What does it take to be wealthy in America? It depends, of course, on where one lives.
According to the 2023 Modern Wealth Survey by Charles Schwab (see below), you need a net worth of at least $1.7 million to be “financially comfortable” in San Francisco, and $4.7 million to be considered “wealthy.”
And in Houston? $606k is “financially comfortable,” while $2.1 million is “wealthy.”
Overall, the net worth that Americans say that is needed to be “wealthy” in the United States is $2.2 million in 2023.
Here are the average wealth numbers indicated by respondents across 12 major U.S. cities, based on a survey of 1,000 people between 21 and 75:
In San Francisco, respondents said they needed $4.7 million in net worth to be wealthy, the highest across all cities surveyed, and more than double the national average.
This figure dropped from last year, when it stood at $5.4 million. The vast majority of people in San Francisco say that inflation has had an impact on their finances, and over half say that living in the city impedes their ability to reach their financial goals, citing steep costs of living.
In Los Angeles and San Diego, it takes $3.5 million to be wealthy, the second-highest across cities surveyed. In New York, it takes $3.3 million in net worth to reach this target. It is home to over 345,000 millionaires, the highest worldwide.
Houston, where the cost of living is less than half of San Francisco, respondents said a net worth of $2.1 million is needed to be wealthy. The average salary is $67,000 in Houston, while in San Francisco it falls at $81,000.
The Wealth Paradox
Separately, the survey asked whether respondents “feel wealthy” themselves.
Overall, 48% of all respondents said they feel wealthy, and those people had an average net worth of $560,000. This is a considerable divergence from the $2.2 million benchmark they said was needed to be wealthy.
Here’s the breakdown for major cities, illustrating the paradox:
Millennials were most likely to feel wealthy, at 57% of respondents, while 40% of boomers felt wealthy, the lowest across generations surveyed.
Explaining the Divergence
When digging deeper, it becomes clear that wealth is not simply a number.
In fact, the survey indicates that many Americans place greater importance on non-monetary assets over monetary assets when they think of wealth.
For instance, 72% said having a fulfilling personal life was a better descriptor of wealth than working on a career, which was only chosen by 28% of respondents. Meanwhile, enjoying experiences (70%) was a better reflection of wealth compared to owning many nice things (30%).
Interestingly, there was a narrower margin in choosing between the importance of time (61%) over money (39%).
Beyond monetary figures, these findings illustrate the layers that influence what it means to feel financially healthy today, and how this affects an individual’s overall quality of life.
On a steamy summer morning, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. strode into a hotel conference room in Columbia, South Carolina, amid a barnstorming town hall tour of a state where Joe Biden won close to 49 percent of the vote in the 2020 Democratic primary.
Mr. Kennedy spoke about his 2024 presidential campaign. Democrat pundits say he is a fringe candidate who spreads conspiracy theories. Polls show him with the highest favorability rating of any presidential candidate.
There is no path for Mr. Kennedy to defeat President Biden, critics claim, despite questions about President Joe Biden’s age and mental fitness, low approval ratings, and surveys showing that Americans are concerned about the economy.
Earlier this year, the Democratic National Committee voted to give its full support to the president.
Mr. Kennedy agrees that unseating an incumbent president in the same party is a daunting challenge but disagrees with doubters who say he has no chance of securing the nomination.
The 2024 presidential nominee will be announced during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next summer. Until then, Mr. Kennedy intends to continue to press his case.
“The DNC has around $2 billion, and they’re spending that money generously to try to marginalize me in many ways, but I think most Democrats care about one thing more than anything else, which is to beat Donald Trump,” Mr. Kennedy told The Epoch Times. “I think President Biden cannot do that. I can.”
Mr. Kennedy is the nephew of President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963; and the son of Robert F. Kennedy, who was shot and killed after a campaign speech while running for president in 1968.
During his town halls and meet-and-greets, Mr. Kennedy tells stories from time spent with his uncle and father and connects them to his presidential campaign.
