at least $15 billion, because it would require entirely new infrastructure. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 11:40

The Commercial Real Estate Crash Is Moving From Paper Losses To Realized Losses

The Commercial Real Estate Crash Is Moving From Paper Losses To Realized Losses

The great commercial real estate waiting game may finally be running out of time, according to Bloomberg.

For years after Covid fundamentally changed how Americans use office space, lenders and property owners managed to postpone much of the financial damage. Loans were modified, maturities were pushed out and buildings were given more time to recover. The basic assumption was that eventually interest rates would come down, employees would spend more time downtown and refinancing markets would reopen.

Instead, many owners are reaching the end of the runway with rates still elevated and buildings worth dramatically less than the debt sitting against them.

Chicago’s Aon Center offers an almost absurd illustration. The 83-story skyscraper changed hands for $712 million in 2015 and was subsequently refinanced, with $536 million of debt eventually packaged into commercial mortgage-backed securities. Today, after losing important tenants, the building is worth nowhere near that amount. Its latest appraisal came in at just $195 million — a decline of roughly 73% from its 2015 purchase price.

Bloomberg writes that when the debt matured in July, the owner couldn’t repay it and sought another three years to sort things out. This time the lender wasn’t interested. The request was “unequivocally denied.”

Situations like this are beginning to pile up across the country. Office loans packaged into CMBS are now delinquent at a 12% rate, according to Trepp. That puts distress near an all-time high and, remarkably, beyond the levels seen in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Meanwhile, approximately $64 billion of office CMBS loans come due this year and next. Nearly $40 billion of that pile is already delinquent, in default or flagged as potentially troubled.

But this isn’t one uniform nationwide office collapse.

New York has been surprisingly resilient, with finance, law and technology companies still competing for desirable space. San Francisco, despite enormous problems left over from the pandemic, has received a new source of demand from the AI boom.

Other cities have considerably less working in their favor. Chicago’s downtown office vacancy rate is roughly 27%. Denver’s has reached an astonishing 39%. Los Angeles and several other downtown markets are also struggling, especially in areas dominated by older office stock.

There’s also increasingly a tale of two office markets within individual cities. Companies willing to spend money on office space generally want newer buildings, good locations and modern amenities. That leaves yesterday’s Class B towers fighting over a shrinking pool of tenants while their economics deteriorate.

And some of the repricing has been brutal.

Denver’s Republic Plaza has lost roughly 80% of its value compared with when Brookfield financed the property in 2012. Chicago’s Citadel Center recently changed hands for $137 million, approximately 76% below what the building sold for in 2006. The situation is bad enough that CoStar expects roughly 11.5 million square feet of Chicago-area office space to simply disappear through demolition by 2031.

Even those enormous valuation declines may understate what lenders ultimately recover.

Distressed office properties sold this year have fetched prices roughly 20% below their latest appraisals, according to Deutsche Bank research cited in the report. In other words, marking a building down dramatically on paper doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve marked it down enough.

There is, however, another side to the collapse. Once prices fall far enough, someone eventually decides the risk is worth taking. That process is now beginning. Investors are stepping into buildings at fractions of their former valuations, effectively resetting the cost basis of properties that made little economic sense at yesterday’s prices.

The same 601W connected to the troubled Aon Center recently bought Chicago’s 175 West Jackson Boulevard for only $41 million, nearly 90% below its pre-Covid sale price. Elsewhere in Chicago, investors acquired the debt behind another major tower for around $100 million, roughly 76% below the building’s previous purchase price.

That’s probably the most important part of what is happening now. An office recovery doesn’t necessarily require these buildings to regain anything close to their old valuations. It requires the old valuations to finally die.

For years, the industry could avoid discovering what many of these buildings were actually worth because lenders kept extending loans and owners kept waiting. As maturities arrive and extensions become harder to obtain, those theoretical losses increasingly have to become actual ones.

And only after that happens can buildings move into new hands at prices that make sense in the post-Covid world. As Polpo Capital’s Dan McNamara put it: “One of the scariest headlines is that office CMBS delinquencies are higher than after 2008.”

“And it’s going to go higher as we face more maturities.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 11:05

Quantum Computing Flees Europe

Quantum Computing Flees Europe

Authored by Thomas Kolbe via American Thinker,

Caught between climate regulation and catastrophic energy-policy decisions, a growing number of high-tech companies in the EU are packing up and leaving. Through stock-market deals, two top quantum-computing companies, IQM and Pasqal, are gradually moving toward the United States. The bleeding of the European economy is now being accepted with remarkable resignation.

Not a week goes by without another disaster report from the economy. In the first half of the year, the German economy recorded a record number of insolvencies -- the highest insolvency figures since 2013. Thousands of industrial jobs are being eliminated as a result, and the economy continues to bleed. A political course correction toward strengthening the economic foundation still appears impossible. And this is only the beginning: the stranglehold of expensive climate policy, the restriction of fossil-fuel energy supplies, and rising regulatory costs are acting like an accelerant on the businesses of the euro economy. Those who can leave, do.

What is happening in Germany is being repeated elsewhere: in Finland, for example, where the company IQM is taking the leap onto the U.S. stock market. IQM specializes in superconducting quantum computers and develops the quantum processors required for them. The systems are being developed for research, high-performance computing, and industrial applications. The company merged with Real Asset Acquisition Corp., a kind of American shell company, and in early July moved to the Nasdaq under the ticker IQMX with a valuation of around $1.8 billion. This is not a classic sale of the company to the Americans -- the existing owners received no cash payment but remained invested in the company. However, this changes little about the outcome: capital, market power, and an increasing share of control over the company’s strategy will, in the future, be rooted in the United States -- American patents, American knowledge of future technologies, made in Europe.

A look at France shows a similar development. This is where Pasqal is based, a spin-off of the Institut d'Optique, founded in 2019. While global players such as IBM and Google rely on superconducting circuits, Pasqal found a different approach: the highly specialized team traps individual rubidium atoms with focused laser beams -- so-called optical tweezers -- inside vacuum chambers and arranges them in precise 2D and 3D lattices. With this principle, the company’s researchers appear to have succeeded in avoiding the production errors that have plagued other qubit technologies so far. The discovered method makes it considerably easier to scale the technology to ever larger numbers of qubits. Knowledge is power, especially in high technology. Given its complexity, the company’s innovation is probably only fully understandable to a few specialists.

