Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump would, if elected, veto a national abortion ban, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) said on Aug. 25.

“If you’re not supporting it as the president of the United States, you fundamentally have to veto it,” Vance, Trump’s running mate, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The president can sign or veto a piece of legislation that reaches his desk after being approved by both chambers of Congress.

Members can override a veto. That requires two-thirds of the House of Representatives and two-thirds of the Senate.

The Republican vice presidential nominee said a Trump–Vance administration would not impose a national ban on abortion.

“I can absolutely commit that,” he said.

“Donald Trump I think has staked his position and made it very explicit,” Vance added later.

“He wants this to be a state decision, states are going to make this determination themselves.”

Trump has not said explicitly that he would veto abortion ban legislation, but he has said that abortion restrictions should be left up to states.

“Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights,” the former president said in a video on social media earlier this year.

“My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both.”

Trump supported the U.S. Supreme Court in overturning its own precedent established in Roe v. Wade, which concluded that access to abortion was a constitutional right. The justices, including three appointed by Trump, ruled in 2022 that this conclusion was erroneous.

The ruling also reversed a 1992 Supreme Court decision that had prevented states from imposing significant restrictions on abortion before a fetus could survive outside the womb.

The ruling was “only made possible because I delivered everything as promised, including nominating and getting three highly respected and strong Constitutionalists confirmed to the United States Supreme Court,” Trump wrote on his platform, Truth Social, at the time. “It was my great honor to do so!”

Vance said on NBC that Trump “wants to end this culture war over this particular topic” and that “Trump’s view is that we want the individual states, and their individual cultures, and their unique political sensibilities to make these decisions because we don’t want to have a nonstop federal conflict over this issue.”

Instead, the federal government “ought to be focused on getting food prices down, getting housing prices down,” Vance said.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who is running against Trump, has told voters that Trump supports a federal ban on abortion.

“Trump hand-picked three members of the Supreme Court because he intended for them to overturn Roe v Wade—as he intended, they did,” she wrote on the social media platform X recently.

“If he is re-elected, we know he will sign a national abortion ban. As president, I will restore reproductive freedom.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said on X, “God have mercy on this nation if this is now the position of what was the Pro-Life Party.”

Trump, meanwhile, took to social media on Aug. 23 to say that his second term “will be great for women and their reproductive rights.”

He told reporters hours later, at an event in Las Vegas, that he is “very strong on women’s reproductive rights,” including access to in vitro fertilization.

By Benjamin Picton, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

Speaking at the Jackson Hole Symposium on Friday evening, Jerome Powell confirmed the worst kept secret that the Fed is poised to deliver an interest rate cut in September. Powell said that “the time has come for policy to adjust”, but didn’t give any clues as to whether the first move would be the standard 25 basis points, or a supersized 50 basis point cut. Market pricing suggests that traders are unsure on that score. The OIS futures currently have 29bps priced in for September, which is near enough to a coin flip.

Early in his prepared remarks Powell noted that the cooling in the labor market was “unmistakable”.   He suggested that the pace of hiring has slowed, the ratio of vacant jobs to unemployment (the Beveridge Curve) has returned to pre-pandemic levels and both hiring and quit rates also resemble the situation that prevailed prior to Covid19. In Powell’s estimation, “it seems unlikely that the labor market will be a source of elevated inflationary pressures anytime soon.”

Powell says the economy is still growing at a “solid pace”, but he made it clear that the focus has now shifted from fighting inflation to the other side of the dual mandate: maximum employment. To whit, Powell said that upside risks to inflation have receded, but that the Fed does not “seek or welcome further cooling in labor market conditions.”

With clear signals of imminent easing, asset prices reacted in much the way that you would expect. The S&P500 closed 1.15% higher, the NASDAQ pumped 1.47%, 2-year Treasury yields fell 9bps, 10-year yields were down 5bps and both crude oil and gold prices firmed. The Bloomberg Dollar spot index was down by 0.78% on the day, producing a death cross on the chart as the 50 DMA moved below the 200 DMA.