He wants to continue his father’s legacy of uniting Americans from all economic classes and ethnic backgrounds.
“I think we do that by telling the truth to people. My dad did it that way. He talked about uncomfortable issues but talked about the truth. I think people are tired of being lied to by the government, by the media,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“My dad ran against an incumbent president in his own party (Lyndon B. Johnson) during a divisive time. I’m running against a larger challenge because I am facing an entire infrastructure that is against me, from my own party and Big Tech and the pharmaceutical industry.”
An environmental attorney and the founder of Children’s Health Defense, Mr. Kennedy is widely known for being outspoken about the health risks of vaccines. His stand on these and other issues has drawn support from voters who are not left-leaning.
The candidate, however, has said that he won’t do that, reiterating that stance over the last month in town halls and meet-and-greets in South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City.
“I’m a Democrat. This is my identity, but I want my party back,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I’m running for president because the Democratic Party has lost its way. I want to remind the Democratic Party of what we are supposed to represent.”
“A focus on the middle class and labor, the well-being of minorities, a focus on the environment, civil liberties, and freedom of speech.“
He frequently talks about “unity” and “healing the divide.”
“I intend to bridge this toxic polarization that is really destroying our country and tearing us apart,” Mr. Kennedy said.
He called his campaign a “peaceful insurgency” that he hopes will appeal to conservative Republicans, independents, moderates, and liberal Democrats.
“During the 35 years I spent as one of the leaders of the environmental movement in our country, I was the only environmentalist who was regularly going on Fox News. I went on Sean Hannity repeatedly—Bill O’Reilly, too,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“I want to talk to media members and voters who share differing opinions than mine, because how else are you going to persuade?
“I think we have a lot more in common than what the media portrays. What keeps us apart are things that are rather trivial. We let them feed this toxic polarization. We need to talk. We need to have conversations with people from a wide range of views.”
Days after a House hearing on censorship in July that saw Democrats attempt to block Mr. Kennedy from testifying, a Harvard-Harris poll showed that he has a higher favorability rating than any other 2024 presidential candidate.
Mr. Kennedy saw a favorable rating of 47 percent and an unfavorable mark of 26 percent, according to a survey of 2,068 registered voters, conducted July 19–20 and released on July 23. Former President Trump carried a favorability rating of 45 percent compared with an unfavorability number of 49 percent. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had a 40 percent favorable rating and 37 percent unfavorable, and President Biden’s rating was 39 percent favorable and 53 percent unfavorable.
Mr. Kennedy also had the highest net favorability of all 2024 presidential candidates in a June poll from The Economist/YouGov.
Kennedy campaign manager Dennis Kucinich is a former Democratic congressman from Ohio who ran for president in 2004 and 2008. He believes Mr. Kennedy can “rebuild and save” the country and that there is a path to victory over Biden.
“He is the only Democrat who can reach across the political spectrum, which means he can win in 2024,” Mr. Kucinich told The Epoch Times.
“Conservatives, liberals, independents, and libertarians are responding to this campaign because of the unique qualities of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and because there is an understanding he stands for unity, freedom, truth, and authenticity. That is what’s resonating with people.”
When asked about President Biden and former President Trump, Mr. Kennedy is measured in his responses.
“I’m not going to attack other people personally,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I don’t think it’s good for our country. And what I’m trying to do in this race is bring people together, is try to bridge the divide between Americans.”
‘Poison, Hatred, and Vitriol’
Mr. Kennedy stands for “de-escalating” what he called “poison, hatred, and vitriol.”
Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly expressed his disapproval of President Biden’s job performance, but he has refrained from personal attacks about the 80-year-old’s mental fitness.
“If there’s a policy I disagree with—like the war, like censorship, the lockdowns—I’m going to criticize those, but I’m not going to attack him as a man,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“I will say, whether he’s up to it or not, whether he’s making his own decisions—the decisions that are coming out of the White House are bad decisions.”
