Authored by Robert Bork, Jr, via American Greatness,

The European Commission’s half-a-billion-euro fine slapped on Apple—and a €200 million fine on Meta—is a reminder that protectionism is a global trend, not just an element of the Trump agenda. Worse than the magnitudes of these fines is the message that they send: the European Union is determined to enforce its Digital Markets Act (DMA) to outlaw the basic business models that made Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Amazon America’s most innovative companies. 

They are now explicitly targeted by this law as digital “gatekeepers” in need of wholesale restructuring.

At home, the Trump administration’s antitrust regulators continue complaints left over from the previous administration against these same companies. Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson and Department of Justice Antitrust Chief Gail Slater are perhaps expressing the current administration’s residual desire to punish big tech companies for their past censorship of conservatives. The massive fine imposed on Apple by the EU should put antitrust in a new context for the administration. If Europe wins, the American tech sector will be broken.

If this sounds hyperbolic, consider what the DMA actually does. Apple has invested more than $100 billion in the last five years to produce products that are seamlessly and safely linked, providing levels of security and privacy valued by consumers worldwide. Central to Apple’s success is the willingness of developers to create new apps with powerful capabilities for Apple customers. But Apple enforces conditions on developers. They are granted a degree of access to Apple systems, but not so much that they can steal Apple’s proprietary algorithms or—most importantly for antitrust—access and exploit user data.

For example, when developers create apps that rely on sound, Apple requires them to ask users for their permission before accessing their microphones. If developers want to record audio, they also must get explicit permission. Similar guardrails are in place for apps used for banking, gaming, and a variety of content and services. Developers can access Apple’s Touch ID, but they cannot access data in the Secure Enclave inside the iPhone. Apple is like a bank that will allow access to a safe deposit box but won’t allow rifling through other people’s boxes.

Taken literally, the law’s demand for “interoperability” with developers and competitors would force Apple to expose consumers’ most sensitive data. The EU mandate would allow access to consumers’ communications over iMessage—whether 6-digit codes texted by banks, Wi-Fi passwords, or personal communications. Also at risk is data on AirPlay, CarPlay, and Siri. Every message, email, phone call, image, and calendar will be potentially exposed to myriad developers, sure to be exploited and likely to be resold on the international market. Thus, Europe, in the name of protecting consumers, will force the exposure of users’ data, commoditizing it in the name of interoperability. It is a virtual certainty that some buyers will be cut-outs for China. As the FBI has warned, China “uses elaborate shell games” and overweight voting rights to control companies without tipping off its real ownership.

Why is Europe doing this? It seems to be out of a mixture of progressive thinking and anti-Americanism. The largest seller of smartphones in Europe is Samsung, with 37 percent of the market. Add to that China’s Xiaomi market share, and the two Asian giants have a combined 53 percent share of the European smartphone market. And yet it is Apple’s 22 percent share that somehow defines it as a “gatekeeper” in need of radical restructuring. These latest fines for violating the DMA are eye-popping, but they continue an anti-American trend that has resulted in roughly $8 billion in fines imposed on another top American innovator, Google, over the past decade.

Europeans might be forgiven for feeling whipsawed. The DMA and its companion Digital Services Act were drafted with the active encouragement of the Biden Administration and former FTC Chair Lina Khan, who was in constant dialogue with European regulators. But the attitude in America is now hardening. In a letter to EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan wrote that the provisions of the Digital Markets Act “stifle innovation, disincentivize research and development, and hand vast amounts of highly valuable proprietary data to companies and adversarial nations.”

Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, chair of the House antitrust subcommittee, noted that the fine “is a tax on U.S. companies operating in the EU. Any trade deal with the EU or its member countries must address the unfair targeting of our most successful companies.”

Will President Trump let this happen? Or will he rise to the occasion to defend America’s most competitive companies? As President Trump engages the European Union in trade negotiations, he should seize this opportunity to stand up for American investors, innovators, and more than 5 million U.S. tech workers.

Chipotle Mexican Grill announced plans this week to enter the crowded Mexican market, partnering with local firm Alsea—which operates brands like Starbucks, Domino’s, and Burger King—to open restaurants by early 2026, a new report from FastCompany says.

