Authored by Dennis Prager,

People need to realize the Left is using the alleged “existential” threat of global warming to wage war against liberty, against the Western world’s (not China’s) economy, and against joy.

The automobile, that magnificent enhancement to human freedom and joy, is a target of the Left. The idea that individuals should be able to go where they want when they want in their own car is anathema to the Left — it provides way too much individual liberty. Ideally, almost no one should own a car. We should all aspire to live in a high-rise apartment building in a major metropolis and use public transportation, ride bicycles or walk. If for some reason we have to travel a longer distance, let us say to conservative relatives who selfishly own their own homes in the suburbs, we can use public transportation; and if none is available, we can use Uber or Lyft.

Even the family, one of life’s greatest sources of joy and meaning, is a target of the climate change activists. They believe that there are way too many people in the world. Kids are carbon-emitting machines. So, an increasing number of women, including married women, are choosing not to have children. They don’t see how they can justify bringing children into a world in which they will be roasted to death. And frequently their progressive parents (the would-be grandparents) agree with them. As I wrote in a previous column, based on the many comments of New York Times readers on an opinion piece written by a woman who has decided not to have children because of global warming, many readers wrote that despite the fact that they long for grandchildren, they support their child’s decision to go childless.

Now we have another joy of life that progressives are targeting in the name of combating global warming: Christmas gifts. Many progressives have long opposed giving Christmas gifts in the name of combating “consumerism” (to be fair, some religious conservatives share that ascetic view). But climate change will soon constitute the greater moral reason.

In the Daily Mail this week, a woman wrote an article making this case.

“Last year,” she wrote, “surrounded by wrapping paper and abandoned gifts, I suggested to my husband Chris that next time we shouldn’t buy anything — for each other or the children.

“Not buying anything for my husband is trivial because he can buy for himself. But not buying presents for our two girls, aged six and three, is a trickier proposition…

“We’re increasingly aware of the global impact of our purchases. Everything we buy the kids will go into landfill…

“With the planet on fire and plastics everywhere it seems like we are at a moment of reckoning and have been for some time…

“I’ve forced this rule on the family, telling my mother, in-laws and the brothers and sisters not to buy the girls anything.

“My sister was appalled and very cross that she will be thought of as the mean old aunt. Just because I want to strip the joy out of Christmas, why should she have to?”

This woman’s article encapsulates much of the darkness the Left represents and creates.

• First is the war on joy. Part of the joy of Christmas, especially for children, is receiving gifts. To deny this is to deny reality. This can be verified by asking any adult to describe the joy they experienced as a child looking under the Christmas tree for their gifts.

• Second, it is a war on altruism. Gift-giving may be animated by a number of factors, but one fact is undeniable: Giving people gifts is an altruistic act. If people stop doing so — whether to combat “consumerism” or to combat global warming — they are ending one of the most widespread expressions of altruism in our society.

• Third, children are the primary targets of this nonsense. Progressives seem to have a particular animus for children. They wage war on children’s innocence with early “sex education,” with LGBTQ activism in elementary school, and by promoting drag queen “story hours” beginning at age 5; by their closing schools for nearly two years for no valid reason; by depriving children of God, religion and patriotism; by their irrationally frightening children about their future (they will essentially be burned alive); and now by depriving children of Christmas gifts and, presumably, birthday gifts (they, too, add to landfills).

• Fourth, the woman who wrote this article has no qualms about imposing her beliefs on everyone else. It is not enough for her to tell her husband not to give her 6- and 3-year-old daughters Christmas gifts. She has ordered the girls’ grandparents, aunts and uncles not to do so: “I’ve forced this rule on the family.”

• Fifth, progressive reasoning is not only morally defective, but also factually defective. If no one in the United Kingdom gave a single Christmas gift, nothing would be accomplished with regard to global warming. But a whole society would be deprived of a major joy of life, and the country’s economy would take a major hit.

Just remember this rule of life: Everything the Left touches, it destroys.

The Supreme Court’s new docket just dropped, notably without expedited consideration of Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in his 2020 election interference case – a critical question which will determine whether he can be put on trial for trying to overturn the results of the last presidential election.