President Biden is not scheduled to appear in Democrat primary debates, a decision Mr. Kennedy believes the president should reconsider.
“I think it would be better if we have a democracy where every candidate debates,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“I suppose he is making a strategic decision that’s based upon his own interest, but I think we’re living in a period when people have lost faith in the democratic process, and they think the system is rigged.”
President Joe Biden and President Trump should take the debate stage as a sign of respect for American voters, Mr. Kennedy said.
“Americans shouldn’t feel like we live in the Soviet Union, where the party picks the candidates. I think it would be much better for our democracy, and we’d be a better example for the world and improve our credibility with the American people if we actually allowed democracy to function and all the candidates participated in debates, and town halls, and retail politics.
“It is important for the Democratic Party that there is a primary debate. Ultimately, a Democrat will debate a Republican, and the Republican will likely be Trump. He is probably the most successful debater in this country since Lincoln Douglas,” said Mr. Kennedy, noting how President Trump defeated a crowded pool of Republican primary candidates in 2016.
“He has his own technique that people like. It’s like going into a prize fight. You need practice, and that usually happens in the primary,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“Asking the president to not debate in the primary is like asking a prizefighter to practice by sitting on the couch.”
In South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City, Mr. Kennedy talked to voters about the economy and issues on which he disagrees with President Biden.
In Charleston, he criticized the president for continued financial support to Ukraine.
“One of the big problems we have in our federal government is the addiction to war,” Mr. Kennedy said. “President Biden went to Congress and asked for another $24 billion for the Ukraine War.
“We’ve spent $8 trillion dollars on wars since 9/11. If we kept that money home, we would’ve had child care for every American. We would have free college education for every American. We’d be able to pay for our Social Security system.”
He believes that he, and not President Biden, is the candidate who will best represent Democrats in 2024 and beyond.
“I am the only choice that is going to end the war machine, that is going to really focus on rebuilding the American middle class, taming inflation,” Mr. Kennedy said.
About gun control, Mr. Kennedy said, “I do not believe that, within that Second Amendment, there is anything we can meaningfully do to reduce the trade and the ownership of guns.”
“Anybody who tells you that they’re going to reduce gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic,” he said. “I think we have to think about other ways to reduce that violence.”
Mr. Kennedy did note that he would sign an assault weapons ban if he were president and the legislation was placed on his desk.
A vocal opponent of the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Kennedy vowed at a town hall in Brooklyn on Sept. 1 that he would ban pharmaceutical advertising.
He is outspoken about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine for some in the population who were coerced to take them, but he told the Epoch Times that he is not “anti-vaccine.”
“I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” he said. “I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times, but it doesn’t matter because that is a way of silencing me. Using that pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing or marginalizing me.”
Mr. Kennedy has said that, initially, he was not in favor of former President Trump’s border wall. But after seeing the border firsthand in Arizona in July, he changed his mind. He said there is a need for increased infrastructure and technology at the border, including more segments of a physical wall, and sensors in areas where a wall isn’t feasible.
Until the United States can seal the border, he said he doesn’t think it is possible to get an immigration reform package through Congress.
Mr. Kennedy visited the Arizona–California border with Mexico in early June and met with illegal immigrants, Border Patrol agents, and other stakeholders.
“The Democratic Party thinks our function should be welcoming all immigrants into the country no matter what, and to basically open the borders. And the experiment has been a disaster, a humanitarian catastrophe,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“I watched it firsthand. I watched 300 people come across the border and then be processed and sent to locations all over the country with court dates seven years down the road.”
“There’s now seven million people who have come across illegally and have no legal status in this country. Those people are very vulnerable now to unscrupulous employers who are paying them $5 and $6 an hour,” he said.
Mr. Kennedy called the Biden administration’s open border policy “a way of funding a multibillion-dollar drug and human trafficking operation for the Mexican drug cartels.”
“As president, I will secure the border, which will end the cartel’s drug trafficking economy. I will build wide doors for those who wish to enter legally so that the U.S. can continue to be a beacon to the world where diversity and culture make us great,” he said.