But the question then arises whether fast food Mexican can cut it in the land of tacos and burritos…

FastCompany explored the idea that Americanized versions of local cuisines have struggled abroad. Domino’s failed to win over Italians, and Taco Bell’s two attempts to conquer Mexico flopped.

In fact, Taco Bell’s 1992 debut collapsed within two years, as crispy tacos were “an anomaly” and had to be rebranded as “tacostadas.”

As one critic put it, it was like “bringing ice to Antarctica.” Taco Bell tried again in 2007, emphasizing convenience over authenticity. “Foolish gringos,” a Monterrey food writer commented, and the brand withdrew once more.

Chipotle hasn’t directly addressed these failures but promises its offerings “will resonate with guests in Mexico,” according to chief business development officer Nate Lawton.

“The country’s familiarity with our ingredients and affinity for fresh food make it an attractive growth market for our company.” Alsea CEO Armando Torrado added that his company brings “vast knowledge of the Mexican consumer.”

Still, some experts question Chipotle’s authenticity, noting its burritos prioritize heft over variety. Its current bestseller—a honey chicken burrito—seems designed more for American tastes.

Yet Taco Bell now has over 8,000 global locations, including hundreds in Central and South America, proving success is still possible. And with global trade rules in flux and about half its avocados sourced from tariff-vulnerable Mexico, Chipotle’s push to diversify its customer base makes strategic sense.

Whether Mexican consumers will embrace its burritos remains to be seen, the report concludes. 

India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed nations, appeared to be spiraling toward broader conflict on Saturday, setting the stage for another day of scary headlines that could trigger World War III. But just moments ago, President Trump announced on Truth Social that India and Pakistan have “agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE.” 

“After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE,” Trump said. 

The president continued, “Congratulations to both Countries on using Common Sense and Great Intelligence. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Trump’s announcement is a surprise, but it comes after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio began back-and-forth diplomacy to end the weeks-long confrontation between India and Pakistan. 

The Guardian provided more color on Rubio’s diplomatic mission: 

Rubio has been engaged in back-and-forth diplomacy between the two countries in recent days, calling for de-escalation as India and Pakistan have been engaged in daily clashes since Wednesday.

The US’s top diplomat “continued to urge both parties to find ways to de-escalate and offered US assistance in starting constructive talks to avoid future conflicts,” state department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement on Saturday.

About 25 minutes after Trump’s Truth Social post, Rubio wrote on X:

Over the past 48 hours, @VP Vance and I have engaged with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, including Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir, and National Security Advisors Ajit Doval and Asim Malik.

I am pleased to announce the Governments of India and Pakistan have agreed to an immediate ceasefire and to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.

We commend Prime Ministers Modi and Sharif on their wisdom, prudence, and statesmanship in choosing the path of peace.

Over the past 48 hours, @VP Vance and I have engaged with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, including Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir, and National Security Advisors Ajit…

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) May 10, 2025

Earlier, G7 foreign ministers issued a joint statement calling for “immediate de-escalation” between the two countries. 

UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy and his counterparts in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the US urged “maximum restraint from both” countries. They cautioned that “further military escalation poses a serious threat to regional stability.”

“We call for immediate de-escalation and encourage both countries to engage in direct dialogue towards a peaceful outcome,” said the G7 foreign ministers.

X user Matt Van Swol wrote: “How many hats can Marco Rubio wear and still deliver incredible results???? This is absolutely amazing.” 

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

They’ve been shared by the vast majority of humanity throughout history in their own contexts…

Germany’s domestic intelligence agency designated the AfD, just topped a recent poll as the country’s most popular party, as “extremist” before withdrawing it pending litigation. This label would legitimize surveillance of them and can set the pretext for banning them. Vice President JD Vance condemned this earlier move as equivalent to building a new Berlin Wall while Secretary of State Marco Rubio called on Germany to reverse its decision and also end its “dangerous open border immigration policies”.

Lost amidst a lot of the debate over this controversial decision is the basis upon which it was made: “The party’s prevailing understanding of the people based on ethnicity and descent is incompatible with the free democratic basic order.” 

