Update (1220ET):

United Auto Workers at several Volvo-Owned Mack Trucks (unaffiliated with Detroit’s three major automakers) locations have authorized a strike as their contract expires on Sunday. 

“The contract covering 3,500 UAW members at Mack in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Florida expires this Sunday, October 1st. These members voted to authorize a strike by 98%. It’s time to win a fair contract at Mack,” UAW posted on X. 

The contract covering 3,500 UAW members at Mack in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Florida expires this Sunday, October 1st. These members voted to authorize a strike by 98%. It’s time to win a fair contract at Mack.#StandUpUAW pic.twitter.com/vs4XhbwLAG

— UAW (@UAW) September 28, 2023

*    *    *

Update (1105ET):

The United Auto Workers’ pay hike demand of 40% over a new four-year contract with Detroit’s three major automakers has ‘bit the dust.’ That’s according to Bloomberg, citing a person familiar with the talks. The figure now stands at 30%, but still far apart from Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co., and Stellantis NV’s proposed offers of around 20%.

“It takes into account a cost-of-living allowance, or COLA, and a general wage increase,” the people said, adding it will generate interest from non-unionized auto workers and help increase the union’s membership base.  

Bloomberg noted, “Ford has already offered a 20% pay increase, plus COLA payments on top of it. The UAW also had lowered its demand for pay raises to 36%. If the COLA formula gives workers additional raises, it represents a smaller gap between the two sides on pay.” 

President Biden might be the ‘touch of death’ for the union as he joined the picket line on Tuesday, echoing UAW Boss Shawn Fain’s demands of 40%. 

Even at 30%, there’s still a big spread between the union’s demands and automakers. 

As noted earlier, if Fain doesn’t feel talks with automakers are progressing, he will call for broader strikes on Friday. 

*    *    *

United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain plans to announce expanded strikes Friday morning if talks with Detroit’s legacy automakers do not make significant progress on a new four-year labor deal, reported Reuters, citing a person familiar with the matter. 

The new UAW-imposed deadline follows a week after the union declared its intention to broaden its initial strikes on Sept. 15 at the assembly facilities of General Motors Co., Stellantis NV, and Ford Motor Co. to include 38 more parts and distribution centers for GM and Stellantis. However, UAW has decided not to expand strikes at Ford over positive talks. 

On Wednesday, UAW’s Facebook page posted a Facebook Live event slated for Friday at 1000 ET. The union calls it a “stand-up announcement.'” 

“If Fain triggers walkouts at more plants starting at noon (1600 GMT) on Friday, the UAW is expected to continue work stoppages currently underway until a new contract is ratified,” the source said. 

In a separate report, a source told Bloomberg that union representatives met with GM negotiators on Wednesday evening, though no immediate meetings with Ford or Stellantis were planned. 

“The union’s strike strategy is to remain flexible and respond to what is happening at the bargaining table,” the person said. When asked whether Ford would be included in the next round of strikes, the person said: ‘Everything is on the table.’ 

As of Wednesday, the strike involves 18,300 workers or about 12% of UAW’s 146,000 members whose labor contracts expired two weeks ago (Sept. 14). 

UAW boss Fain has yet to budge from 40% pay hike demand over a new four-year contract, while automakers are around 20%. A Deutsche Bank note breaks down just how far apart the union and automakers are from striking an imminent deal. 

On Tuesday, President Biden joined Fain on the picket lines in Michigan. When a reporter asked the president: “Mr. President, should the UAW get a 40% [pay] increase?” He responded: “Yes.” 

“Mr. President, should the UAW get a 40% [pay] increase?”

BIDEN: *confused* pic.twitter.com/Ya8LbCOimv

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 26, 2023

It’s unprecedented for the president to walk the picket line. Presidents historically avoid strikes and usually act as mediators. 

On Wednesday night, former President Trump was in Michigan, pitching to autoworkers he would terminate Biden’s EV mandate. 

TRUMP: On day one I will terminate Biden’s EV mandate pic.twitter.com/WaKsqkJMnF

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 28, 2023

… and why would Trump do that? Well, as explained in a Detroit Free Press opinion piece by Mike Rogers, a Republican candidate for Michigan’s open US Senate seat, Biden’s EV push “will kill Michigan jobs”: 

With the UAW strike expanding against the Big 3 automakers, it’s clear we are at a critical point that will determine the future path of our state’s most important economic sector. Not only are the futures of General Motors, Ford and Stellantis at risk, along with countless Michigan-based suppliers that help uphold the industry, our national security is put into question as well.