BREAKING: Supreme Court docket reflects a *denial* of Jack Smith’s request for expedited consideration of Trump’s immunity appeal. https://t.co/eOKZyWnyhj pic.twitter.com/daCuXjOmkR

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) December 22, 2023

The one-sentence order, with no noted dissents, means that a federal appeals court in Washington will be the first to review a district judge’s ruling earlier this month which rejected Trump’s claim of immunity – with arguments scheduled to begin Jan. 9.

The move (or lack thereof) comes eight days after the USSC agreed to consider whether to expedite consideration of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s petition to short-circuit the appeals court and immediately weigh in on Trump’s claim of presidential immunity to try and have the case tossed.Smith argued that public interest required intervention now so that his well-timed case against the former president could proceed as scheduled in March.

“This case involves — for the first time in our Nation’s history — criminal charges against a former President based on his actions while in office,” Smith said in his filing, requesting the abnormally fast review. “And not just any actions: alleged acts to perpetuate himself in power by frustrating the constitutionally prescribed process for certifying the lawful winner of an election.”

The Supreme Court has denied Special Counsel Smith’s request for an expedited review of the case against Trump.

There won’t be a trial in DC before the 2024 election.

No mistake – this is a big loss for the Special Counsel. pic.twitter.com/nCNiiJe5lG

— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) December 22, 2023

Trump’s attorneys, on the other hand, argued that the case was too important to be rushed, and that Smith was doing the bidding of Joe Biden’s reelection campaign – saying that the special counsel “confuses the ‘public interest’ with the manifest partisan interest in ensuring that President Trump will be subjected to a months-long criminal trial at the height of a presidential campaign where he is the leading candidate and the only serious opponent of the current Administration.”

“The combination of an almost three-year wait to bring this case and the Special Counsel’s current demand for extraordinary expedition, supported by the vaguest of justifications, creates a compelling inference of partisan motivation,” Trump lawyer D. John Sauer wrote.

The move comes after Trump appealed an appeals court judge’s rejection of that argument.

As The Reactionary noted last week;

The setting of Trump’s DC trial for the spring of 2024 – conveniently scheduled one day before the Super Tuesday primaries – was undoubtedly the result of a shared interest between the Special Counsel and the presiding judge, Tanya Chutkan: to convict Donald Trump before the 2024 election. Moreover, given the 11+ million pages of documents involved in this case, the hundreds (if not thousands) of hours of video and audio, and the hundreds of witnesses, the accelerated trial date was a violation of Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, which includes the opportunity to prepare for trial.

The Special Counsel’s DC case against Trump comprises novel legal theories that have never been tried in American courts, most notably whether Presidential challenges to an election can be criminalized under the United States code. The attorneys for Trump have filed lengthy and well thought-out motions, reasoning that the Constitution and the doctrine of presidential immunity required dismissal of this criminal case. Judge Chutkan denied each one in her desire for a quick trial.

This is the last thing Smith wanted…

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge in West Virginia rejected a bid Thursday to remove former President Donald Trump from the state’s ballot, rebuffing a bid from a little-known presidential candidate to remove the former president.

District Judge Irene Berger ruled that John Anthony Castro, the candidate who filed a lawsuit against President Trump, lacked the standing to sue. She sided with attorneys for President Trump, Secretary of State Mac Warner, and the West Virginia GOP to dismiss Mr. Castro’s suit.

U.S. District Judge Irene Berger wrote that the evidence that Mr. Castro had submitted removes “any doubt that Mr. Castro’s purported ‘campaign’ exists as a vehicle for pursuing litigation, not votes,” adding that he could not prove any political activity in the state aside from the lawsuit that he filed.

Mr. Castro, who is based in Texas, has filed at least two dozen lawsuits against the former president to remove him from respective states’ ballots in recent weeks. Earlier this month, a judge in Arizona dismissed a similar lawsuit.

His lawsuit had argued that President Trump should be disbarred from appearing on the state’s ballot because Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that anyone who engaged in an insurrection against the United States cannot be a presidential candidate. The U.S. Supreme Court declined in October to hear the appeal of a similar case that Mr. Castro brought in Florida.