Our own US Strategist, Philip Marey, recently updated his forecast on the path of Fed policy rates. Philip had previously tipped a cut in September followed by another in December and two more in the first half of 2025. Ahead of Powell’s speech, Philip revised this to bunch his four cuts into consecutive meetings (September, November, December and January) owing to the clear signs of labor market softening and our house view that the United States is trending toward recession, or at least a substantial downturn.

If that’s the case, you might be forgiven for wondering why we are sticking with just four 25bps cuts as our view when most estimates of a neutral nominal rate lay somewhere South of that. The reasoning behind our call is the considerable uncertainty about the political situation in Washington. Under a Trump win scenario the imposition of universal tariffs, tax cuts and strong government spending are likely to induce an inflationary boom that would hamper the Fed in cutting rates further. Under the Harris scenario of targeted tariffs, tax increases and strong government spending, the inflation impetus is likely to be weaker, which opens up the possibility of more cuts than we are currently tipping.

There is also the issue of the Middle East bubbling away in the background putting a cloud over supply-side progress. Israel announced over the weekend that it had launched pre-emptive strikes on up to 40 locations in Southern Lebanon where Hezbollah was believed to be preparing imminent rocket and drone launches. 100 Israeli warplanes were involved in the strikes and Israeli sources claim that the attack thwarted the launch of thousands of projectiles into Israeli territory.

Immediately following the Israeli attack, Hezbollah militants launched approximately 320 projectiles into Israel. An Israeli base just outside Tel Aviv appears to have been the main target. Reports suggest that most of the projectiles were intercepted by Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ defence system, but Hezbollah leader Nasrallah went on TV late on Sunday to declare the assault a success, rubbish Israel’s claim that they had prevented “thousands” of projectiles being launched and suggest that Israeli sources are hiding the extent of their losses.

Despite the significant exchange of fire between the two belligerents, the events of the weekend may have helped to forestall the threat of regional war, at least in the short term. Hezbollah’s attack on Israel allows it to save face by claiming revenge for the assassination of Fuad Shukr several weeks ago, while the Israeli strike on Hezbollah rocket positions may have prevented civilian casualties that could have demanded a more severe response from Israel later on. At this stage, both sides are signalling limited appetite to escalate further as they remain wary of taking action that could lead to all-out war.

Consequently, markets have not reacted substantially to the news in early trade. However, it would be a mistake to think that the matter is now closed. Nasrallah warned that the events of the weekend were a “preliminary response” and that Hezbollah will “act accordingly” if they assess that the impact of that response was not “satisfactory”.  We are also yet to see significant promised action from other members of the ‘Axis of Resistance’: Iran, the Houthis & Hamas. Their desire to extract a price from Israel and its allies is no secret at all.

Brent crude prices are surging above the $81/bbl mark on Monday morning, driven by two major headlines: 

• Middle East on edge after Israeli strike on Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon
• Libya’s eastern-based government said it will stop all oil production and exports

The primary driver between the two headlines is Bloomberg’s report that Libya’s eastern government plans to shut down oil production and exports after its Tripoli-based rival moved to replace the central bank leadership. 

Libya Eastern Govt Says It Will Stop All Oil Production, Export

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 26, 2024

Eastern authorities said the declared “force majeure” applies to all oil fields, export terminals, and all other oil facilities. 

Infighting between the two governments has been ongoing for the last week, centering around who leads the Central Bank of Libya (CBL). There are mounting risks that a UN-brokered peace deal could collapse. 

“The internationally acknowledged government in the country’s west has been seeking to replace the governor Sadiq Al-Kabir, who has refused to step down. A government delegation entered the regulator’s offices today to take over,” according to Bloomberg. 

Here’s more on the situation from Bloomberg:

The announcement comes amid an attempt to oust CBL governor Al-Siddiq al-Kabir. Earlier this month, the Tripoli-based Presidential Council (PC) voted unanimously to appoint Mohammed al-Shukri as CBL governor, replacing Al-Kabir.

Over the weekend, local media outlets reported that the new board had taken up its duties and that armed men had abducted several CBL officials.

The east-based House of Representatives (HoR) and the High Council of State (HCS) both issued statements condemning what they described respectively as attempts to “storm” and “seize control” of the CBL – in apparent reference to the board taking up office at the CBL headquarters.