The AfD believes that ethnic Germans have a special connection to their country due to their shared culture and experiences, which non-ethnic German citizens lack, especially those from civilizationally dissimilar societies across the Global South who only recently arrived there.

These views actually aren’t extremist at all since they’ve been shared by the vast majority of humanity throughout history in their own contexts. In fact, they’re still popular in non-Western societies, the same places from which most of Germany’s non-ethnic-German population originates. From Africa to West Asia and the Indo-Pacific, most of these countries believe that original inhabitants have a special connection to their country, which can take several generations for newcomers’ descendants to share.

It’s only the radical liberal-globalist ideology espoused by the Western elites that denies this special connection or pretends that it’s always shared by all newcomers once they step onto foreign soil. To be clear, acknowledging this special connection doesn’t imply that members of non-titular nationalities who obtain another country’s citizenship don’t deserve any rights, rather it’s meant as a safeguard of the titular nationality’s socio-cultural rights. It’s here where the Russian example is instructive.

One of the constitutional amendments that entered into force after 2020’s referendum stipulates that “The state language of the Russian Federation throughout its territory is the Russian language as the language of the state-forming people, part of the multinational union of equal peoples of the Russian Federation.” It reaffirmed the equality of all Russian citizens while emphasizing the role that ethnic Russians and their language have historically played in forming their cosmopolitan civilization-state.

Separately, legislation was passed mandating that foreigners pass tests on Russian language, history, and legal basics in order to obtain long-term permission to reside in Russia, let alone citizenship. This is meant to mitigate the socio-cultural threat posed by those who refuse to assimilate and integrate, which Patriarch Kirill drew attention to on three occasions in 2023 and 2024 here, here, and here. He and Putin, however, also united in condemning ethno-religious hate speech after the Crocus terrorist attack.

What the Russian example shows is that a titular nationality’s special connection to their country can be recognized without doing so at the expense of other nationalities. The same goes for having policies for ensuring that migrants assimilate and integrate. None of this is “extremist”; it’s respectful, pragmatic, and sensible, which is why the AfD wants the same in Germany. These views on nationality are the historical norm for humanity, not the exception, which makes the liberal-globalists the real extremists.

Authored by Kurt Schlichter,

Britain started arresting people for tweeting unapproved things, and France decided to arrest its leading opposition politician, so what happened in Germany was not a surprise. After all, Germans are the best at fascism. 

There, the establishment parties used the internal security apparatus to formally designate the AfD, which is an upstart populist party with a plurality of voter support, particularly by the young and by the eastern Germans, an extremist organization. This basically means it’s open season for the heirs to the Gestapo and Stasi; banning it completely is the next step. Already, AfD supporters are being fired from civil service jobs. I guess with Germans, the only thing that changes is the uniform. Actually, that goes for all Europeans. They paid lip service to the idea of normal people having a say in their own governance but never believed in it. It was all a lie and a scam, but the mask is coming off. The ruling class is offering Europeans the choice between capitulation and rebellion.

Now, let’s not get too uppity here in America because our own garbage establishment would love to do the same thing. Its obstacles are that it’s so dumb and that Americans are not yet a nation of low-T femboys; we also pack heat. Our ruling class tried to frame Donald Trump after trying to bankrupt him, and when that didn’t work out, one establishment-friendly guy tried to murder him. The other guy who tried to murder him might be establishment-friendly, but we don’t know anything about him for some reason. The point is we have a Boomer generation ruling class that is desperately seeking to cling to power and is willing to do anything to keep it. Anything. This is a matter of life and death, and they’re willing to take lives and deal death to keep their power. As they keep losing, which they will – none of this is happening because they are intrinsically strong or competent – they will go further and further. More oppression. More tyranny. More bloodshed. It’s all worth it to them. Their power is all that matters.

This isn’t going to work out well. History teaches us what happens when you suppress the voice of people expressing legitimate grievances and boy, are people’s grievances ever legitimate. Economic dislocation. Anarcho-tyranny. A sanctioned invasion by Third World barbarians who rob, rape, and murder our citizens. Normal people have legit gripes, and they will be heard. It’s just a matter of what sound they make – voices or explosions.