“Immigration is good for our country, but this kind of immigration is unfair to everybody,” he said.
Ending the Ukraine War
Mr. Kennedy has called for de-escalating the war in Ukraine. He explained that he is sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and added that Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded the country illegally, but he chastised the United States for its role in the conflict.
“We have neglected many, many opportunities to settle this war peacefully,” he said. “We have turned that nation into a proxy war between Russia and the United States.”
Mr. Kennedy has urged President Biden to negotiate a peaceful end to the Russia-Ukraine war, which started when Russia invaded the neighboring nation in February 2022.
“Russia is not going to lose this war. Russia can’t afford it,” Mr. Kennedy said. “It would be like us losing a war to Mexico.”
As part of his reasoning for ending the Ukraine war, Mr. Kennedy referenced his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.
“My uncle Jack said that the primary job of an American President of the United States is to keep the country out of war. He kept out of Vietnam. He sent only 16,000 military advisers there—mainly Green Berets,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“In October 1963, he learned that one of his Green Berets had died, and he asked his aide to give him a combat casualty list, and the aide came back and said 75 had died so far. He said: ‘That’s too many.’”
The American Dream
When it comes to supporting labor unions, Mr. Kennedy’s ideas are similar to President Biden’s.
“In my administration, you can expect vigorous action by the Justice Department and the Department of Labor to enforce laws against union-busting and unfair labor practices,” Mr. Kennedy said.
“We will also raise the minimum wage so that unions have a higher floor from which to bargain. We will negotiate trade treaties that don’t pit American workers against low-wage foreign workers in a race to the bottom.”
At his campaign stops. Mr. Kennedy likes to talk about the flourishing economic period the nation experienced after World War II.
“I grew up during the heyday of American economic prosperity. It was in the 1950s and 1960s that the archetype of the American Dream was born. It was not something available only to a lucky few; it was within the reach of most Americans,” he said.
CNN Political Director Admits Biden In Danger From “Troublingly Low” Approval Ratings
A new poll from CNN conducted by SSRS found that President Biden’s reelection campaign is already in trouble, with 46% of voters, overall, saying that any GOP candidate would be preferred over Biden – including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.
According to CNN political director David Chalian, Biden’s approval ratings are “troublingly low.”
Amontg those polled, 58% say Biden’s policies have made economic conditions worse, and 70% say things in America are going badly. Just 33% of those polled described Biden as someone they’re proud to have as their president.
“Look at that approval number over time. Since the spring, he’s been hanging out in this very low, troubling approval rating for him and It really has not fluctuated for him all that much,” said Chalian. “Take a look by party. You noted among Democrats, his approval rating is down a bit from where it was in July. He’s at 74% among his own party faithful. Independents, holding troublingly low for the president at 36%. Obviously, single digits among Republicans.“
A recent Wall Street Journal poll also spelled bad news for Biden, with former President Donald Trump leading Biden by 11 points on the question of who had a better record. Trump also led Biden by 10 points in perceived mental fitness to hold office. Fifty-eight percent of those polled said the economy has gotten worse over the past two years, with a majority of those polled disapproving of Biden’s handling of the economy. -Daily Caller
Watch the whole clip (via the Daily Caller),
“And look at how Biden stacks up against all of his modern-era predecessors at this point in their presidency. Going to draw a line here to show he’s hanging out in this category with Trump and [Jimmy] Carter. Something about Trump and Carter, they lost their reelection efforts,” he continued.
In an article published last month in Foreign Policy Analytics, Karim Khan – the lead prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in the Hague – declared that his office will now be investigating and potentially prosecuting “war crimes” committed in cyberspace. This comes after Joe Biden ordered his administration to begin sharing evidence of alleged Russian war crimes committed in Ukraine with the ICC.