There is a lot on the line as Biden Administration red tape forces auto companies to transition to electric vehicles. What does this mean for workers? Estimates show that over 175,000 people in Michigan are employed directly for auto companies or parts suppliers, and since building electric vehicles requires at least 30% less labor, that could mean tens of thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs here in Michigan could be eliminated.

The stated goal of the Biden administration is reducing greenhouse gas emissions to fight climate change. The problem is their solution to accomplish this goal is misguided, will eliminate jobs that drive our economy, and the biggest beneficiary won’t be the climate, it will be China.

The next round of strikes could affect the production of large trucks and SUVs. One estimate by Morgan Stanley’s auto strategist, Adam Jonas, shows automakers stand to lose around $250 million in profits per day. 

CNN has cited Ukrainian military sources to say that Wagner fighters have been redeployed to the battlefield in Ukraine, but this time under the Russian defense ministry. 

Hundreds of Wagner fighters have reportedly appeared in the east, according to the Ukrainian sources. The last time the Ukrainians had seen them in significant numbers was after Wagner units had handed control of Bakhmut in the east over to the Russian regular armed forces. 

But the following month, in June, Wagner staged a mutiny and short-lived armed “march on Moscow” – which resulted in several deaths among Russian soldiers. After the rebellion fizzled out and the group’s head Yevgeny Prigozhin agreed to peace, much of Wagner was exiled to Belarus.

Below is what a Ukrainian commander had to say on their reemergence: 

On Wednesday, the Deputy Commander of Communications for Ukrainian troops in the East, Serhii Cherevatyi, said that the former Wagner fighters who had returned to Ukraine were now working for the Russian Ministry of Defense or its affiliated structures and had joined as individuals not as a unit.

“As of now, there are several hundred of them in our direction, on the Eastern Front, in different areas,” Cherevatyi told CNN.

But he sought to downplay the significance of their return, saying Russian forces in Ukraine “are short of everyone there now, so any man is good for them.”

Thus it appears that any returning Wagner fighters are now serving as regular troops, which President Putin had previously stipulated. In the summer he had offered that they either sign individual contracts with the defense ministry, or be exiled to Belarus.

According to a separate CNN source: 

“Wagner is here too,” a drone operator with call-sign “Groove” told CNN’s Fred Pleitgen on the ground in eastern Ukraine on Tuesday. “They came back, they swiftly changed their commanders and returned here.”

However, Ukrainian sources have been seeking to emphasize Wagner is no longer a significant “threat” as it once was…

He said that of roughly 8,000 Wagner fighters who were stationed in Belarus, around 500 are returning to Ukraine’s eastern front. Yevlash noted that Wagner fighters no longer pose a “significant threat” since the death of their leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin.https://t.co/4PIXToduIk

— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) September 27, 2023

The process to disband and normalize Wagner was likely sped up in the wake of the August 23 death of Prigozhin and his entire senior leadership after their private plane went down outside Moscow while en route to St. Petersburg. It is believed that either a bomb was detonated, or it was shot down by an anti-aircraft missile.

Wagner’s fate as a large entity with financial interests across the globe is as yet uncertain. There’s speculation it may be absorbed into the Russian state, but at the same time it is clearly still very active in its Africa operations. 

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has received its first official contract for the Starshield network from the US Space Force. This network will provide satellite communications for the military via the company’s Starlink satellite internet system and comes just weeks after Democrats, corporate media, and a former comedian turned Ukraine president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, attempted to cancel Musk after the Washington Post published excerpts from his new biography on the billionaire, alleging he rejected help from Ukraine to assist in the attack against Crimean port of Sevastopol last year. 

Space Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek told CNBC that the contract’s term for Starshield is one year with a maximum value of $70 million. She explained: 

“The SpaceX contract provides for Starshield end-to-end service (via the Starlink constellation), user terminals, ancillary equipment, network management and other related services.” 

SpaceX’s growing portfolio of Pentagon business comes as the space company was recently contracted to launch a Falcon 9 with 13 satellites for the Pentagon’s Space Development Agency. In June, the Pentagon bought an undefined number of Starlink terminals for the battlefield in Ukraine. 

Meanwhile, Democrats and their allies in the corporate press are infuriated about Musk’s success (apart from his free-speech platform “X,” where users are allowed to discuss non-approved government narratives). They attempted to cancel the billionaire earlier this month after a WaPo piece cited a new biography on Musk revealing that he allegedly turned down a Ukrainian request to assist in a sneak attack against Russia. 