Now, of course, this phenomenon isn’t just limited to these countries. We’ve seen similar antics in Brazil, Israel, Romania, and elsewhere. The entrenched establishment parties have no answer to the critiques of their gross incompetence, corruption, and arrogance, yet they are determined to hang onto power at all costs. Free speech and democratic norms – they don’t matter. Why, the situation is so extreme, the peril so perilous, that these concepts must give way. We must protect democracy by utterly destroying democracy. But of course, these people never actually believed in free speech or democracy or any of that stuff. They only believed in their own power. They dress themselves in the skin suits of the institutions they invaded, infested, and obliterated. We’re supposed to respect them because they were once respectable, but the problem for the establishment, the insurmountable challenge it faces, is that we normal people are neither blind nor stupid. We can see what’s happening, especially now that the regime media monopoly has been broken.

Of course, they tried to handle that, too. Remember “misinformation?” Oddly enough, the Venn diagram of “misinformation” and “Things the ruling class doesn’t want people to say or hear” is a single circle. Go back in time to 20 years ago and try to imagine somebody explaining to you that the government set up a specific organization to force media companies to suppress the points of view of the opposition. Sure, the regime media has always been left, but the idea of the U.S. government running an unapologetic censorship operation would’ve been insane. They would’ve summoned big dudes with butterfly nets to haul away anyone predicting that. And yet it was true. It happened. Our government did that, and other Western governments are even more open about it. The Germans are actively proud of their speech suppression, proving once and for all that Morgenthau was right.

This can’t continue forever. It’s not going to continue forever. This status quo is unsustainable. Our elite has failed. The ruling class is trash, and everybody knows it. However, alone among the countries around the globe, it’s only America that seems to be able to beat the largely Boomer-driven reactionary response. Canada famously just reelected the same people who destroyed their country over the last 10 years. That was Trump’s fault, of course – Canadians apparently have no agency. The Australians did something similar. France and Germany both had an establishment coalition made up of parties that should be at each other’s throats instead unite to stop the populists from being heard. Le Pen is headed to jail and AfD is likely to be banned. In Romania, the EU regime just canceled the election. And again, this is all going to be cheered on by regime media lackeys as necessary for the protection of democracy, “democracy” meaning their perpetual stranglehold on power.

So, how is it going to play out? Well, the Boomers of the West are either going to give up power like a normal generation would, or they are going to have power stripped from them. What’s not going to happen is that normal people around the world are going to shrug their shoulders and submit to serfdom. The right thing to do would be self-sacrifice and voluntary retirement, but of course, when have you ever seen the Boomers do anything that benefited anybody but the Boomers?

Well, it’s theoretically possible that we avoid chaos and convulsion, but every day it looks less and less likely that we will be able to. We’re facing greedy, stupid, and narcissistic people whose poor judgment has brought us to this place and whose poor judgment will tip us over the edge.

The big question is where the conflagration ignites. Is it going to start in Europe? Maybe the great revolt begins in some Third World country. Trump already represents a revolt in the United States; if he fails, the guy who comes next won’t be so nice. But the backlash is going to start somewhere. What can’t go on won’t go on, and this will not go on.

Authored by Arthur Schaper via American Greatness,

The United States, the American people, Donald Trump, and even myself: we have all been humbled over the last four years—or the last sixteen years … or even thirty years.

And we needed it.

More than thirty years ago, following the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the United States emerged as the leader of the pack in a once-bipolar world. The Soviet Union collapsed, socialism sloughed off, free enterprise became commonplace as the solution to all our problems, and the liberal democratic process was winning. “It is the End of History,” Francis Fukuyama (arrogantly, short-sightedly) prophesied.

Of course, history didn’t stop, and we had lessons to learn.

Some suggest that this fantasy of global liberalism came crashing down on September 11, 2001. Let’s not forget February 26th, 1993, when Islamic terrorists attempted to topple the World Trade Center by detonating the foundation of one tower to crash into the other.