Pasqal’s systems are going to data centers such as the Jülich Research Centre and to the Saudi energy giant Aramco. The applications extend across industries -- from energy company EDF to major bank Crédit Agricole, for which the race for cryptography and security technology has long since begun. From logistics optimization and materials simulation to risk analysis -- Pasqal is competing right at the forefront across the board.

One of the company’s co-founders was Alain Aspect, the French physicist who received the Nobel Prize in 2022 together with John Clauser and Anton Zeilinger for verifying the quantum entangelment of photons, thereby laying the scientific foundation for modern quantum technology. It is a good example of how university research and technological development can become intertwined at the corporate level. Yet as capital increasingly flows from the EU to America, these pillars of European academic and corporate culture are gradually disappearing.

In the case of Pasqal, the acquisition of the company by the shell company Bleichroeder Acquisition Corp. II on August 28 paved the way for its know-how to cross the Atlantic. The company is currently valued at around $2 billion -- but this is likely to be only a snapshot; its potential is enormous. With its patents, research results, and academic substance, Europe is losing its intellectual foundation -- all the more serious because the continent is energy-poor, politically cornered, and steering aimlessly through uncertain waters. Europe is simply no longer attractive enough for cutting-edge research, top-tier capital, and top talent.

Why, then, is quantum computing currently on everyone’s lips?

Quantum computing -- as demonstrated by the determination with which the American economy has gone hunting for patents -- is far more than merely the next step in conventional computer technology. Conventional computers think in switches: on or off, zero or one. Every bit is like a tiny lamp that is either lit or dark. Quantum machines, by contrast, work with qubits. These can not only be on or off, but both at the same time -- as well as infinitely many states in between, until the system is measured and the final result is determined. Through entanglement, qubits can be connected in such a way that the state of one immediately determines the state of the other -- regardless of how far apart they are. Where a classical computer checks one path after another, a quantum computer explores dozens, thousands, theoretically millions of paths simultaneously.

That does not make them better everyday computers. For texts, spreadsheets, or videos, the classical computer remains superior. But for tasks where the challenge is to find the right combination among astronomically many possibilities -- simulating new molecules, optimizing logistics networks, or breaking encryption -- a fundamental advantage emerges. In strategy papers from the United States, China, and the EU, quantum computing is explicitly identified as a key technology that will significantly advance fields such as materials research, pharmaceuticals, and cryptography.

Whoever controls the key technologies of the future controls global markets and gains geopolitical influence.

It is all the more tragic to see that in the EU, there has so far been little resistance, politically but also from within the business community, to ideologically driven, technology-hostile policies. The EU area now lacks almost all the conditions required to attract brilliant minds to high technology, encourage new companies to be founded, and enable investment and settlement in future-oriented clusters such as robotics, quantum computing, or artificial intelligence. Europe has specialized in saving the climate, and many on the continent seem indifferent to deindustrialization and the slowly emerging impoverishment of society. But Europe is facing Ayn Rand’s final bombshell: You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 10:30

China Pledges Major US Coal Purchases But Falls Short On Rare Earth Crisis Resolution

China Pledges Major US Coal Purchases But Falls Short On Rare Earth Crisis Resolution

Barclays senior China economist Yingke Zhou poured cold water on the Trump-Xi state visit this past week, calling it "more signaling, less substance."

Shortages of rare earths and critical materials in the West, caused by China's weaponization of its export channels in what can only be viewed as resource nationalism, have yet to be resolved.

But there was some good news, though not on the critical materials front: Bloomberg reported early Saturday that China is planning to purchase 20 million metric tons of US coal over two years.

Beijing committed to importing at least 10 million metric tons in 2027 and another 10 million in 2028. The two countries will also pursue preferential tariffs covering $30 billion of non-sensitive goods from both economies under an agreement reached through the US-China Board of Trade.

Meanwhile, the White House said US and Chinese trade negotiators would continue addressing US concerns over shortages of rare earths and other critical minerals. The statement described further work on those bottlenecks, rather than a resolution.

Stifel critical materials analyst Brock Cannon laid out last week that investors want to begin "Owning the Bottlenecks" - in other words, ex-China producing mines that can deliver critical material supplies to the West today. 

The bad news: no resolution to supplies of rare earths and critical materials being choked by Beijing. The good news, however, is that China is willing to buy US coal.

But if Phase 1 of the trade deal during Trump's first term is any indication, China usually doesn't abide by its agreements. US farmers found that out the hard way when China began boosting agricultural imports from South America.

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 09:55

Another New UK Government Unit Created To Police 'Untrue Narratives'

Another New UK Government Unit Created To Police 'Untrue Narratives'

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham used his first United Nations speech this week to announce a 'National Centre for Information Defence' - a new state machine to "detect, attribute and disrupt" what ministers call hostile information attacks, and to stop a "distorted and untrue narrative about Britain."

Burnham wrapped it in Russia, bots, deepfakes and "community cohesion." Critics are adamant the move is purely aimed at ensuring the government has full control over the flow of information.

Speaking in New York, Burnham said there is "no national security without a strong, cohesive society" and that this cohesion "has been under attack."

He described an "industrial-scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment." He blamed Russian agencies for bots, fake websites, falsified newspaper articles and forged branding of 28 British organisations "including universities and the BBC."

Burnham also claimed they had "amplified far-right narratives" and tried to interfere with the 2019 general election. He called attempts to stoke unrest after "horrific events" repulsive.

The centre will sit first in the Office for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It is supposed to work with the intelligence agencies, government departments, police and social media companies. Ministers assert it will also "build national resilience" by helping communities spot disinformation - and prevent that "distorted and untrue" picture of Britain.

Burnham went further, warning of an "insidious campaign that reaches into people's homes and twists what they feel about their own country and community - creating a narrative of decline, stoking division and sowing despair."

The United Kingdom, he said, had "tiptoed around this for too long." Over the last decade, he claimed, "we have given too much ground to those who want to run a negative, corrosive narrative about life in Britain, which bears no resemblance to reality. Well, no more."

The government already treats public anger about migration, crime, two-tier policing and a collapsing high street as a "narrative" problem rather than a facts problem.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage blasted, "Andy Burnham is setting up a Ministry of Truth to clamp down on free speech." In the accompanying clip he said ministers would use Russia as the excuse, then slide into shutting down "far-right tropes."

"This will be like George Orwell's Ministry of Information, and this will be used to clamp down on free speech," he said, adding "Never ever trust this authoritarian Government."

Ironically, stripped of the Russia garnish, the language reads like early Soviet information control.