Musk recently told the panel on the ‘All-In’ Podcast Summit that Walter Isaacson – his biographer – had misunderstood the situation and that the initial decision to not allow access to Starlink around the Crimean border was due to sanctions from the Biden administration.

“Starlink have provided connectivity to Ukraine since the beginning of the war and as the Ukrainian government has said, Starlink was instrumental in the defense of Ukraine – although the media forgets to mention that.”

Musk explained that “at the time [the attack] happened, the region around Crimea was turned off… and the reason it was turned off was because the United States has sanctions against Russia, which includes Crimea, and we are not allowed to turn on connectivity to a sanctioned country without explicit permission – which we did not have from the US government.”

The billionaire said the Biden administration has apparent ‘beef’ with him and warned some in the government are weaponizing agencies against him. 

If you want to know where the attacks stem from, look no further than this former Obama administration official who recently declared: “The US government needs to end its relationship with Musk immediately.” 

What infuriates Democrats the most is that it’s not one of their own leading the charge in the space race. So, what do you do when you want to attack your opponent? Attempt to cancel them in the press, but the attempt was unsuccessful this time.

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

Federal agencies accused of pressuring social media companies to remove users’ content will remain free to contact those companies for the time being because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has temporarily stayed a judge’s order forbidding them from making contact.

The heavily litigated case remains pending before the 5th Circuit. At the same time, a Supreme Court order blocking the judge’s order remained in effect as of press time late on Sept. 27.

The Biden administration has been ordered to make submissions to the 5th Circuit by midday on Sept. 28 as to how that court should proceed.

On July 4, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana, an appointee of President Donald Trump, issued a ruling that prohibited several agencies, including the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), from intimidating social media companies.

The lawsuit that spawned the injunction was filed by Missouri and Louisiana’s attorneys general, who have accused Biden administration officials of engaging in what amounts to governmental censorship-by-proxy by leaning on social media companies to take down posts or suspend accounts.

The lawsuit alleged that the Biden administration urged or even mandated Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and YouTube “to censor viewpoints and speakers disfavored by the Left,” under the cover of combating “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “malinformation.”

Judge Doughty’s injunction provides that agencies and their employees may not communicate with the social media companies by “urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

The agencies may not flag content on social media platforms or seek to remove content or suppress its reach. The agencies also may not press the platforms to alter their guidelines for the removal, suppression, or reduction of content that contains protected free speech, the injunction states. But the injunction allowed federal officials to continue to correspond with social media firms regarding criminal activity, national security threats, and other matters.

On Sept. 8, the 5th Circuit partially upheld Judge Doughty’s injunction, allowing certain agencies to communicate with companies in some circumstances.

But on Sept. 14, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito put the July 4 ruling on hold, which allowed the government to continue interacting with the social media companies. Then on Sept. 22, Justice Alito extended the stay to 11:59 p.m. on Sept. 27.

As of the evening of Sept. 27, the Supreme Court had neither acted to extend nor to refuse to extend the stay.

But on Sept. 26, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and Missouri Attorney Andrew Bailey advised (pdf) the Supreme Court in a letter that on Sept. 25 a panel of the 5th Circuit withdrew its order and granted a rehearing in the case at the request of the two Republican attorneys general.

The 5th Circuit ordered the Biden administration to respond to the petition for rehearing by 12 noon on Sept. 28 and stayed Judge Doughty’s injunction “pending resolution of Appellees’ petition for panel rehearing,” according to the letter.

The 5th Circuit order was issued by a three-judge panel. The panel consisted of Judges Edith Clement and Jennifer Elrod, who were appointed by President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2007, respectively, and Judge Don Willett, who was appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017.

Attorney General Bailey told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders: Now” sub-series last month that the Biden administration’s “vast censorship enterprise” that is targeting American voices and operates amid “a dystopian scenario, Orwellian in nature,” should be permanently halted.

Mr. Bailey said the preliminary part of the discovery process “has uncovered a relationship of coercion and collusion between the White House across a spectrum of federal agencies to silence American voices on big tech social media in violation of the First Amendment.”

“We’ve got to build a wall of separation between tech and state to protect Americans’ First Amendment rights, and the first brick of that wall was laid on July 4, when the court agreed with our side of the issue and issued a nationwide injunction preventing President [Joe] Biden and the federal bureaucracy from coordinating with big tech social media to silence core political speech, which is protected under the First Amendment.”