A court in Colorado recently ruled that the former president—under the judges’ reading of the provision—cannot appear on the state’s ballots, although the case is likely going to be appealed to the Supreme Court. The Colorado case, however, was not brought by Mr. Castro but by a left-wing activist group, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, and headed by a board member who currently serves on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s advisory council.

But as Mr. Castro had “alleged that he is a candidate for the Republican nomination for President and anticipates being on the ballot in West Virginia,” his lawsuit “contains few specific factual allegations related to his candidacy,” Judge Berger wrote.

The judge added that “Mr. Castro’s complaint relies on supposition and speculation that if Mr. Trump were removed from the ballot, that his voters and contributors would default to other candidates including Mr. Castro,” adding that “he supplies no specifics to support the conclusion that Trump voters would become Castro voters if his suit was successful.”

“The evidence establishes that he has no campaign offices, staff, or advertising in West Virginia, does not appear in polling, has little name recognition among West Virginia Republican primary voters, and has extremely minimal campaign funds, vastly insufficient to run an actual campaign,” Judge Berger added in her ruling.

“If there were any question as to whether the allegations in the complaint are sufficient to overcome a facial challenge, the evidentiary submissions remove any doubt that Mr. Castro’s purported ‘campaign’ exists as a vehicle for pursuing litigation, not votes.”

After the judge’s ruling on Thursday, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey hailed the order.

“In the West Virginia case attempting to kick President Trump off the ballot, we have prevailed. Strong victory for our Office and the rule of law! Colorado should learn from the wisdom of our courts!” he wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

In response, Mr. Castro, who frequently criticizes President Trump and other GOP candidates like Gov. Ron DeSantis, wrote on X that he disputes Judge Berger’s order, suggesting that he is not “running for President ‘in bad faith’ to ‘manufacture’ standing.”

“So if I was a corrupt POS running for President to enrich myself and corporate oligarchs, they’d find ‘good faith.’ But because I’m running for President based on my principles, they’re saying it’s in ‘bad faith.’ Our system is beyond corrupt,” he wrote. It’s not clear if he will appeal her ruling.

Federal Election Commission records show that Mr. Castro has raised zero dollars via donors. He also has not shown up in any major national or state polls.

Colorado Ruling

Citing their reading of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Colorado Supreme Court found the former president ineligible for the White House.

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

Under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a clause stipulates that a candidate can be disqualified if a person “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States or had “given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” While the federal government has charged the former president in relation to his activity after the 2020 election, he has not been charged with engaging in an insurrection against the U.S. government or similar crimes.

A number of legal experts and even some Democratic officials have disputed the legitimacy of the 14th Amendment-based attempts to block the former president from running. Some criticized the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this week.

Russia and the United States continue to clash in the UN Security Council (UNSC), which was on display again as Friday it passed a new resolution that urges speeding up humanitarian aid deliveries to the Gaza Strip. But both the US and Russia abstained from the vote for contrasting reasons.

The new resolution calls for “urgent and extended humanitarian pauses and corridors throughout the Gaza Strip for a sufficient number of days to enable full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access.”

However, the US is angry it didn’t specifically condemn the Oct.7 Hamas attack, while Russia is unhappy that the final resolution watered down any real call for urging a ceasefire. 

Describing Moscow’s stance, Jerusalem Post writes, “But a weakening of language on a cessation of hostilities frustrated several council members – including veto power Russia – and Arab and Organization of Islamic Cooperation states, some of which, diplomats said, view it as approval for Israel to further act against Hamas for a deadly Oct. 7 attack.”

Wrangling over the fine print had carried on all week:

Diplomats had been working behind closed doors to finalize the resolution drafted by the United Arab Emirates. US official familiar with the discussions said the draft had started with calling for an “urgent cessation” of hostilities. Neither the United States nor Israel currently supports a ceasefire, so the US countered with “a more passive formulation,” the official said, describing the language that ended up in the resolution.

The US had vetoed prior proposed resolutions on the basis that they called for an immediate ceasefire, which Washington rejects in support of ongoing Israeli air and ground operations.