Last week, HoR Speaker Aguila Saleh had warned that removing Al-Kabir could result in shutting down oil production and stopping the transfer of oil revenues to the CBL.

In a separate Bloomberg report, the east-based government warned about “attacks” against employees at the CBL and the attempts by “outlaw groups” to enter “the CBL headquarters by force.” 

What’s critical to understand is that a force majeure across all oil fields, ports, and installations will lead to the interruption of oil production, which totaled about 1.15 million barrels a day last month. The biggest oil field, Sharara, pumping about 270,000 barrels, has been halted. 

What Happens if We Lose All of Libya’s Crude Oil Exports?

Daily Energy Report #Oil #Libya #OPEC #Russia #LNG https://t.co/UrSfvvIRdH pic.twitter.com/O1wL57sUpQ

— Anas Alhajji (@anasalhajji) August 22, 2024

Brent crude prices jumped 2.6% in markets to $81.09/bbl. Prices have been range-bound since early 2023, basing around the $75-$80 level and occasionally jumping above $90 on geopolitical risks stemming from the Middle East. Down pressure on Brent in recent months originated from economic slowdowns in China and risks mounting of a downturn in the US. 

Two weeks ago, we outlined to readers that bullish positioning in Brent by investors was cut to the lowest level on record, mostly due to rising concerns over a global economic slowdown. To us, this signaled a ‘price rebound’ was ahead. 

“Oil blockades are a time-honored tradition in Libya. Unlike recent ones, that have been driven mostly by locals demanding jobs and better living conditions and are relatively easy to resolve, this one is political in nature. Political blockades tend to last several months. A Libya disruption will likely amplify the price impact we’ve seen over the weekend from the latest round of the Israel-Hezbollah airwar,” said Fernando Ferreira, director of geopolitical risk service at the Rapidan Energy Group.

Citigroup analysts noted earlier that a decline in exports could temporarily push Brent prices into the mid-$80s range. Combined with rising geopolitical risks in the Middle East, further deterioration could send crude prices even higher.

Authored by Kenin Spivak via RealClearPolitics,

The Supreme Court had multiple opportunities during the last term to end the censorship of conservatives by social media. It chose a different path. Now, Democrats are free to double down on the Biden-Harris administration’s massive censorship enterprise.

There is every indication they intend to do so. 

The bedrock of American democracy, the First Amendment, prohibits Congress from making laws “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The prohibition also applies to executive actions and state governments. Until recently, there was bipartisan agreement on the centrality of free speech to American liberties. Today, nearly a third of Americans believe free speech rights go too far.

When Donald Trump was elected president, Democrats in Congress threatened social media platforms with antitrust actions and repeal of the libel protections in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act if they failed to rein in conservative speech. When Joe Biden took office, the federal government institutionalized a censorship enterprise that coerced and collaborated with social media platforms to censor, suppress, and demonetize disfavored views.

The New York Times acknowledges the left has long sought to limit “unfettered speech.” Former president Barak Obama told a Stanford University conference that government controls must be imposed to stop so-called “disinformation.” Vice President Kamala Harris announced a White House task force to block disinformation involving women’s issues. Democrat vice presidential candidate Tim Walz told MSNBC, “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.” In fact, both are generally protected by the First Amendment. The Democrat platform sees controlling disinformation as a priority.

By contrast, in July, the Republicans adopted a platform that states: “We will ban the Federal Government from colluding with anyone to censor Lawful Speech, defund institutions engaged in censorship, and hold accountable all bureaucrats involved with illegal censoring. We will protect Free Speech online.”

In Murthy v. Missouri, healthcare professionals, Missouri, and Louisiana sued to block the Biden-Harris censorship regime. During discovery, officials testified that they knowingly sought to end-run the prohibitions on government interference in free speech by working with and through third parties, including Stanford, non-profit associations, and social media companies. After reviewing extensive discovery, U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty found that the Biden-Harris administration had engaged in “a broad pressure campaign designed to coerce social media companies into suppressing speakers, viewpoints, and content disfavored by the government” and issued an injunction to stop it. A unanimous panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the findings but tailored the injunction to eliminate ambiguities and exclude some agencies.