After the trial court acted, the DOJ “almost instantly” moved against the injunction and “actually had the audacity to argue that the nation would suffer irreparable harm if they weren’t allowed to continue violating Americans’ First Amendment rights,” Mr. Bailey said at the time.

In the DOJ’s emergency application on Sept. 14, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar asked the Supreme Court to allow federal officials to call into question online posts that they claim pose a danger to public health. The DOJ argued that federal officials need to be able to correspond with social media companies for national security purposes.

Under Judge Doughty’s injunction, “the Surgeon General, the White House Press Secretary, and many other senior presidential aides risk contempt if their public statements on matters of policy cross the ill-defined lines drawn by the Fifth Circuit,” Ms. Prelogar wrote.

“CDC officials run the same risk if they accurately answer platforms’ questions about public health. And FBI agents risk being hauled into court if they flag content posted by terrorists or disinformation disseminated by covert malign foreign actors.”

Ms. Prelogar also argued that Judge Doughty’s injunction was “vastly overbroad” and said it “covers thousands of federal officers and employees, and it applies to communications with and about all social media platforms.”

The Supreme Court is currently in its summer recess. The court resumes oral arguments on Oct. 2.

Traditionally, the second revision to GDP data (which comes three months after the end of a given quarter) is a boring, subdued affair… except for once every five years when alongside the latest data revisions, the BEA (the B usually stands for Bureau but in this case it may as well stand for Biden’s) also publishes a wholesale revision of all GDP going back some two decades. Today was one of those time, and boy was it a doozy.

As we warned one week ago in “Ignore The Hawkish Fed: Not Only Is GDP About To Tumble, Next Week It Will Be Revised Sharply Lower“, moments ago the Bureau of Economic Analysis published Q2 GDP data which – at least at the headline level – was largely in line with previous numbers and expectations, printing at 2.1%, the same as the previous revised estimate published in August and just below the consensus estimate of 2.2% (range 2% to 2.5% from 54 economists).

So were we wrong? Not really, because while the headline GDP number was as expected, the most important component to US GDP, personal consumption was nowhere near as expected. In fact, printing at 0.8%, down 80% from 3.8% in Q1, it was a downright disaster.

As shown in the chart below, Personal Consumption was expected to print unchanged from the 1st revision to Q2 GDP at 1.7%. Instead, it came in less than half at 0.8%, a 9-sigma miss to expectations!

Furthermore, at a sharply downward revised print, the Q2 GDP consumption was not only the first sub-1% print since September 2020, it was the lowest consumption going back to the covid quarter, Q2 2020.

Confirming this, the BEA coyly put it as follows:

The update from the “second” estimate primarily reflected a downward revision to consumer spending that was partly offset by upward revisions to business investment, exports, and inventory investment. Imports were revised down.

Of course, when it comes to the US economy which is 70% spending-driven, all that matters is consumer spending, and the sudden collapse there confirms what we have been saying: the US is about to careen into economic contraction once the various factors that will slam Q4 GDP come into play including:

• the resumption of student loan payments, which will subtract (at least) 0.5% (and likely much more) from quarterly annualized GDP growth
• the federal government shutdown, which will reduce quarterly annualized growth by around 0.2% for each week it lasts
• reduced auto production from the ongoing UAW strike which will reduce quarterly annualized growth by 0.05-0.10% for each week it lasts.

Taking a closer look at the components of Q2 GDP we get the following picture, courtesy of the highly politicized BEA which waited two months after the end of the quarter to tell us that the state of the US consumer was less than half as strong as expected:

• The increase in business investment reflected increases in structures, equipment, and intellectual property products.
• The increase in consumer spending reflected increases in both services (led by health care, as well as financial services and insurance) and goods (led by recreational goods and vehicles, as well as gasoline and other energy goods).
• The increase in state and local government spending reflected increases in investment in structures and compensation of state and local government employees.
• The decrease in exports reflected a decrease in goods (led by industrial supplies and materials; consumer goods, except food and automotive; and foods, feeds, and beverages) that was partly offset by an increase in services (led by travel).

While it is largely irrelevant since all the historical data was also revised, compared to the first quarter, the deceleration in GDP in the second quarter primarily reflected a deceleration in consumer spending, a downturn in exports, and a deceleration in federal government spending. These movements were partly offset by an upturn in inventory investment, an acceleration in business investment, and a smaller decrease in housing investment. Imports turned down.