Islamic terror replaced the adversarial communist regimes as our enemies. America was complacent, prosperous, and secure in its secular liberalism. Instead of remembering what made the West the best—the Gospel, our Judeo-Christian heritage, Biblical truth, our reliance on a Living Savior instead of humanist self-reliance—we got self-righteous and self-satisfied. “We beat the Russians! We are the only player on the world stage!”

Thus, it seemed that there was nothing left to fight but ourselves.

But that was never the case. Marxism’s vision of a stateless world dominated by class conflict never emerged, but Pan-Americanism would never work, either. An America-defined globalism not only offended other nations, but it also undermined the American citizen and the American experiment.

With an obsessive focus on free trade, cheap labor, and making money while ignoring national identity—borders, language, culture, faith, family, and freedom—Americans witnessed the wonders of the American dream turn into an elite fantasy that only the rich and politically connected could enjoy.

We got arrogant, then fearful and angry; we stopped believing in what really made America great. We forgot who we are. We needed to be humbled.

And what is humility? A biblical definition is apropos, I think:

“For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.” (Romans 12:3)

American exceptionalism is a real thing. We the People of the United States should be proud of our heritage. That recognition does not justify American supremacism, however. Nor does it mean our safety, security, or sovereignty depends on what other countries do and believe.

The United States embraced some humiliating defeats not just on September 11, 2001, but in the waning year of the George W. Bush administration, when risky financing and overextended loans inflated housing prices and unleashed the Great Recession.

Instead of taking stock of where we were wrong, we went with a false messiah, Barack Obama, who chimed, “We are the change we have been waiting for.” But we were the ones who caused our own downfall. How could we make changes if we did not change?

From this self-righteous refusal to own our failures came the Occupy Movement, Black Lives Matter, and the re-radicalization of race. Obama long harbored bitter disgust for the United States, and he seduced the American public. Under the Obama Administration, humility was minimized and disparaged, for sure. One of the most repeated words in the 44th president’s speeches was “I.” It was all about him, and to hell with America.

And the country was humbled for the worse. Obama called us all racist and insisted that we needed the government to run our healthcare. He exhorted us to flood our country with “undocumented immigrants” so that we could pay back for all the wrongs that American imperialism had caused. America fell into decline.

Then came Trump, and with him the mantra “Make America Great Again.”

He talked about God restoring America’s previous glory. But was that something he could do himself? Not at all. In too many ways, his first term had some of the hallmarks of amateur hour. He surrounded himself with bad advisors, went with tired ideas, and didn’t transform the Art of the Deal into the Art of Governing.

Election 2020, with COVID, George Floyd, massive spending, and a frustrating Congress, did not help matters. Americans still had not learned their lesson.

We need God. We need biblical truth. We need to restore our Judeo-Christian heritage, our Anglo-American legal traditions, and our revolutionary legacy.

America’s further humbling came under bumbling Joe Biden. Defined by Biden-Harris’ arrogant incompetence, suffused with dementia and DEI, America became weaker, worn out, and adrift, all while witnessing the left’s culmination of all their wishes. Obama got his third term.

Then Trump ran again. He faced challenges from the right because he hadn’t gotten the job done. Perhaps those challenges shaped his second-term determination. Then came a would-be assassin’s bullet, which changed the course of history in our favor.

Trump has acknowledged, “God saved my life.” And why? “To Make America Great Again.”

His second inaugural speech was all business, with a clear reliance on where his—and our—power comes from: God.

Trump is a different man, acting like the president I wanted in 2016, whom I had anticipated DeSantis would be.

Like Homer’s eponymous hero, Trump is a man of many turns, and he’s turning out real results. Ulysses has come home. He has finished off all the suitors, he has his wife Penelope, and the gods are smiling at him. He learned his lesson. He gets it.

President Trump 2.0 has accomplished much of what we had expected in 2017, and more. Trump now knows his limits, and he knows what he can—and must—do. That is true humility.

If his supercharged successes continue, it makes all the disappointments, frustrations, and confusions of the previous six years worth the aggravation.

Authored by Andrew Lowenthal via The Brownstone Institute,

Last week, my non-profit liber-net unveiled a new database of US government awards to mis-dis-and-malinformation (MDM) and other content control initiatives. A previous Network Affects post broke down where that money came from. This one details where the money went, specifically the countries, regions, topics, and activities, and the top organisations that took home the cash.