Florida and Texas then passed laws to make it more difficult for social media platforms to ban political speech. The 11th Circuit struck down Florida’s law, finding that it impermissibly limited editorial discretion, while the Fifth Circuit upheld Texas’ law, concluding that content moderation activities are not speech.

Last term, the Supreme Court weighed in on both cases.

In Murthy v. Missouri, a 6-3 Court overruled the Fifth Circuit, holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to demonstrate that their speech was specifically censored by specified actions of identified government officials. The majority found that the platforms had independent incentives to censor content, “often” exercised their own judgment, and likely would have censored the same content without government coercion or encouragement.

In Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, the court unanimously decided that the Florida and Texas appeals courts had inadequately analyzed the First Amendment. It sent the cases back for reconsideration, though warning the Fifth Circuit that content moderation usually involves editorial decisions protected by the First Amendment.

The court’s use of the left’s preferred euphemism, “content moderation,” in these decisions, rather than “censor” or “suppress,” is troubling. And, while the court is properly wary of states intruding in the editorial choices made by social media platforms, it expressed no similar concern about the federal government. Murthy was inconsistent with NetChoice, precedent, and the evidentiary record.

In Peterson v. City of Greenville (1963), the court held that when the government strongly involves itself in a private party’s conduct, it cannot claim the conduct occurred as a result of private choice, even if the private party would have acted independently. In Norwood v. Harrison (1973), Chief Justice Warren Burger explained that the government “may not induce, encourage, or promote private persons to accomplish what it is constitutionally forbidden to accomplish.” In Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. (1974) and Blum v. Yaretsky (1982), the court developed guidelines for when government becomes responsible for private actions by coercing or “significantly encouraging” those actions. In his concurring opinion in Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia Univ. (2021), Justice Clarence Thomas summarized: “The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly.”

Since the court’s ruling in Murthy, the Biden-Harris administration has ramped up its censorship enterprise. A July report from the Justice Department recycles the same justification of malign foreign influence it used in defending Murthy to again authorize DOJ collaboration with social media platforms to suppress disfavored postings. Last week, referring to Elon Musk’s interview with Donald Trump on X, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre channeled former Press Secretary Jen Psaki, asserting that social media companies have a “responsibility” to stop disinformation and misinformation.

Though the Court’s rulings leave an opportunity for future plaintiffs to more carefully link coercion to specific instances of censorship, unless Republicans win in November, government-encouraged censorship of conservatives will only get worse.

Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including The American Mind, National Review, the National Association of Scholars, television, radio, and podcasts.

French judicial authorities have extended the detention of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov following his surprise arrest at Paris’ Le Bourget airport on Saturday. 

The list of charges include fraud, drug trafficking, organized crime, terrorism promotion and cyber-bullying on the popular encrypted messaging platform. “It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform,” the company has said in a fresh statement.

The 39-year old Russian-born Durov, who also holds French and UAE citizenship, is being held for “questioning”. Le Monde is reporting Monday that his detention has been extended by the investigative magistrate.

His detention “was extended beyond Sunday night by the investigating magistrate who is handling the case, according to a source close to the investigation.”

“This initial period of detention for questioning can last up to a maximum of 96 hours,” Le Monde continues. “When this phase of detention ends, the judge can then decide to free him or press charges and remand in further custody.”

So at this point the initial 48 hours was extended to the max of 96 hours, during which time the judge must charge him or release. However, in more serious cases the detention period can reportedly be extended for up to 144 hours, or six days.

Le Monde reviews further:

France’s OFMIN, an office tasked with preventing violence against minors, had issued an arrest warrant for Durov in a preliminary investigation into alleged offenses including fraud, drug trafficking, cyberbullying, organised crime and promotion of terrorism, another source said. Durov is accused of failing to take action to curb the criminal use of his platform.