Defence Secretary Wes Streeting was sent out to hose it down on GB News. Alex Armstrong put the question straight: people fear the unit will be "weaponised to target British citizens who simply disagree with your Government. Can you promise today that that will not be the case?"

Streeting said yes. "One of the great things about Britain and one of the things that I have a responsibility to defend is the freedom and democracy that we all enjoy."

That includes, he said, "the freedom to disagree, the freedom for people to challenge their Government, to challenge Government policy, to criticise robustly what we are doing."

The centre, he insisted, exists to attribute and rebut hostile state work. "We're not interested in policing domestic political dissent."

Fraser Myers of Spiked heard the same words and reached the opposite conclusion.

Labour's record is why nobody should take the promise at face value. Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo said action against genuine foreign campaigns is legitimate, but "we have already seen the mantle of countering 'disinformation' being abused by our Government in attempts to malign and silence dissent."

Units including the Counter Disinformation Unit, the Rapid Response Unit, RICU and the MoD's 77th Brigade have, she said, been "involved in recording, flagging and triggering the censorship of Britons' lawful speech." MPs, journalists, campaigners and ordinary people have appeared in so-called disinformation reports "for lawful, truthful speech critical of the Government."

UnHerd's account of the 77th Brigade is worse. The Ministry of Defence once claimed the unit "does not, and has never, conducted any kind of action against British citizens." Documents showed it tracking identifiable British accounts during Covid, including tweets from then-Green MP Caroline Lucas.

The civilian Counter Disinformation Unit logged Peter Tatchell for criticising the monarchy and Conservative MP David Davis for attacking lockdown policy - after ministers said the unit did "not monitor political debate." Time and again the public was told these teams looked abroad. Time and again they looked inward.

This is the same apparatus we've repeatedly mapped:

         

Nile Gardiner, a former Thatcher aide, told GB News that Burnham's UN address was "talk of control and censorship" and "exactly the kind of messaging that the Trump administration absolutely hates."

The White House has already hauled British officials into the US embassy over the Online Safety Act, under-16 social media bans, and plans to push "trusted" outlets - BBC, ITV, Channel 4 - through the platforms.

While Burnham builds a centre to police "untrue narratives," Labour is also looking at how to keep the BBC's pipeline funded even as viewers walk away. Ministers are considering dumping the £180 licence fee for an £11-a-month "Home Internet Levy" on every household with broadband, whether anyone watches live TV or not.

Culture officials have discussed the Social Market Foundation plan. BBC director-general Matt Brittin has called the licence fee a "busted flush" and pushed for a mandatory household levy.

A DCMS spokesman said Charter Review is looking at options that are "sustainable and fair." Fair, in this case, means you pay for the state broadcaster through your router.

They might as well say that if you want running water or electricity, you also have to pay for the BBC.

The same week, communications regulator Ofcom was accused of sitting on data that undercuts the BBC's moral monopoly. The regulator's own news consumption survey found 74 per cent of GB News viewers rate that channel trustworthy, against 71 per cent for Sky News viewers and 66 per cent for BBC viewers.

GB News and Sky both scored 63 per cent on impartiality among their own audiences; the BBC scored 53 per cent.

Seventy-two per cent of GB News viewers said it offered a broad range of views. Ofcom left those figures out of its headline report and produced them after GB News asked.

The regulator blamed an "administrative error."

Whitehall already has plans to force-feed the BBC through YouTube and the social platforms in the name of fighting "disinformation" - the same BBC that memory-holes comedy sketches when the satire no longer fits the narrative.

   

Reform's Zia Yusef asked a simple question, three times: what single piece of misinformation has Vladimir Putin actually seeded in the minds of British people?

Hostile states run influence operations. That is not in dispute. What Burnham has built is a centre inside his own office, working with police and the platforms, to police free thought. The people who will staff it already decided that noticing decline is the problem. The people who will be "resilient" are the ones told to distrust their own eyes.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 09:20

AI Doom: A Brief History Of Bad Tech Predictions

AI Doom: A Brief History Of Bad Tech Predictions

Go back three decades to 1995 when the Internet was just taking off and opinions proliferated about the future and impact of this novel creation: some said it would supercharge global productivity. Others said it would be no more useful than a fax machine.

With the benefit of hindsight some 30 years later, we can say that the Internet debate has been settled, and as Deutsche Bank's Adrian Cox writes in a lengthy report published this week, it takes guts to do what Bob Metcalfe did.

After wrongly predicting in an article in 1995 that the internet would go “spectacularly supernova” and collapse in 1996, the co-inventor of Ethernet and founder of 3Com then pulped a copy of the article in a blender and drank it at a conference in 1997 as a way to eat his words.

While nobody worries about the Internet any more, the latest tech predictions are about no less than an AI apocalypse. Various tech leaders spent the weekend warning of catastrophic but not fully specified risks if it is not contained.

Yet history suggests that even the greatest minds of their generations have a poor record in predicting what tech is coming down the line, let alone what its effects will be in the real world.

The stakes could not be higher – not just the future of life itself but, in the shorter term, the future of a historic boom that depends on hype turning into reality.

* * * 

As Cox writes in his latest report (full report available here), concerns about AI have moved in waves since the launch of ChatGPT nearly four years ago. This year there was a spike in searches for “SaaSpocalypse” (the concern that software-as-a-service would be disintermediated by AI agents) in February, followed by a surge in “jobs apocalypse” in May, Google Trends data show. Both have been totally eclipsed in recent days by searches for AI extinction.

But taking a step back, all are far behind “AI bubble”, itself behind “deepfake”, in turn below “AI students”, overall “AI risk” and – biggest of the lot – the very tangible and immediate “cybersecurity”, almost all of which have surged this year, according to Google Trends data.

“Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future”: Niels Bohr, often also attributed to Yogi Berra

Wanting to know what will happen tomorrow is deeply visceral – literally.

People have been sacrificing sheep and chickens for four millennia to read the future in their entrails. Nowadays almost a third of Americans say they believe in astrology and consult their horoscope. We want to believe that Lionel Messi really can see space in a football match before it even exists, even if it is partly his movement that helps create the space he appears to predict.

But predicting the future is hard. For AI, it’s not just about what it will be able to do but also when it will be able to do it – whether more than $5 trillion in investment by the hyperscalers alone over the next five years will pay off before the advanced semiconductor chips they’re buying become redundant. It’s also about how rapidly and intensively AI can be adopted. Asset prices are a still more uncertain derivative, whipping around like the tail of a snake in response to every shift in expectations.