The below graphs are based on 867 awards made between 2016-2024, out of nearly 1,100 that we reviewed from 2010 to the present day. You can review our process and methodology here. You can see all the graphs from the last post, this post, and a few more here.

When it comes to MDM funding, the vast majority of the awards went to US-based initiatives. The graph below includes a contract totaling nearly $1 billion to military contractor Peraton, but even without it, US recipients received around $318 million, dwarfing the next country, Kazakhstan, at $20 million. Out of the nearly $1.5 billion spent across the 867 awards, around $187 million left the US from a roughly $6.7 trillion annual federal budget.

The “US taxpayers are wasting money on foreigners” narrative isn’t the story here, at least not in the mis/disinformation space.

When you zoom out, it looks like this:

That said, when you look at the data by unique awards (individual grants and contracts made), American organisations are still the main recipients, though it isn’t quite as skewed – US organisations received 220 of the 867 awards made. 

Looking at unique awards is important in part because of the internal government resources and focus it represents. Giving out money costs money, whether it is $1,000 or $1,000,000.

Below, we’ve broken the individual awards down by region. After the US, Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic states are the main focus areas, mostly as a counter to Russian influence.

Here are the unique awards on a map:

Another interesting view is which countries the “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees” awards went to. These are awards where the organisation is not explicitly named (this can be for security justifications or a host of unknown reasons), though in some cases it is easy to deduce what the organisation is (e.g., through the awardee address that is sometimes referenced in the USAspending record).

This is how the Misc. awards break down by country outside the US:

You can view the Misc. awards in our searchable database.

What topics did the money go to? The below outlines our analysis of the major themes. Note that while this is a pie chart, we’ve tagged individual awards with more than one topic as they were frequently combined, such as vaccine “misinformation” in minority communities.

This is how it breaks down among the top eight funders:

We have also classified the awards by the types of activities they entailed, such as conferences, research, or technology development. These were often a little harder to classify, but the general outline is still useful in understanding what “counter-misinformation” work looks like in practice.

Lastly, who got most of the money? 

The two visualisations below detail the top 30 awardees by dollar amount and by the number of individual awards. The $80 million award to the CDC Foundation is a kind of internal transfer the CDC gave to a technically external (but heavily linked) 501(c)(3).

And the unique awards which reveal some more familiar names and close government relationships. The number of awards doesn’t correlate too tightly with the overall funding received.

You can find explore and find more in the database. Enjoy!

Republished from the author’s Substack

As the global population grows and demand for affordable protein increases, eggs remain a dietary staple. On average, people consume roughly 10 kilograms of eggs per year.

However, prices have spiked in recent years due to avian flu outbreaks and rising feed, fuel, and labor costs, which farmers are passing on to consumers. In just four years, egg prices in the U.S. have surged by 238%.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, explores what consumers are paying for a dozen eggs across major economies, based on crowdsourced data from Numbeo and official national statistics. Currency values are converted as of April 24, 2025.

Switzerland Tops the List

Switzerland tops the global chart, with consumers paying an average of $7.31 per dozen eggs—the highest price globally and nearly double what shoppers pay in neighboring Italy.

On the other hand, India offers the lowest egg prices, with a dozen costing just $0.97, reflecting broader affordability in emerging markets.

U.S. Prices Rise Amid Shortages and Policy Shifts

Egg prices in the United States climbed sharply through the end of the Biden administration (topping $8 per dozen), thanks to a combination of avian flu outbreaks, and supply chain disruptions drove costs higher, surpassing prices in many European nations and Canada. 

The last few weeks, since President Trump took over, egg prices have tumbled back below $4 per dozen…

Emerging Markets Offer Relative Bargains

Despite global inflation, several emerging markets remain egg-price havens. In Brazil, Russia, and China, consumers pay under $2 per dozen, making eggs a highly accessible protein source for large populations.

To learn more about food prices, check out this graphic that shows the cost of a McDonald’s Big Mac in different countries worldwide in U.S. dollars.