Russian officials and media have been especially vocal in calling out France’s dubious case against Durov…

Today’s Russian papers on Pavel Durov’s detention in Paris:

* “The blow to Telegram threatens to become a blow to Russia.”
* “Telegram might become a tool of Nato…”
* “If Telegram crashes, how will [our army] fight?”#ReadingRussia pic.twitter.com/q4IYalPjHM

— Steve Rosenberg (@BBCSteveR) August 26, 2024

Absurdly, some American pundits are suggesting ‘Russian links’ and are seeking to justify Durov’s detention based on political alliances, smearing those speaking out on the obvious free speech issues: “Certain quarters…”

Most Americans have no idea who Pavel Durov is, what Telegram is, or why it might be important to the Kremlin. But his arrest swiftly drew attention from certain quarters. pic.twitter.com/a6jngeE1wb

— Jamie Dupree (@jamiedupree) August 25, 2024

The reality is that Durov actually has long been seen as an enemy of Putin and has a deeply antagonistic relationship with the Kremlin.

In 2014, Pavel Durov fled Russia, selling his multi-billion dollar social media company VK after refusing to censor content and share user’s private information with the Russian government.

In 2024, France, an EU and NATO member, arrested Durov for refusing to censor content on… pic.twitter.com/J2M7By1Yr5

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) August 25, 2024

Geopolitical analyst Arnaud Bertrand points out that “This is insane.” He goes on to explain:

Pavel Durov actually acquired French nationality in 2021 through an exceptional procedure: the so-called “eminent foreigner” process. Initiated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it grants French nationality to “a French-speaking foreigner who contributes through their eminent action to the influence of France and the prosperity of its international economic relations”. 3 years later France arrests the guy for doing the very same “eminent actions” they’d granted him citizenship for 3 years earlier. Make it make sense.

Telegram has stated that “Durov has nothing to hide and travels frequently in Europe.” The company continued: “Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act – its moderation is within industry standards.”

By Justin Choi of Campus Reform

The University of California, Los Angeles Medical School hired students to write the curriculum for the school’s required Structural Racism and Health Equity (SRHE) courses. 

A June 2023 document that was obtained by Do No Harm, a medical and policy advocacy group, showed that UCLA’s medical school was seeking to recruit first and second year medical students to develop a curriculum associated with liberal ideas such as critical race theory.

The SRHE curriculum “emphasizes critical race theory, queer theory” and “diversity, equity, and inclusion ideology.” The university’s SRHE course guide directly states: “The first section of the year will focus on … how structural determinants of health such as race shape our present healthcare framework.” 

The document outlined that in order to apply, applicants must have a letter of support from a peer outlining their commitment to anti-racist work.

The Chairman of Do No Harm, Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, told the Washington Examiner that UCLA’s plan to recruit students to “develop curriculum in training other medical students is a terrible idea.” 

He argued that first-year students would not be appropriate mentors when most freshman students never even have treated a patient to begin with. 

By Sarah Prentice of Campus Reform

Cornell University is set to offer a course on ecological justice from feminist, queer, and trans perspectives.

The Ivy League school will teach a “Ecological Justice: Feminist, Queer, and Trans Perspectives” class that will present “an in-depth study of ecological justice from feminist, queer, and trans perspectives.”

The course claims it will unpack how these “marginalized” groups have “led environmental movements and ecological theorizing around the globe,” as well as draw on the “traditions of ecofeminism, racial justice, queer and trans ecology, and disability theory” to show how these perspectives have “reshaped environmental ethics.”

The course description also alleges: “Historically, people marginalized by race, gender, sexuality, disability, and poverty have borne the brunt of environmental degradation.”

The course will be taught by Perry Zurn, a society fellow at Cornell University. Zurn is also a Provost Associate Professor of Philosophy at American University, and affiliate faculty in the Department of Critical Race, Gender, and Culture Studies. 

Zurn specializes in researching political philosophy, critical theory, and trans studies, and also collaborates in psychology and neuroscience.

Cornell offers other courses from an LGBTQ+ perspective. The university is set to offer “Queer Classics” in the Fall of 2024, for example.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

What starts in California and Minnesota is guaranteed to not stay in California and Minnesota if you vote for Harris.

“Liberated” Studies Hit Minnesota

Beginning in kindergarten, the state’s schoolchildren will be indoctrinated in radical racial ideology.