US President Donald Trump and China found themselves on the same side in rebutting the latest concerns as fearmongering, albeit with Trump adding that America needs to stay ahead of China in AI.

“Those who have knowledge, don’t predict. Those who predict, don’t have knowledge.” Lao Tzu

A glance through history would give any investor indigestion. Most predictions are wrong. The favorites in horse races lose 70% of races. It took a decade or more for demand to catch up with the infrastructure laid down in the British canal and railway and US telecoms and fibre booms – and many investors never recovered their capital.

Technology predictions have an especially mixed record as the binary order of the labs collides with the messy reality of the world. Famous examples range from IBM Chairman Thomas Watson’s underestimation of demand for computers in 1943 (“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers”) to Elon Musk’s repeated overestimation of imminent widespread adoption of self-driving cars since 2013 (“We should be able to do 90 percent of miles driven within three years”).

Technologists are not immune from making category errors, mistaking the most visible, automatable component of a job for the job itself. For example, radiologists, a favorite case study for believers in a jobs apocalypse, do much more than looking at images and making binary diagnoses. Much of their value lies in interpretation, judgement, communication and clinical decision-making.

Ultimately, what we see in the future is not so much a window as a mirror into our own hopes and fears.

And the problem is that hindsight makes what actually happens seem so obvious that we never seem to learn.

Today’s debate in a (rough) nutshell

The current debate encapsulates a perfect storm of an extremely high-stakes issue with limited transparency and an inherently unknowable outcome.

What sparked the current surge in concern?

The current debate comes after a researcher from one of the leading frontier labs quit, citing safety concerns; AI agents apparently collaborated with each other on a number of high-profile security breaches; and labs hinted that the technology is getting closer to “recursive self improvement”, ie AI improving AI.

Is the existential debate something new?

It is actually nothing new: leading economists and academics warned in July that “we must act now” to steer AI through a potential “transformation of our economy, larger than the Industrial Revolution… over a vastly shorter time frame”. That echoed the even more ominous statement three years ago by AI leaders calling for action to mitigate “the risk of extinction”.

The tug of war between “doomers” vs “boomers” has played a pivotal role in the development of the key frontier labs. Silicon Valley insiders sometimes refer to their “p(doom)” rating, representing their estimated percentage chance that AI will cause an existential catastrophe. 

What does an extinction scenario look like?

Experts including Tesla’s Musk, “godfather of AI” Geoffrey Hinton and philosopher Nick Bostrom have been warning about it for well over a decade. In the latter’s famous “paperclip maximiser” scenario, a superintelligent AI runs out of steel and then kills humans in a single-minded drive to fulfil its task of making paperclips. Fears sometimes centre around AI that has access to coding, the internet and knowledge of how people think, in order to manipulate them – as current AI models indeed do.

Why has it caught on so fast this time?

One factor is that it comes amid a tech backlash, particularly in the US, where concern about AI has become a rare bipartisan issue ahead of the US mid-term elections in November. Local concerns about data centre construction have become rallying points for voters in a way that vague fears about long-term jobs did not. Politicians including Senator Bernie Sanders have moved to propose wide-ranging legislation.

What arguments do companies make for continuing AI research?

  1. If we don’t do it, someone else will. That may be either China or other, less responsible companies.
  2. The potential benefits outweigh the benefits. AI may, they say, cure cancer, create new jobs and even eliminate the need for work altogether.
  3. Good AI is the answer to bad AI. It should create defences against rogue AI and misuse of AI, and solve issues like AI’s huge energy and water use.

What do critics say?

  1. AI is not dangerous because it is too clever but rather because it is too limited. It does not think like a human and people should not anthropomorphise it, critics say, adding that it is flawed probabilistic code that cannot reliably follow instructions. Longstanding critic Gary Marcus argues that it should be recalled until it can be shown to be safe and is properly controlled.
  2. AI leaders are defending their own businesses. With potential IPOs on the horizon, a rising challenge from open-source models, and progress towards Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) being called into question, a handful of companies may benefit from a pause or legislation that helps protect their lead, critics say. Doomer talk distracts from real issues like deepfakes, copyright infringement and  cybersecurity lapses, they say.
  3. Extinction scenarios are overblown. The internet is a diversified platform, so talk of AI somehow switching it off is fanciful, critics say. AI does not and will not realistically have sustained secret access to military or dangerous biotech resources, or be able to influence (very nondeterministic) human brains en masse, critics say. Humans will use tame AI and other tools, eg kill switches, if needed to resist attacks. Another “godfather of AI” Yann LeCun says the real risk is of power concentration.

A century of good and bad technology predictions

You have to admire people who have the courage to stick their neck out and make predictions, even if they don’t always work out. Vague predictions are relatively easy; specific ones within specific timeframes are harder.

It is no wonder that executives are coached by their ever-cautious PR teams to avoid answering hypothetical questions or giving dates to reach their targets.

  • Nikolai Tesla, scientist, 1926: “When wireless is perfectly applied… we will be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance…” The instruments will be “amazingly simple… A man will be able to carry one in his vest pocket”. He was right, albeit imprecise about the how or when it would be achieved.
  • Albert Einstein, physicist, 1934: “There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” Within a decade, in 1942, a team at the University of Chicago had created the first sustaining chain reaction, a precursor to the nuclear reactor,
  • Ray Kurzweil, futurist, 1999: “By 2029, computers will have human-level intelligence.” Dismissed at the time, many (though by far not all) of his predictions have worked out, fuelled by what he called the “law of accelerating returns”. His prediction from almost 40 years ago of artificial general intelligence by the end of this decade is remarkably close to the current “San Francisco Consensus”.
  • Steve Chen, Chief Technology Officer and co-founder of YouTube, 2005: “There's just not that many videos I want to watch.” Despite his concern, YouTube was bought by Google (now Alphabet) for $1.65bn a year later. The unit made more than $11bn in advertising revenue in the most recent quarter.
  • Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, 2007: “There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share.” But you may be reading this on one of the more than 3 billion iPhones sold since its launch in 2007.
  • Geoffrey Hinton, “godfather of AI”, 2016: “People should stop training radiologists now. It’s just completely obvious within five years deep learning is going to do better than radiologists… It might be 10 years.” In fact, the number of radiologists has increased by about 10 percent over the past 10 years, in part because of the limitations of AI and in part because of the increase in demand from an ageing population and more affordable healthcare. Hinton has walked back his comments and humans and AI are working together.
  • Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, 2025: “I can easily imagine a world where 30 to 40% of the tasks that happen in the economy today get done by AI in the not very distant future." He revised this view in May amid a backlash against AI, saying he and his team had been “roughly right” in their technological predictions but “pretty wrong” on the economic and social implications. “I’m delighted to be wrong about this,” he said.
Why is it so hard to predict the future?