Quantifying the changes in Q2, we get the following picture:

• Personal Consumption contribution to the change in GDP was just 0.55%, down more than half from 1.14% in the last revision, and down massively from 2.54% in Q1
• Fixed investment was where the BEA plugged the consumption hole, and despite continued cuts in CapEx, fixed investment magically boosted Q2 GDP by 0.9%, up from 0.66% in the previous revision,
• The change in Private Inventories was exactly 0.00%, almost as if it was fat fingered, although considering it was -0.09% in the previous revision, it’s somewhat credible.
• Net Exports were also used by the BEA to incredulously boost GDP because somehow, despite the soaring dollar, net exports contributed 0.04% to the bottom line GDP number (exports -1.09% vs imports 1.13%), up from a -0.22% detraction previously. How this is possible, again, with the dollar surging is anyone’s guess.
• Finally, government consumption was largely unchanged from the previous estimate, and at 0.57% it contributed just over a quarter to the bottom line GDP print of 2.06%.

Of far lower importance was the latest price data, which showed a headline GDP price index of 1.7%, down from 2.0% in the previous revision. Excluding food and energy, the PCE “core” price index increased 3.7%, unchanged from the last revision and in line with expectations, after increasing 5.0 percent.

Finally, looking at corporate profits, the BEA reported that profits increased 0.2 percent at a quarterly rate in the second quarter after decreasing 2.6% in the first quarter; this was the first positive quarter since Q3. 

• Profits of domestic financial corporations decreased 10.9 percent after increasing 3.6 percent.
• Profits of domestic nonfinancial corporations increased 1.8 percent after decreasing 4.1 percent.
• Profits from the rest of the world (net) increased 4.5 percent after decreasing 1.6 percent.

Corporate profits decreased 2.7 percent from the second quarter one year ago

Finally, as a reminder, here is the main reason why today’s GDP report actually matters:

Comprehensive Update of the National Economic Accounts

Today’s release presents results from the comprehensive update of the National Economic Accounts (NEAs), which include the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPAs) and the Industry Economic Accounts (IEAs). The update includes revised statistics for GDP, GDP by industry, GDI, and their major components. Current-dollar measures of GDP and related components are revised from the first quarter of 2013 through the first quarter of 2023. GDI and selected income components are revised from the first quarter of 1979 through the first quarter of 2023.

We will now take a closer look at the various GDP revisions and share the data in a subsequent post.

Sales of Apple’s newest and priciest iPhones may be chilled by a growing chorus of user complaints about the phones overheating to the point of being too hot to hold and even shutting down on their own, with some testers recording temperatures above 120 degrees. Depending on the cause, Apple may only be able to address the issue by reducing performance. 

About half of Apple’s revenue comes from iPhone sales. This latest development will won’t boost the company’s shares, which had already fallen 6.6% over the last month, compared to a 3.18% loss for the computer and tech sector, according to Zack’s.  

The complaints are circulating around Apple’s iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max, which have only been on the market since Sept. 22 for regular retail sales, and Sept. 15 for pre-orders. The iPhone 15 Pro starts at $999 and the Pro Max at $1,199. The priciest version asks $1,599. 

Apple’s iPhone sales slipped 2.4% in the quarter that ended July 1, and the complaints about overheating threaten the company’s hopes of reversing that trend amid general weakness in the smartphone market. Consider the publicity damage from observations like this one from an Apple-centric account with 740,000 followers: 

My iPhone 15 Pro Max has major overheating issues after a few mins of use

Things are not looking good so far… pic.twitter.com/aGNYGOK3Kg

— Apple Hub (@theapplehub) September 24, 2023

At first, the overheating phenomenon seemed most prevalent during initial setup and while charging, but new users are reporting that normal usage is rendering the phone too hot to handle. “I’m just browsing social media, and it’s burning up,” said one. 

This user demonstrated temperature readings as high as 42 degrees Celsius — or 108 degrees Fahrenheit: 

The natural titanium iPhone 15 Pro gets extremely hot, so much so that it becomes difficult to hold. Furthermore, it heats up after just a 2-minute FaceTime call or when scrolling through reels for 8-10 minutes. This is a new issue for me, as I’ve never encountered this with any… pic.twitter.com/Qu0QK1xGLd

— Mohit Verma (@itz_mohitverma) September 25, 2023

A Wall Street Journal reporter topped that, obtaining a reading of 112 degrees by simultaneously charging her phone and using it in processor-heavy ways. The gold medal, however, goes to a Chinese tech platform that scored a whopping 122 degrees by downloading the “Genshin Impact” game. Simply playing the game in hi-res mode put it back in that danger zone. 