But increasingly, the US has found itself isolated alongside Israel as the death toll soars. The Hamas-Run Gaza Health Ministry has said the death toll now surpasses 20,000 killed – with the majority being women and children. Israel has said multiple thousands are actually Hamas militants.

Russia has been a big backer of UNSC language which demands a halt to fighting:

The representative from Russia put an amendment before the council just before the vote that would have changed the language back to the original “immediate cessation of hostilities” but it was vetoed by the US.

Hawks in the US have lately sought to make a connection between Putin and the Oct.7 terror attack. Most recently, Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley bizarrely claimed at a campaign rally event, “Hamas invaded Israel on October 7th, October 7th is Putin’s birthday.” By this, she painted a picture of covert Russian support to Palestinian militants.

Haley claimed it was part of a plot to take the world’s attention off of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. However, there was nothing in the way of evidence offered for such a grand conspiracy theory based on pure speculation.

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is warning seniors born before 1951 that they are required to take minimum distributions from their retirement plans by the end of the year or face possible penalties.

Required minimum distributions (RMD) are amounts that many owners of individual retirement arrangements (IRA) or other retirement plans must withdraw each year—even if they’re still working.

For 2023, the Secure 2.0 Act raised the age requirement (from 72 to 73) for account owners to have to start taking the mandatory distributions from their retirement funds. This means that people born before 1951 face a Dec. 31 deadline to take the distributions—or face a possible penalty.

“RMDs are taxable income and may be subject to penalties if not timely taken,” the IRS warned in a Dec. 20 announcement.

Penalties In Focus

Account owners who fail to withdraw the full amount of the RMD by the deadline face a 25 percent excise tax on the amount not withdrawn. The penalty may be reduced to 10 percent if the RMD is corrected within two years, the IRS says.

It’s even possible for the penalty to be waived entirely if the account owner can prove that the shortfall in distributions was due to “reasonable error” and that they’re taking “reasonable steps” to remedy the shortfall.

To qualify for penalty relief, taxpayers must file Form 5329 and attach a letter explaining their situation.

The RMD rules require individuals to withdraw from their IRAs every year once they reach the age of 72 (or 73 if the account owner reaches 72 in 2023 or later). This holds true for those who are still employed.

An exception to this requirement is Roth IRAs, whose owners are not required to take RMDs during their lifetime. However, the beneficiaries of a Roth IRA are subject to the withdrawal rules after the account owner’s death.

The rules also apply to employer-sponsored retirement plans—including profit-sharing plans and 401(k) plans—although participants in such plans can delay taking RMDs until they retire. An exception is part owners of the business that is sponsoring the plan (with an ownership stake of at least 5 percent).

Other Recent Developments

On Dec. 19, the IRS said it is providing failure-to-pay penalty relief for roughly 4.7 million taxpayers who didn’t receive automated collection reminder notices from the tax agency.

The $1 billion or so in total penalty relief will be granted to certain individual taxpayers, businesses, and tax-exempt organizations for the taxable years 2020 and 2021, the IRS said.

The taxpayers eligible for the relief are those who did not receive automated reminders from the IRS to pay overdue tax bills when the agency temporarily suspended the mailing of such notices in February 2022 “due to the unprecedented effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Normally, these reminders would have been sent as a follow-up after an initial notice, but the IRS didn’t send them out because it was swamped by a backlog of millions of original and amended tax returns filed at the height of the pandemic that the agency was unable to process.

The IRS did, however, send out initial balance-due notices, so penalties for failing to pay taxes owed continued to accrue.

Citing this “unusual situation,” the IRS said it’s waiving failure-to-pay penalties for certain affected taxpayers in advance of resuming normal collection notices for tax years 2020 and 2021.

The tax relief is automatic but applies only to eligible taxpayers who owe less than $100,000 in back taxes.

The failure-to-pay penalty will resume on April 1, 2024, for taxpayers eligible for the relief.

Demands to Return Pandemic-Era Relief Funds

While the IRS is waiving failure-to-pay penalties for nearly 5 million Americans, it also recently announced that it was sending letters to around 20,000 taxpayers demanding that they return wrongly claimed and received pandemic-era tax credits.