"The idea that the future is unpredictable is undermined everyday by the ease with which the past is explained." Daniel Kahneman

1. Chaos theory: treating complex systems as if they are simple and linear.

  • Systems like traffic, economies and social trends are finely balanced and sensitive to initial conditions. The butterfly effect means a tiny, unforeseen variable can lead to vastly different outcomes. Just take a look at the ragged history of market-implied forecasts of US Federal Reserve interest rates, where extrapolating from current trends has been reliably wrong.

Take self-driving cars, for example. It turns out to be about more than getting the technology right for the rubber to hit the road:

  • Technological hurdles and “edge cases”: throwing more data and processing power at the problem is not enough. There is an infinite long tail of unpredictable events (“edge cases”), like sun glare, a cyclist riding the wrong way in a bike lane, a person in an animal costume, or road-rage-enhanced hand gestures.
  • Regulatory labyrinth: autonomous vehicle optimists have come up against legal and ethical debates around liability, safety certification and moral challenges such as the so-called “trolley problem”, when swerving to avoid hitting one victim means colliding with another. Regulation is a slow-lane activity.
  • Social and psychological barriers: public acceptance has been slowed down by high-profile accidents and safety concerns. Robots are held to a higher standard than flesh-and-blood motorists. It might be easier to navigate a world where all cars were self-driving, but the “messy middle”, with a mixture of both, is much harder for algorithms to navigate.

2. The future of AI will ultimately depend more on the prosaic challenges of workflow integration at enterprises that will need to pay for it than on releasing yet another model with a marginal step up in capabilities.

Cognitive bias: flaws in how the brain works

  • Linear thinking about exponential change: We fail to intuitively understand how different exponential change is from linear change. As Wharton Professor Ethan Mollick says, “being on an exponential means each change over a fixed window is larger than the one before it… This is why AI keeps feeling like it is making leaps… Even though it is a curve on a graph, we keep experiencing a steady doubling of capability as a series of shocks.” This cognitive tendency to track exponential change in linear terms helps explain big AI market swings, he says.

  • Optimism bias and the planning fallacy: underestimating costs and overestimating benefits. For example, only a quarter of more than 3,000 megaprojects studied by Saïd Business School came in on budget or better, only 2.8 percent were on budget and on time, and only 0.2 percent were on budget, on time and on benefits. Large-scale infrastructure projects are “too easy to start and too difficult to stop,” the authors said in the study from 2019. It remains to be seen how the recent surge in datacentre construction will compare.
  • Confirmation bias: favoring information that confirms existing beliefs. For years, legacy automakers dismissed electric vehicles by  focusing on their high costs and limited range, ignoring the fact that rapid advances in battery technology would soon change that.
  • Anchoring: relying too heavily on early information. Microsoft’s Ballmer dismissed the iPhone when it was launched because it was “the most expensive phone in the world and it doesn’t appeal to business customers because it doesn’t have a keyboard which makes it not a very good email machine”. He later said he did not understand how mobile carrier subsidies would make it affordable. More broadly, he missed that this was a new business model.

3. Limited information: inability to see

  • It is not just the future that is unknowable but also the present. Feedback mechanisms are often delayed, making it hard to distinguish between causation and correlation, and between relevant and irrelevant factors.
  • Isolating key factors is impossible. Even since the development of scientific methods and controlled experiments, we have not come that far since the Mesoamericans found ways to prepare maize where they didn’t succumb to a long-term wasting disease called pellagra. The problem was that they weren’t able to single out the effective part of the process – soaking the maize in an alkaline solution of water and ash –from the other ineffective parts of the package – such as blowing on the maize before cooking it.
  • (Author David Oks draws a fascinating parallel between this example of a delayed feedback mechanism and the tendency of AI models to “overfit”, extrapolating too much from coarse and sparse data to fill in the gaps. If the model creates a complex output and gets a single reward signal for it, the rational move is reproduce all of its features, including the ones that were incidental – such as AI’s trademark verbal tics.)
  • No one wants to risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Argentinian President Javier Milei talked publicly about his superstitious insistence on staying at home wearing a lucky jacket rather than watching his team playing in the football World Cup live at the stadium.

4. Self-interest: incentives favour more extreme positions

  • AI is not magic, a silver bullet or a charity, but a commercial industry.
  • Most participants have incentives to amplify the stakes. Founders need belief, investors need momentum, incumbents need gravitas, consultants need urgency, policymakers need relevance, executives need a narrative and journalists need drama. This is not a criticism of individuals or organisations, or even of the likely revolutionary impact of AI.
  • The challenge is magnified by a social media-driven economy. Social platforms favour novelty, negativity, moral intensity and shareability. For example, in political tweets, one study by New York University found each additional moral-emotional word was associated with about a 20 percent higher retweet rate. Another study by MIT found that false news was 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than true news and reached a threshold of 1,500 people six times faster.
  • That means moderate claims are likely to be under-distributed and extreme claims over-rewarded. Implausibly precise numbers for the future size of the AI economy, for example, or dramatic doom-laden scenarios heavy with emotive language will continue to attract greater attention than even-handed assessment. 
What makes AI special – and gives hope for the future

Technology may be liable to erroneous thinking because of the disconnect between visionaries in Silicon Valley and similar communities, and the rest of the world.

Cynics may say that people with extraordinary knowledge and skills in one area may be even more prone than most to wrongly estimate their lack of knowledge or skills in other areas: the so-called Dunning-Kruger effect. That may include the reality of implementing AI on a trading floor in Wall Street, an office supplies wholesaler on the outskirts of London or an auto maker in Mumbai.

There is also a long tradition of correctly identifying the task that will disappear but getting wrong what humans will do instead.

  • 1982: Computers “… can develop into monsters, damage the physical and mental health of the clerical staff – maybe even eliminate their jobs”: the Washington Post reported from a clerical conference. Computers instead became the core tool of knowledge workers.
  • 1983: The pocket calculator “… has become the target of critics who fear that its use in the classroom will render generations of children dependent on batteries instead of brains”, the Washington Post reported. Instead expectations changed about what people calculate for themselves.
  • 2009: Cloud computing: around half of companies surveyed “cited security and privacy concerns as their top reason for not using cloud computing”, Forrester Research found. Today companies entrust much of their critical infrastructure to the cloud.