Industry observers are offering competing theories about the cause of the problem. Initially, fingers were pointed at TSMC’s groundbreaking 3-nm processor. However, on Wednesday, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote that he thinks materials and design are the principal suspects: 

“The primary cause is more likely the compromises made in the thermal system design to achieve a lighter weight, such as the reduced heat dissipation area and the use of a titanium frame, which negatively impacts thermal efficiency.”

As Apple strives for lighter and lighter phones, there’s a price to be paid where heat dissipation is concerned. With the iPhone 15 Max’s design centered on a new titanium frame rather than stainless steel, designers may have gone too far. “It’s the Icarus theory,” iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens tells the Wall Street Journal. “Apple flew too close to the sun, and the wings started melting off.”

I bought the new iPhone 15 pro, upgraded from the 14 pro, and I wish I hadn’t.

My iPhone 15 pro is overheating & feels slower than my old phone somehow, and there is no noticeable difference in the camera output.

Don’t upgrade!

— Sheel Mohnot (@pitdesi) September 27, 2023

Overheating isn’t just about user comfort. According to Apple, “using an iOS or iPadOS device in very hot conditions can permanently shorten battery life.” To guard against that, iPhones shut themselves down if the phone exceeds hot or cold temperature parameters.

It’s one thing for that safeguard to be triggered when you accidentally leave your phone in a car on a hot day. It’s something else altogether when you’ve simply been using your thousand-dollar-plus phone for normal functions. 

Sometimes I cant even use my phone due to extreme heat 🥲 pic.twitter.com/aKqkttN6F4

— Mohit Verma (@itz_mohitverma) September 25, 2023

As for fixing the issue, Kuo ominously suggests Apple may be in a pick-your-poison pickle: 

“It’s expected that Apple will address this through software updates, but improvements may be limited unless Apple lowers processor performance. If Apple does not properly address this issue, it could negatively impact shipments over the product life cycle of the iPhone 15 Pro series.” 

This isn’t the only new complaint related to Apple’s new flagship iPhones. Behold the iPhone 15 Pro Max’s unsettling fragility: 

CONFIRMED: iPhone 15 Pro Max is about as fragile as a glass picture frame. Get a good case ASAP, and if you’re particularly rough on your phones, AppleCare+ may be worth it.

Video by JerryRigEverything: https://t.co/GEMXia5Wof pic.twitter.com/eo95uG7xbu

— Zach Laidlaw (@ztlaidlaw) September 23, 2023

Meanwhile, users and reviewers have also been slamming Apple’s proprietary carry-cases for the new phone line. Consistent with its woke environmental push, the new, $59 cases ditch leather in favor of a proprietary “FineWoven” fabric that are said to be slippery and highly susceptible to staining, scratching and even collecting lint and dog hair.

Initial jobless claims hovered just above 200k (204k to be exact) for the second week in a row (well below the 215k exp) but the non-seasonally-adjusted claims data printed at 175 – its lowest since Sept 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

The distortions in initial claims – from Ohio fraud to Minnesota extensions – appear to have largely been ‘fixed’…

Source: Bloomberg

Though we note that Ohio saw claims jump significantly, only outdone by California…

Continuing claims remain well below 1.7mm…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, we wonder just what is going on with the claims data when The Conference Board survey is signaling the labor market is worsening significantly and financial conditions are tightening aggressively…

Source: Bloomberg

When will this data be ‘free’ to reflect reality?

No College Mandates, an advocacy group that argues against the Covid-19 vaccine for higher education, counts 79 colleges and universities that require their students to be vaccinated this fall semester. 

“There are 79 colleges in the US still mandating COVID vaccines when there should be zero just like the rest of the world. Do Not Comply!” No College Mandates posted on X. 

The advocacy group said “COVID injections for one of the lowest risk populations” is “insanity.” They added higher education has “zero efficacy and safety data for the the newly approved COVID injections. It is incomprehensible that this remains a reality.” 

Many of these schools mandating Covid vaccines are situated in or around Democratic-controlled metro areas (map courtesy of X user Broken Truth). 