The Wall Street Journal reports Tim Walz Brings ‘Liberated’ Ethnic Studies to Minnesota

Tim Walz was a schoolteacher before entering politics, so what is his approach to teaching? The Minnesota Department of Education will soon release the initial version of a document that lays out how new “liberated” ethnic-studies requirements will be implemented in the state’s roughly 500 public-school districts and charter schools.

Mr. Walz signed the law establishing this initiative in 2023. The department’s standards and benchmarks, approved in January, require first-graders to “identify examples of ethnicity, equality, liberation and systems of power” and “use those examples to construct meanings for those terms.”

Fourth-graders must “identify the processes and impacts of colonization and examine how discrimination and the oppression of various racial and ethnic groups have produced resistance movements.” High-school students are told to “develop an analysis of racial capitalism” and “anti-Blackness” and are taught to view themselves as members of “racialized hierarchies” based on “dominant European beauty standards.”

The Walz administration has relied on committed political activists to design and guide implementation of the state’s education agenda. One of them is Brian Lozenski, an associate professor of urban and multicultural education at Macalester College in St. Paul and a leader and a founding organizer of Education for Liberation Minnesota, or EdLib MN, a group that aims to “be a political force” in Minnesota and “contend with the status quo of colonial education that prioritizes Eurocentric curricula.

The St. Paul course makes “resistance” to America’s fundamental institutions a central theme. It instructs 16-year-olds to “build” a race- and ethnicity-based “narrative of transformative resistance” and to “challenge and expose” “systems of inequality.” It tells them to “resist all systems of oppressive power rooted in racism through collective action and change.” Accompanying artwork, labeled “seeds of resistance,” features protest signs that read “No Bans/No Walls” and “Abolish Prison.”

Minnesota’s experience with this radical restructuring of its public education system may give Americans a picture of what the nation as a whole could soon face.

A Beauty from EdLib MN

Things Kindergarteners Need to Study

• Use economic models and reasoning and data analysis to construct an argument and propose a solution related to an economic question. Evaluate the impact of the proposed solution on various communities that would be affected.

• Apply economic concepts and models to develop individual and collective financial goals and strategies for achieving these goals, taking into consideration historical and contemporary conditions that either inhibit or advance the creation of individual and generational wealth.

• Ask historical questions about context, change and continuity in order to identify and analyze dominant and nondominant narratives about the past.

• Analyze the ways power and language construct the social identities of race, religion, geography, ethnicity, and gender. Apply these understandings to one’s own social identities and other groups living in Minnesota, centering those whose stories and histories have been marginalized, erased, or ignored.

• Describe how individuals and communities have fought for freedom and liberation against systemic and coordinated exercises of power locally and globally. Identify strategies or times that have resulted in lasting change. Organize with others to engage in activities that could further the rights and dignity of all.

• Use ethnic and Indigenous studies methods and sources in order to understand the roots of contemporary systems of oppression and apply lessons from the past that could eliminate historical and contemporary injustices.

Things First Graders Need to Study

• Investigate a variety of historical sources by: a) analyzing primary and secondary sources; b) identifying perspectives and narratives that are absent from the available sources; and c) interpreting the historical context, intended audience, purpose, and author’s point of view of these sources.

• Integrate evidence from multiple historical sources and interpretations into a reasoned argument or compelling narrative about the past.

• Analyze the ways power and language construct the social identities of race, religion, geography, ethnicity, and gender. Apply these understandings to one’s own social identities and other groups living in Minnesota, centering those whose stories and histories have been marginalized, erased, or ignored.

Things Fourth Graders Need to Study

• Explain and evaluate processes, rules and laws of United States governmental institutions at local, state and federal levels and within Tribal Nations.

• Use economic models and reasoning and data analysis to construct an argument and propose a solution related to an economic question. Evaluate the impact of the proposed solution on various communities that would be affected.