“We overestimate the impact of technology in the short-term and underestimate the effect in the long run.” Roy Amara, Stanford computer scientist

But this time may really be different – with AI as a partner, starting with (deterministic) predictive AI. It is certainly helping weather forecasters to sift through unimaginable amounts of data. Four-day forecasts are now said to be about as accurate as one-day forecasts in the 1990s.

There are diminishing returns. The limit of predictability with standard physics models is about eight days, while deep-learning AI models increase that by just one day to nine days. However, the difference is that they generate state-of-the-art forecasts 100,000 faster, and 10,000 times more energy-efficiently, meaning they can be done on a laptop rather than a supercomputer.

And for the time being, your predictions about the impact of AI are no less valid than an AI expert based in the very particular world of Silicon Valley. And the future of AI will be made not in Silicon Valley but in Main Street.

More in the full Deustsche Bank report available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 08:45

"The Netherlands Also Has Islamic Grooming Gangs"; Dutch MP Warns After 18-Year-Old Girl Raped By 10 Men

"The Netherlands Also Has Islamic Grooming Gangs"; Dutch MP Warns After 18-Year-Old Girl Raped By 10 Men

Via Remix News,

An 18-year-old woman has been gang raped and beaten by up to ten different men, many of them with a Syrian background, in the Dutch city of Dordrecht. Although the rape occurred in May 2025, the suspects are only now being arrested. In response to the rape, political leader Geert Wilders wrote that the Netherlands also has Islamic grooming gangs and called for all the perpetrators to be removed from the country along with their families.

Six suspects have now been arrested, aged 20 to 23. During the incident, the girl, who lived in a residential group home, was driven to two different parking lots and raped by several men, some of whom filmed the assault and shared it on Snapchat. Police say the woman was humiliated and beaten.

"A bruise on the cheek, a tooth through the lip and a swelling on the knee," described one source.

"It is a very serious criminal offense where all boundaries have been crossed and the victim has been treated very disrespectfully. As if she were an object that everyone could use."

The incident has already attracted attention from politicians in the Netherlands, including PVV leader Geert Wilders.

"Teen victim of gang rape by Syrians. Raped by ten boys at different parking lots. The Netherlands also has Islamic grooming gangs. The Netherlands needs an unprecedented cleanup. All that scum out. With their families. No mercy," he wrote on X.

The first introductory court hearing took place on Sept. 23, 2026. Only 23-year-old S.S., described by the prosecutor as having played a leading role, and identified in court reporting as Syrian-born, was required to appear. Of the other five suspects, two of them are S.S.'s brother and cousin, who were arrested that Wednesday morning.

The investigation by the Rotterdam police Sexual Offences Team is still open, and prosecutors believe as many as ten men were involved.

According to the prosecution, the young woman accepted a lift to a train station from three strangers but they never brought her there. She was taken first to one parking lot, where S.S. raped her, and then to a second parking lot where, prosecutors say other men also raped her.

The Public Prosecution Service also told the court that the suspects "discussed and coordinated their statements in detail." Even so, the accounts given by S.S. diverge from those of the others. His lawyer said that was because he did not want to inform against his brother and cousin.

S.S. himself told the judges the girl got into the car of her own accord.

"We didn't force her to do anything," he told police.

He is requesting to be released while his court trial is pending.

"I don't want to ruin my future. If I stay stuck, all I'm going to be in debt," he said.

The court refused. Judges said the images, the statements, and conversations overheard by police were enough to keep him in custody for now. He is due back for another introductory hearing in early December.

Remarkably, there was already a case in 2025 involving gang rape in the Netherlands involving ten suspects and a 15-year-old girl, mostly Syrians. Geert Wilders had also called attention to the case, writing: "50 percent of all suspects of sexual offenses are of foreign origin. Only the PVV will throw that criminal scum out of the country and immediately implement an asylum stop."

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 08:20

Saudi, Turkish, Pakistani Military Chiefs To Hold Urgent Meeting Over Yemen War

Saudi, Turkish, Pakistani Military Chiefs To Hold Urgent Meeting Over Yemen War

Saudi, Turkish and Pakistani army heads are set to urgent talks on the Yemen crisis. Crucially, these countries represent signatories to the Mecca Defense Pact, which vows mutual defense in the instance that any member is attacked.

Of course, the Iran-aligned Houthis have been semi-frequently targeting the Saudi kingdom's territory, gong after oil export infrastructure as well as fuel storage sites, with ballistic missiles even targeting the capital of Riyadh this month, which marked a first.

Anadolu/Getty Images

Ahead of the meeting of defense chiefs, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan and Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Turkish Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar gathered in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly to discuss developments.

They have been closely monitoring developments in Yemen, after the Saudi-backed coalition based out of Sanaa has lost the Red Sea coast area.

"The three ministers strongly condemned recent attacks targeting Mecca, as well as civilian and economic facilities in Saudi Arabia, and reaffirmed the Kingdom’s right to take appropriate measures to defend its security under Article 51 of the UN Charter," Al Arabiya reports.

"They also discussed arrangements for the urgent meeting of their countries’ chiefs of staff, which will examine ways to support Saudi Arabia under the defense pact," the report adds.

As for the Houthis, who now have an even tighter grip on the fate of Red Sea shipping, as of Friday they are vowing not to attack European vessels.

However, the Yemeni rebels will still fire on Saudi ships or any Israeli-linked vessels, in accord with the ongoing 'siege for siege' strategy which has already been on for months.

Earlier this month, Pakistan threatened to trigger the young Mecca Defense Pact, but so far this has stopped at mere words. A regional analyst has explained to Al Jazeera why the Yemen crisis is 'tricky' and controversial for the alliance:

The Mecca Joint Defence Agreement’s first real test, being framed around the Houthis rather than Israel, sits awkwardly with the Islamic-solidarity language the pact was sold on, says Betul Dogan Akkas, assistant professor of international relations at Ankara University.

“The Mecca Defence Pact might be used, for the first time, to frame itself as defending the lands of Islam, rather than being framed around the Israeli threat in Gaza or Palestine, which would have been the more obvious framing,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Using the Houthi threat as that first framing isn’t necessarily good for the pact’s long-term branding and perception,” she said.

“Even though you’re not targeting Israel or Western countries, you’re still ultimately targeting a Muslim country, a Muslim nation. That makes it a bit controversial and tricky.”

Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif has said previously that attacks on the kingdom "could trigger" the defense agreement.