No College Mandates states on their website: 

“It is the fundamental right of each individual to freely choose which medical interventions to receive based on informed consent. Neither sufficient clinical trail data for young adults nor long-term safety data exist for these recently developed and novel vaccines. Because the coercive nature of college vaccine mandates completely disregards students’ individual freedom and right to bodily autonomy, we strongly believe that these mandates are unconstitutional, unethical, unscientific and undoubtedly contributing to the psychological distress and the staggering rise in mental health issues among young adults. Institutions of higher learning which impose vaccine mandates do not uphold the very civil rights and liberties they teach and purport to vehemently defend.”

If you are curious about which colleges have lifted mandates, the group has published a spreadsheet listing those institutions (read: here). 

Authored by Andy Puzder via RealClear Wire,

Speaking at a convention in April, United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain identified what he considered the union’s “one and only true enemy – multibillion-dollar corporations and employers that refuse to give our members their fair share.” He may be attacking the wrong enemy.

The UAW is now engaged in a strike of historic proportions against America’s big three auto manufacturers: GM, Ford, and Stellantis (owner of Chrysler). But it’s the Democratic Party’s climate activists who pose the most significant threat to American auto workers today – the forced transformation of the U.S. auto industry from gas to electric-powered vehicles (EVs).

As for the strike, the UAW’s demands include a stunning 40% pay raise over the next four years. According to CEO Jim Farley, that increase would put Ford “out of business.” Yet, in a response that hardly seems miserly, Ford has offered a 20% increase over the life of the contract and an immediate 10% increase.

For a starting point in negotiations, it’s strong evidence of good faith, if not generous. GM and Stellantis will likely make offers in that range. But the final number won’t mean much to the union workers whose jobs disappear.

Turns out that it takes 40% fewer employees to manufacture EVs than it does to manufacture gas-powered vehicles. According to a recent analysis by James Sherk and Jacob Sagert at the America First Policy Institute, the Biden administration’s proposed EV rules will eliminate at least 117,000 existing auto manufacturing jobs.

In addition, the majority of EV jobs won’t be union jobs. They will either go to non-union companies (such as Tesla) or right-to-work states in the South. In those states, workers can’t be compelled to join a union, which explains why so many foreign manufacturers have opened their U.S. plants there.

Part of the problem is that the Democrats’ climate bill (ironically named the Inflation Reduction Act) promotes the use of “domestic” labor rather than “union labor.” That was the result of lobbying by foreign auto manufacturers, many of which have or intend to build plants in right-to-work states. It’s also evidence that the climate-activist wing of the Democratic Party is more concerned with promoting EVs than with preserving jobs for their traditional union allies.

In fact, to accomplish its EV goals, the Biden administration is attempting to force them on consumers who just don’t want them. According to the Deloitte 2023 Global Automotive Study, 62% of Americans prefer their next car purchase to be a gas-powered vehicle, 20% prefer a hybrid, and a mere 8% prefer a pure EV.

So, perhaps it’s not surprising that Ford, the second-largest seller of EVs with 7.5% of the market, can’t sell all the EVs it’s producing despite losing nearly $60,000 on every sale. This year alone, Ford estimates it will lose $4.5 billion in its EV business. That’s money that could be available to meet the UAW’s demands if the Biden administration weren’t pushing EVs on American consumers – and manufacturers.

The problems the UAW is facing should not come as a surprise. Given the lack of consumer demand, the transition to EVs will only occur if the government suppresses the free market and forces a conversion. There are always unanticipated consequences when government elites impose their will rather than allowing consumer demand and the free market to guide the economy. It’s one of the primary reasons socialism always fails.

The unintended consequences of the administration’s green agenda will be numerous and consequential. The rare-earth minerals necessary for battery production come from foreign countries, where they are extracted using forced labor and child labor. Mining those ores, and then disposing of the batteries at the end of their useful lives, will cause long-term environmental damage. Moving to EVs at scale will increase America’s reliance on China, where the batteries, their components, and the great majority of EVs are manufactured. Finally, America’s electricity grid, which is already stressed, is likely to be overwhelmed once a large segment of the population is using it to power their cars. 

The current strike is one of these unintended consequences, as the union sees EV jobs moving to non-union companies, right-to-work states, and China. Discussing the EV transition in an op-ed earlier this month, Fain stated that “at stake in these contract negotiations is the very future of the auto industry itself – and workers’ place in it.” Given the Biden administration’s push for EVs, is it any wonder that the UAW has yet to endorse President Biden for 2024?

Certainly, no one could blame workers for believing climate activists in the Democratic Party are selling out their union supporters. It’s an unintended consequence that could be a game-changer in next year’s election. Even if the big three auto manufacturers meet the union’s demands on wages, the EV problem will not go away.