The letters demanding a return of pandemic-era relief money relate to a flood of bad claims for the pandemic-era relief program known as the Employee Retention Credit (ERC). This refundable tax credit was designed for businesses that continued paying employees during COVID-19 shutdowns.

Predatory promoters pushed a large number of improper ERC claims on unwitting businesses, the IRS said.

An investigation by the IRS Criminal Investigation Division uncovered over $2.8 billion of potentially fraudulent ERC claims.

So far, 15 fraudulent ERC cases have resulted in federal charges and of these, six have resulted in convictions. Four of those cases have reached the sentencing phase, with the average sentence being 21 months, the IRS said.

Story continues below advertisemenThe ERC tax credit, which is somewhat complex, is available to employers, not individual taxpayers.

Since the program was enacted, over 3.6 million claims have come in, with ERC-related fraud getting worse over time.

A four-year commercial freeze of Boeing jet deliveries to Chinese airlines could soon end. Bloomberg reported that a 787 Dreamliner left Boeing’s Everett, Washington factory on Thursday, headed for Shanghai and destined for Juneyao Airlines Co.

The 787-9 Dreamliner delivery to Juneyao would be the first new Boeing jet delivered to an airline in the world’s second-largest economy since November 2019 – or around the time when China grounded all 737 MAX jets after two crashes killed 346 people. 

The delivery comes one month after Presidents Joe Biden and Xi Jinping met in San Francisco at the APEC Summit. A Bloomberg report at the time said there were talks between both countries to end the freeze on Boeing jets. 

Boeing confirmed to Bloomberg in an emailed statement about the 787 delivery to Juneyao. The plane landed at Shanghai’s Pudong airport on Friday afternoon. 

In July, Boeing CEO David Calhoun said while the planemaker is “not dependent” on additional China deliveries, he was hopeful that deliveries of jets to Chinese carriers would restart soon. 

About a third of Boeing’s 250 MAX jet inventory is destined for Chinese airlines, according to Jefferies.

“There are clear regulatory and political hurdles to overcome, but the resumption of deliveries appears to be nearing,” Jefferies analyst Sheila Kahyaoglu wrote in a note earlier this week. 

Another 787 is set to leave Everett for China Eastern Airlines, a sign the Juneyao delivery might not be the only one. 

By Julianne Geiger of Oilprice.com

Ford said on Thursday that half of all 1,550 Ford dealers chose to sell electric vehicles in 2024 – down from two-thirds that said this time last year that they would opt in to sell EVs for 2023.

The other half of Ford dealers will sell – and service – ICE and hybrid models.

“EV adoption rates vary across the country, and we believe our dealers know their market best,” Ford spokesman Martin Günsberg told the Detroit Free Press. 

The slack buy-in from Ford dealerships comes even after Ford relaxed its requirements for dealers in the EV dealer program last January that mandated fewer L2 chargers and extended installation deadlines.

Certified Ford EV dealers were once required to spend $500,000 for a single public DC fast charger, or $1 million if they wanted to be in the Elite tier of EV dealers. The extra $500,000 was for another fast charger and demo units, among other things. But the high price tag caused Ford dealers to balk.  

Buick saw a similar engagement among its dealers last year, according to Electrek, with half of Buick dealers choosing buyouts of their franchises instead of selling EVs.

As a result, GM now has 47% fewer Buick dealers as of the end of this year compared to January. The hardline taken by GM with regard to its Buick dealers is in line with Buick’s ambitious plan to be all-electric by 2030.

Ford said earlier this month that it was reducing the planned number of F-150 Lightning EV trucks by half starting next year, kicking out 1,600 F-150 per week beginning in January, down from 3,200 per week, saying that it would match production with customer demand. 

A startup developing the next generation of sustainable high-speed transportation is shutting down, according to a new report. 

Once backed by Richard Branson’s Virgin Group, Hyperloop One promised to create the next generation of sustainable high-speed transportation. However, the issue was that the startup made this promise in a period of easy money when interest rates were at the zero lower bound. 

A source informed Bloomberg that only a few Hyperloop One employees remain. They’re tasked with selling the startup’s assets, such as a test track near Las Vegas and heavy equipment.

In 2022, the startup laid off 200 employees and closed its headquarters in Las Vegas. The remaining workers are set to be terminated on December 31.  