"Under the trilateral agreement, any aggression against any of the three [countries] is regarded as an aggression against all. There is no ambiguity about that," the Pakistani minister told Geo News weeks ago.

The pact between Riyadh, Islamabad, and Ankara has been likened to NATO Article 5, where an attack on one is an 'attack on all'. These countries' own officials have in many cases advanced this interpretation.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 07:55

Diesel Export Ban Off The Table? Ted Cruz Relays White House Assurances To Refinery Heads

Diesel Export Ban Off The Table? Ted Cruz Relays White House Assurances To Refinery Heads

As of early Saturday morning, AAA data put the national average retail diesel price at about $6.48 a gallon, slightly below its recent record high, while Brent crude settled on Friday around $104.30 a barrel. The modest pullback leaves fuel costs elevated and maintains pressure on the White House to deliver relief before the midterms.

The Trump administration's messaging on a potential diesel export ban has exposed differing views over how to address the global refining crisis that could soon morph into an economic shock (Read Apollo's warning). President Donald Trump has been for a diesel export ban, while Energy Secretary Chris Wright has opposed a blanket ban and instead encouraged industry measures to increase domestic supply.

Politico reported midweek that the administration was preparing a potential 90-day export ban. By late Friday, however, Senator Ted Cruz told refinery heads he had received White House assurances that a ban would not move forward.

Bloomberg reports that Cruz relayed those White House assurances to refinery heads during a call by the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association.

Here's more color from the outlet:

The president wants to see pump prices fall and is evaluating all options on the table, a White House official said. Representatives for Cruz and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association, which conducted the call, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

To be sure, the counsel is consistent with a message that's been delivered for months by some of Trump's top deputies, who've consistently warned that diesel export curbs would ultimately cause more harm than good.

. . .

Cruz, a Republican from Texas, described having received assurances from the White House, not specifically from the president. He did not provide more specifics on who had ruled out an export ban, the people said.

Other tools in the Trump administration's toolkit could target taxes and regulatory costs. Officials have discussed allowing dyed red diesel, normally reserved for off-road use, on highways. Such a change could suspend some diesel taxes, including the federal levy of roughly 24 cents a gallon.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright, the former chairman and CEO of Liberty Energy, has warned about the dire ramifications of a diesel export ban and instead emphasized voluntary industry changes to increase domestic diesel supply.

"We will not cease exports of US diesel," Wright said Wednesday, while leaving room for adjustments to where fuel from US refineries flows.

Last week, Barclays refining and midstream analyst Theresa Chen warned clients that a proposed U.S. diesel export ban would be "detrimental to the US refining complex and unlikely to provide the intended price relief."

Chen pointed out one major problem: keeping diesel inside the country does not guarantee it can reach gas pumps.

Goldman Sachs energy analyst Nikhil Bhandari warned clients early last week that the global refining system will be stretched through 2027, with diesel and gas prices expected to remain elevated.

Read: Goldman Warns Diesel Crisis Is Setting Up The Next Gasoline Squeeze: Here's How

On March 10, JPMorgan's head of commodity research, Natasha Kaneva, laid out the six options the Trump administration has to combat higher oil prices (read here, as the administration's next move could be to reduce fuel taxes).

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 07:30

China Sent Over 1,000 Shipments Of Missile, Drone Parts To Iran In 2026

China Sent Over 1,000 Shipments Of Missile, Drone Parts To Iran In 2026

Authored by News Desk via The Cradle,

China has sent Iran around 1,300 shipments of missile and drone parts this year through the end of June, as the Islamic Republic faced a brutal US-Israeli campaign against it, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on 23 September.

(Photo credit: NurPhoto/Getty Images)

One of the shipments arrived the same day the April ceasefire was announced, according to Iranian customs data cited by the outlet.

It carried a shipment for the Iranian Defense Ministry that included electronic components used to make parts for drones and missile guidance systems.

Another Chinese shipment two days later carried drone parts for Iran, worth more than $6 million, according to WSJ.

WSJ writes that there has been a surge in Chinese cargo flights to Iran over the past year, coinciding with several new Iranian warnings.

Tehran's military recently said it received intelligence of upcoming US attacks.

After the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June 2025, Hebrew media began expressing concern over Chinese military support for Iran.

The concern lay with Chinese-Iranian cooperation on the manufacture of surface-to-surface missiles, Yedioth Ahronoth said in August last year.

Since the start of the latest illegal war by Washington and Tel Aviv, Iran has inflicted unprecedented damage on US military installations across the region.

Israel, which uses heavy military censorship to cover up losses, was also heavily targeted.

The Islamic Republic recently warned that new weapons will be used in the event of a renewed escalation by the US or Israel.

"Iran is prepared for a prolonged war," said Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) spokesman Brigadier General Hossein Mohebbi this week.

He added that "If a new aggression takes place, there will definitely be significant changes in our defense and our counteroffensive."

"We will definitely bring new weapons with new capabilities into the battlefield, and the world will be surprised," Mohebbi went on to say. "We will definitely change the geography of the war."

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/25/2026 - 20:55

Mystery Deepens As Spy Aircraft Disappears From US Air Base Without Explanation

Mystery Deepens As Spy Aircraft Disappears From US Air Base Without Explanation

An SR-71 Blackbird parked for years on an outdoor display at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center is no longer visible in commercial satellite imagery, and the agency has offered no public explanation of where it went.

The spy aircraft, the NASA 844, has been absent from its pad since at least May 17, according to Aviation Week.

Sources told the publication that the plane was moved into a hangar earlier this year for an inspection, though NASA has not described what that inspection involves, why it is taking place, or how long it will last.

The Serial 61-7980 was the last SR-71 built and the last to fly, completing its final flight in 1999 after the Air Force had already retired the type and NASA had retained a few surviving airframes for high-speed research.

Lockheed Martin produced 32 of the reconnaissance aircraft, 12 of which were lost in accidents and none to enemy action.

Questions about the disappearance of the SR-71 come a week after NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman discussed plans for a new high-altitude, high-speed X-plane and displayed images of silhouette that closely resembled a Blackbird at annual the All-In Summit in Los Angeles. 

“In the service of the first A [aeronautics] in NASA, we are rebuilding our X-plane fleet. The X-59 is researching quiet supersonic flight, but it’s just the beginning,” the NASA head told attendees.

“As NASA recommits to flight test and works alongside industry to push the boundaries of airframe and propulsion design, it will not be long before NASA once again is flying as high and as fast as we had in decades past, and then even more.”