Nevertheless, President Biden appeared on the UAW picket line in Michigan on Tuesday, attempting to walk a fine line between supporting striking workers and giving the presidential stamp of approval to the union’s specific demands. Bullhorn in hand, he told the crowd, “You guys, UAW, you guys saved the automobile industry. … You should be doing incredibly well too.” He didn’t take questions.

Donald Trump sees an opening. Already popular with union workers, though perhaps not their leaders, Trump recently pointed out the obvious – EVs are “a disaster for both the United Auto Workers and the American Consumer” that would “wipe out” the UAW. He’s skipping next week’s Republican presidential debate and visiting Detroit to speak with striking auto workers. The reception he gets may be telling.  

Andrew F. Puzder is the former CEO of CKE Restaurants, Inc. and a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy.

The Guardian on Wednesday has published some of the contents of a secretive document sent from the Ukrainian government to its Western allies in the G7, which compiles findings from the Iranian-manufactured drones Russia has used in hundreds of attacks on Ukrainian targets.

The conclusion of the document entitled “Barrage deaths: report on Shahed-136/131 UAVs” is that Western components have made their way into construction of Iranian Shahed Kamikaze drones, which Kiev sees as a scandal which must be dealt with.

“A wide range of components produced by western companies have been found in the downed drone models, according to the submission to the G7, which comprises France, the US, the UK, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada, plus the EU,” The Guardian writes, based on the secret document it has reviewed.

The publication attempted to track down some of the Western companies, located across Europe, whose parts are being used by the Iranians to manufacture the drones: 

A fuel pump manufactured in Poland by the German company Ti Automotive GmbH, of which the British multinational TI Fluid Systems is the parent company, was discovered in a Shahed-136, as well as a microcontroller with built-in flash memory and a very low-voltage drop regulator with inhibitor made by the Swiss firm STMicroelectronics, according to the paper.

Also discovered in a Shahed-136, was an integrated circuit of a buffer network driver and a transistor made by International Rectifier, a subsidiary of the German firm Infineon Technologies AG.

TI Fluid Systems did not respond to a request for comment. Their equipment is freely available to buy from retailers across Europe and the company has previously said it does not sell into Iran.

Likely these components are exported to Iran via third party countries with which Tehran has relations, despite Washington’s years-long sanctions campaign against the Islamic Republic.

The Ukrainian report references customs information to show that “almost all the imports to Iran originated from Turkey, India, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Costa Rica.”

The report found that Western technology enabled Russia to conduct hundreds of drone raids on Ukrainian cities: 

In a 47-page document submitted by Ukraine’s government to the G7 governments in August, it is claimed there were more than 600 raids on cities using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) containing western technology in the previous three months.

According to the paper, obtained by the Guardian, 52 electrical components manufactured by western companies were found in the Shahed-131 drone and 57 in the Shahed-136 model, which has a flight range of 2,000km (1,240 miles) and cruising speed of 180kmh (111mph).

But perhaps most interesting, and bizarre, was the “solution” that Kiev offered…

The Ukrainian government not only urged Western allies to attack suspected drone manufacturing plants in Iran, Syria, and Russia—but went so far as to request long-range missile so it could conduct these attacks itself.

The Guardian says that Kiev actually wanted to attack Syria and Iran. “Iranian kamikaze drones used in the latest attacks on Ukrainian cities are filled with European components, according to a secret document sent by Kyiv to its western allies in which it appeals for long-range missiles to attack production sites in Russia, Iran and Syria,” says the report.

The Guardian:

Ukraine suggested allies launch missile strikes on Iraninian Shahed UAV factories.

Among the suggestions for action by Ukraine’s western allies – at which they would probably baulk – are “missile strikes on the production plants of these UAVs in Iran, Syria, as… pic.twitter.com/zd9tSl1Q1C

— Clash Report (@clashreport) September 27, 2023

And according to the very words quoted from the Ukraine-authored document itself: 

Among the suggestions for action by Ukraine’s western allies – at which they would probably baulk – are “missile strikes on the production plants of these UAVs in Iran, Syria, as well as on a potential production site in the Russian federation.”

The document goes on: “The above may be carried out by the Ukrainian defense forces if partners provide the necessary means of destruction.”

If such a wild scenario as Ukraine attacking Middle East countries were to play out, it would probably broaden the war. At the very least, Iran would be pulled more directly into the conflict, and it would be easy to imagine a scenario where Tehran began sending its own troops to Ukraine to partner with the invading Russian forces.