Even with money set aside from the Biden Administration’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the idea of a hyperloop system across the US never took off. 

“Virgin removed its branding after the startup decided last year to focus on cargo rather than people,” according to Bloomberg.

Dubai port operator DP World has a majority take in Hyperloop One. Another source said all intellectual property from Hyperloop One will be transferred to the DP. 

In April, Bloomberg obtained a document showing that Hyperloop One merged with a shell company, resulting in the shares being written down to zero. This allowed shareholders of the shell company to effectively take control of the Hyperloop One. Employees of the startup were told DP orchestrated the transaction, a source said. 

All it took was a period of high interest rates to squash the next generation of sustainable high-speed transportation. 

Authored by Sam Bourgi via CreditNews.com,

The holiday season is supposed to be a time of cheer, but for many Americans, it brings nothing but dread – especially financially.

According to NPR, roughly half of Americans are “dreading the holidays” this year due to added financial stress. High interest rates, stubborn inflation, and the resumption of student loan payments make it harder for people to get into the holiday spirit.

Apparently, having children compounds the problem as the costs of gifts and holiday travel continue to rise.

“[T]he holidays are just an enormously stressful time in about a hundred different ways. And when things are difficult financially, it just makes it even more stressful,” said Matt Schulz, the chief credit analyst for LendingTree.

Against all odds, Americans are still “doing” Christmas—they’re just going deeper into debt to make it happen.

Last year, a survey from LendingTree found that about a third of Americans planned to go into debt during the holidays.

The situation is a lot worse in 2023: A study by the Achieve Center for Consumer Insights found that half of respondents will use credit to pay for the holidays this year.

The survey results align with Creditnews’ reporting on consumer debt trends over the past three months. American credit card debt is at an all-time high, more consumers are requesting credit limit increases, and low-income households are close to maxing out their cards before Christmas.

It’s not hard to see why delinquencies are on the rise.

Although 37% of survey respondents in the Achieve study said they expect to pay down their holiday debt in just two months, there’s a good chance it’ll take them much longer.

Falling deeper into debt

There’s a mountain of data suggesting Americans are consistently going deeper into debt.

About one in four Americans takes on additional debt each month, according to a survey by Clever Real Estate. Roughly half (48%) use their credit cards for everyday living expenses such as food and rent.

Then there’s the fact that about one in ten U.S. credit cards are in chronic debt—meaning regular payments mainly cover interest and fees while barely scratching the principal balance.

Adding Christmas gifts to ballooning monthly expenditures is a powder keg for personal finances.

In this environment, it’s not difficult to see why Americans plan to reduce their holiday spending by 2.1% this year, according to the Conference Board. Spending on non-gift items is forecast to plunge by 16%.

Consumers are done splurging

Americans’ bleak outlook on the holidays could carry over into next year as a weakening jobs market and depleted savings start to affect their spending habits.

The Fed’s most recent “Beige Book” survey of regional businesses found that “Sales of discretionary items and durable goods, like furniture and appliances, declined, on average, as consumers showed more price sensitivity.”

And “some banks noted a slight uptick in consumer delinquencies,” the report stated.

Consumer wallets account for 70% of GDP, so when spending dries up, the economy usually follows. Retailers are already warning of a “discretionary recession” as consumers become more selective in how they spend their money.

The last few months have been volatile – to say the least – for US durable goods orders, November saw orders surge 5.4% MoM – the biggest monthly jump since July 2020. This sent year-over-year orders growth up 10.1% – the highest since May 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

The headline orders print was more than double the +2.3% MoM expected and Ex-Transports, durable goods orders jumped 0.5% MoM (+0.1% exp).

The surge in orders was primarily based on non-defense aircraft & parts orders surging 80.1% MoM – as goes Boeing, so goes the S&P 500?

Source: Bloomberg

However, core capital goods shipments, a figure that is used to help calculate equipment investment in the government’s gross domestic product report, declined for the second month in a row, dragging YoY growth down to +1.0% – the lowest since Feb 2021…

Source: Bloomberg

So, apart from Boeing, things maybe aren’t full Goldilocks after all.