• Analyze how scarcity and artificial shortages force individuals, organizations, communities, and governments to make choices and incur opportunity costs. Analyze how the decisions of individuals, organizations, communities, and governments affect economic equity and efficiency. [Mish comment: There’s your pro-socialism and price-gouging indoctrination]

• Evaluate how government actions affect a nation’s economy and individuals’ well-being within an economy. [More socialism if not outright communism]

• Describe places and regions, explaining how they are influenced by power structures. [Excluding of course the indoctrination taught]

• Analyze the ways power and language construct the social identities of race, religion, geography, ethnicity, and gender. Apply these understandings to one’s own social identities and other groups living in Minnesota, centering those whose stories and histories have been marginalized, erased, or ignored.[Massive DEI campaign]

The above snips are from a 109 page “American Experiment” Standards and Benchmarks document for Minnesota.

I stopped at grade 4. I couldn’t take anymore.

Glenn Youngkin Lesson

It is discussion of education, and only education, that propelled Glenn Youngkin to gubernatorial victory in Blue Virginia.

Instead of talking about DEI, indoctrination, inflation, and the border, Trump is attacking Pocahontas, offering ridiculous freebees in competition with Harris without saying how he will pay for them, and let’s be honest (running a pathetic campaign).

If you are cheering playground name calling, then you are part of the problem.

Trump won in 2016 (by a small margin), because Hillary was equally obnoxious and because of a last minute gift from then-FBI Director James Comey reopened the agency’s investigation into her private email server just days before the 2016 election.

Trump lost in 2020 on the current path.

Trump and Hillary are alike. Neither will admit they are to blame for losing.

Don’t fool yourself. Polite stupidity, DEI, and extreme socialistic indoctrination could easily win again if Trump keeps marching down the path he is on.

People are sick of divisive politics, and rightfully so. Biden promised to be a moderate but was a Progressive wet dream candidate instead.

Trump promised less divisiveness and that lasted precisely one day.

Glenn Youngkin might have won in a landslide. Instead, Trump is currently behind because of his own doing.

Trump Would Rather Be Crass Than President

Trump would rather be crass than president. And many are with him on that. https://t.co/YFexDbNoCp

— Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) August 23, 2024

Being crass will not bring an a single vote. Anyone cheering playground name calling is already voting for Trump.

Trump Seeks More Influence Over the Fed

On August 8, I commented Trump Seeks More Influence Over the Fed, a Really Stupid Idea

To understand why it’s stupid, ask yourself what would happen if Democrats get complete control again.

Trump Fires Arrows Missing the Target Badly

Also on August 8, I asked Trump Fires Arrows Missing the Target Badly, Will a Recession Save Him?

Trump’s strategy has gone from boring to shockingly bizarre and counterproductive. Does Trump think his opponent is Brian Kemp or Kamala Harris? What about recession? Walz?

Trump Lets Harris Get Away With Nonsense

Harris is pretending to be a moderate and Trump is letting her get away with it.

If Trump won’t talk about inflation, indoctrination, and his vision of the future instead of his alleged past greatness, then who will?

Harris and the media are very pleased with this aspect of Trump campaign because it allows Harris to stay in hiding.

All I can do is suggest that if you don’t want your kids to be part of an “American Experiment” indoctrination of DEI and socialism, then you need to abandon Harris no matter how crass Trump appears.

Also, ask yourself what would happen if Democrats get complete control.

Very Serious Setup

This is a very serious setup. But if you offend enough people, anger and misplaced hope can easily overrule common sense.

Yet, many Republicans are happy with the Trump campaign. I’m not. Trump’s best hope is a recession will bail him out.

I predict a recession but I don’t know if it will be strong enough.

Improving the McKelvey Recession Indicator

On August 20, I commented Improving the McKelvey Recession Indicator, No False Negative or Positive Signals

Adding the job vacancy rate to the McKelvey (Claudia Sahm) recession signal eliminates false negatives and false positives, and provides a much faster signal than Sahm.

I note that since 1953, every time the economy was in the current state, the economy was in recession.

That does not make the odds 100 percent because everything is up to the NBER, the official arbiter of recessions.

My recession post is on the complicated side, but please check it out.

Also note that the BLS Revises Jobs Down by 818,000 the Most Ever, About 68,000 Per Month

Do I get to say I told you so? My advance estimate a month ago was 779,000 lower. Bloomberg estimated 730,000.

Via OilPrice.com,

• Over 40 energy sector companies have voiced their concerns over Labour’s proposed windfall tax increase, warning it could lead to significant job losses.