Asked whether the image was an SR-71, Isaacman quiped, “You sure that’s a Blackbird?” and declined to elaborate. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/25/2026 - 20:30

Federal Judge Blocks Oklahoma Religious Ban On Jewish Charter School Bid

Federal Judge Blocks Oklahoma Religious Ban On Jewish Charter School Bid

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge in Oklahoma on Sept. 24 blocked the state from using religion as an automatic bar to a charter application, allowing a proposed Jewish virtual school to keep seeking approval after officials rejected it because of its faith.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court in Oklahoma City on May 19, 2014. Sue Ogrocki/AP Photo

U.S. District Judge David Russell granted a preliminary injunction to the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, after the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board, citing state law and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s 2024 Drummond decision, denied the application because the school would be religious. The order does not approve the school or allow it to open. It only stops the board from treating religious character as a disqualifier while the case proceeds.

The ruling in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond involved a different school. In June 2024, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ordered the board to cancel its contract with St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. The state court held that the Catholic school was effectively a governmental entity and that the contract violated the Oklahoma Constitution’s ban on “using public money for the benefit or support of any religious institution.”

Because it treated the charter school as a state actor, the court also said denying it charter status did not violate the U.S. Constitution’s free exercise clause.

The U.S. Supreme Court deadlocked 4–4 in the Drummond case last year. Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself. The tie left the state decision in place but did not establish a national precedent. How the individual justices voted was not disclosed.

The new ruling is the first federal court order to treat Oklahoma’s nonsectarian charter rule as a free exercise violation after that deadlock.

Ben Gamla is a separate applicant. It never received a contract. The foundation applied for a virtual Jewish charter; the board rejected the application. Board attorneys from First Liberty Institute said the board wanted to follow the First Amendment but believed Oklahoma law and the Drummond state court ruling forbade approval. The board did not oppose the injunction and argued in favor of it. Two groups of intervening taxpayers and charter school families did oppose it.

Russell held that once Oklahoma opens a generally available charter program, it cannot exclude applicants because they are religious.

The nonsectarian requirement in the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act “expressly discriminates against otherwise eligible recipients by disqualifying them from a public benefit solely because of their religious character and in doing so, violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,” the judge said.

Russell held that Carson v. Makin (2022) governs the dispute.

In both that case and this one, “the state created a generally available benefit: the opportunity to apply for and contract with a sponsor to establish a charter school. But the state categorically excludes religious institutions from participating. As Carson plainly stated, ‘[t]hat is discrimination against religion.’”

The injunction is temporary. Ben Gamla still needs the board to approve a charter on the remaining statutory criteria. Intervenors have said they will keep fighting the claim that a public charter may be religious.

Counsel at First Liberty, Holly Randall, hailed the new court ruling.

“We’re grateful the court answered this important question of the law and agreed that enforcing a religious prohibition is a violation of the United States Constitution,” Randall said in a statement.

Daniel Chen, an attorney for Ben Gamla at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said the ruling makes sure his client “now gets what it should have had from the start: a fair shot to serve Oklahoma families.”

“The Constitution doesn’t permit the state to welcome every kind of charter school except a religious one,” he said.

Attorneys for the intervenors at groups including Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the American Civil Liberties Union expressed disappointment over the ruling, saying it marked “a dangerous sea change for our democracy.”

“We will continue ⁠to fight for all Oklahomans, who deserve public schools that are secular and open to all students,” they said.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/25/2026 - 20:05

Energy Secretary Announces $2 Billion For Improving Electric Grid With Smart Technology

Energy Secretary Announces $2 Billion For Improving Electric Grid With Smart Technology

The U.S. Department of Energy has committed $2 billion for smart technology improvements to the nation's electric grid, aiming to address concerns about artificial intelligence power usage, blackouts, and higher utility bills heading into the colder seasons.

During a press conference on Sept. 24, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the investment would affect around 100 million Americans. Nationally, the spending would be distributed across 31 projects in 26 states and is expected to produce more than 23 gigawatts of electricity annually, enough to power about 16 million homes.

"This is a quick way to lower electricity prices and increase reliability: using fibers that are already in the transmission lines to analyze what's the temperature out, what's the wind out, how can we use this transmission line to distribute more power, but safely and only in the right conditions," Wright said, speaking at a PPL Corp. facility in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

As Jeremy Lott reports further for The Epoch Times, PPL owns one of those projects at the local level. It's a $71.5 million effort to modernize an existing high-voltage transmission line across roughly 30 miles in northern Pennsylvania.

The state has a few data centers now online and a half-dozen more under construction, with grid improvements that could help facilitate them.

Future data center construction in the state has been slowed by an executive order issued by Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro in August, which affects the construction of all data centers that will use 25 megawatts or more, or enough energy to power about 18,000 homes.

Shapiro said the order was about "implementing the strictest standards in the nation for AI data centers - because I will not allow Pennsylvanians to be bullied by greedy developers and bulldozed by the lawyers working for these big tech companies."

Manufacturing Grid Components

AI has been in the spotlight in much of the recent electricity news, from the latest grid upgrades to a recent executive order by President Donald Trump.

The "bulk-power system" executive order, issued in late August, aimed to ensure that key components of the grid are not manufactured in nations under arms embargoes or other U.S. sanctions, particularly China, but are instead manufactured domestically whenever possible.

The text of the order said that the new restrictions were necessary because AI and AI-related production, including defense technology, has increased America's "dependence on abundant, reliable electricity."

Smart technology improvements to the grid can help reduce electricity waste and thereby free up more supply, but those improvements also increase vulnerability to hackers.

America's energy needs have heightened the consequences of a "successful attack or supply disruption on the bulk-power system," the order warned.

The concern is that components manufactured in regimes hostile to certain U.S. interests might contain "backdoors" or other features that make it easier to sabotage the grid, the order stated.

Ryan Norris, a senior fellow for energy policy at the Abundance Institute, said the threat is real.

"The administration is right to recognize that America's bulk-power system is both critical infrastructure and a potential national-security vulnerability," he told The Epoch Times.

"Our goal should not simply be to restrict potentially vulnerable foreign equipment, but to make the United States the best place in the world to design and build transformers, turbines, batteries, inverters, control systems, and other critical energy infrastructure," he said.

Norris also called for wider measures, more electricity generation and capacity, and allowing more power from industrial concerns themselves, including "islanded microgrids, and 'bring your own power' arrangements that protect critical facilities while reducing pressure on the broader grid."

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/25/2026 - 19:40

Pages