• The tax hike, intended to fund green initiatives, has been criticized for potentially hindering investment in both fossil fuels and transition technologies.

• While the government argues the tax is necessary for the UK’s clean energy transition, industry leaders believe it will have a detrimental impact on the economy and energy security.

The government’s plans for North Sea oil and gas are a “blunt response” that could jeopardise hundreds of thousands of jobs not just in the energy sector, several of the industry’s leading figures have warned.

In an open letter to the Treasury, over 40 companies with operations in the North Sea voiced their “grave concern” with the new government’s plans for the Energy Profits Levy, which include raising the headline rate of tax to 78 percent and removing the allowance for investment and exploration.

The signatories—comprising engineering companies like Wood Group, tech firms like 3t, and catering specialists Sodexo—warned that the levy risked jeopardising investment in fledgling transition technologies, such as floating offshore wind and carbon capture technologies.

However, the firms’ main concern was the negative impact the plans would have on jobs, not just in the energy sector but also in industries and communities that support it.

Windfall tax will hit jobs

The North Sea energy industry is believed to support 200,000 jobs, with most of these roles in supporting sectors like catering, transport and infrastructure, Offshore Energies UK – the industry body that choreographed the letter – said.

Entire communities in Aberdeen and much of North East Scotland are dependent on the industry, which is believed to support 30 percent of the city’s jobs.

The letter said: “For our companies, [the tax plans] risk operators – big and small – further scaling back or postponing their investment plans in response. The ramifications will be felt throughout the supply chain, through jobs, and the communities this industry supports, both directly and indirectly.”

But the government has argued its reforms would create “thousands” of jobs in the same part of the UK thanks to offshore workers having the “vital” skills to help build Britain’s renewable capabilities.

GB Energy, the state-owned renewable energy firm that will form the foundations of Labour’s clean energy industrial strategy, will be headquartered in Scotland when it is formally established in the coming months.

The letter also claimed the current plans would widen the country’s energy trade deficit, saying: “The UK spent almost £27bn on imports of crude oil and over £21bn on gas imports last year.

“This is £6bn more than receipts from UK crude oil exports and £17bn more than gas exports. The measures as announced risk both the net import gap for fuels, and the emissions footprint of fuel imports, growing long before the UK can deliver reliable, affordable, alternative energy sources.”

The firms dubbed Labour’s plans a “surprise” despite them having been a core part of the party’s manifesto.

Making Britain a “clean energy superpower” is one of the government’s five core “missions”, which Keir Starmer unveiled in February 2023 – nearly 18 months ago – when his party Party was in opposition.

The government announced the reforms to the energy levy in the run-up to the election, claiming they will help fund approximately £23.7bn in green spending.

The tax was first announced by the previous administration after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine led energy firms’ profits to skyrocket.

It was originally levied at 60 percent, which was then raised to 75 percent, and also contained an allowance for investment and exploration.

But as oil and gas prices have returned to more regular levels, the tax has eaten into the profit of many of the North Sea’s key players; a fact further hampered by the region being one of the world’s most mature, and thus leas profitable, oil fields.

North Sea producers curtail output

On Thursday, Ithaca Energy – one of the region’s biggest players – posted a major dent to profit in its half-year results, which it claimed were in part down to the windfall tax.

And earlier this year, Harbour Energy announced it was cutting 350 UK jobs, blaming the tax after the had said had “all but wiped out” the firm’s profit in 2022.

The letter added: “The Prime Minister has reassured the sector that the North Sea will be managed in a way that does not jeopardise jobs. 

“The Treasury has been tasked with being the most pro-growth in our country’s history, and the Chancellor has committed to ‘working hand-in-hand with business’. Ministers have spoken of working in partnership, of the critical role of the people whose jobs are supported by our offshore energy sector, but we need those commitments to be honoured.”

A spokesman for HM Treasury said: “We are strengthening the previous government’s windfall tax to ensure North Sea oil and gas producers contribute their fair share towards our energy transition.

“Our plans for a new National Wealth Fund and Great British Energy will create thousands of new jobs in the industries of the future.”