Khan wrote that his office will investigate cyber crimes that possibly violate the Rome Statute. “Cyber warfare does not play out in the abstract. Rather, it can have a profound impact on people’s lives… Attempts to impact critical infrastructure such as medical facilities or control systems for power generation may result in immediate consequences for many, particularly the most vulnerable. Consequently, as part of its investigations, my Office will collect and review evidence of such conduct.”
On Thursday, Washington and London sanctioned 11 people allegedly affiliated with Trickbot, a Russian hacking group accused of targeting businesses and government infrastructure, as well as hospitals, during the coronavirus pandemic. A US Treasury statement describes the individuals as “key actors involved in management and procurement” for Trickbot, which is claimed to be connected with Russian intelligence.
Lindsay Freeman – the director of technology, law, and policy at Berkely’s Human Rights Center – explained that the ICC’s remit extends beyond hackers themselves to the command structure above them, which could lead to charges against higher level military officers or Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin, he has been accused of kidnapping, and unlawfully deporting to Russia, thousands of Ukrainian children as well as teenagers.
According to a report in Wired, Khan’s office confirmed the new cybercrime mandate with the outlet. “The Office considers that, in appropriate circumstances, conduct in cyberspace may potentially amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and/or the crime of aggression.” The spokesperson continued, “…such conduct may potentially be prosecuted before the Court where the case is sufficiently grave.”
Disinformation, vaguely defined, is listed as one of Khan’s concerns in his article, “We are likewise mindful of the misuse of the internet to amplify hate speech and disinformation, which may facilitate or even directly lead to the occurrence of atrocities.” He suggests the ICC could prosecute people for leaking confidential information as well, writing “disinformation, destruction, the alteration of data, and the leaking of confidential information may obstruct the administration of justice at the ICC and, as such, constitute crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction that might be investigated or prosecuted.”
It is noted, in the Wired report, that Kiev is currently conducting its own investigation into Russian “war crimes carried out via cyberattacks.” Evidence collected as part of the Ukrainian government’s investigation could also be provided to the ICC’s prosecutors to assist with their cases.
Regarding the legal precedent, Bobby Chesney – director of the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas Law School – says “I don’t think anyone who’s serious about international law would dispute that there are at least some circumstances in which intentional harm to civilians can be carried out through cyber means in a way that qualifies as an attack” that violates the Rome Statute’s principle that warring parties distinguish between military targets and civilians. Neither Russia, Ukraine, nor the United States, are parties to the Rome Statute.
Last June, Gen. Paul Nakasone, the head of US Cyber Command, revealed to Sky News that Washington has been aiding Ukraine by conducting “offensive” cyber-attacks against Russia. Nakasone said the US has “conducted a series of operations across the full spectrum; offensive, defensive, information operations” aimed at Russia, without offering more details.
Ukraine formally joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Cyber Defense Center earlier this year. Biden has previously warned that cyber conflicts are liable to start a real war with Russia and China. “If we end up in a war, a real shooting war with a major power, it’s going to be as a consequence of a cyber breach of great consequence.”
As with the United States, Russia is not a member of the ICC and does not recognize the court. In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act.” The bipartisan legislation goes as far as to authorize military action against the Netherlands – a fellow founding member of NATO – to prevent US officials and military personnel accused of war crimes from facing accountability before an international tribunal.
During the Donald Trump administration, the US sanctioned ICC officials for attempting to investigate American war crimes committed in Afghanistan. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo charged the court is an “unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body.”
Fired NYC Teachers Who Refused Vaccine To Be Reinstated With Back Pay: Judge
A New York state judge on Wednesday ruled that 10 employees fired by the NYC Department of Education for refusing the Covid-19 vaccine must be reinstated with back pay.
In his ruling, State Supreme Court Judge Ralph J. Porzio found that the city acted illegally when it denied religious exemptions to certain city teachers – who went to Children’s Health Defense to sponsor a lawsuit against the department following failed attempts to claim religious accommodation for the mandate.
“This Court sees no rational basis for not allowing unvaccinated classroom teachers in amongst an admitted population of primarily unvaccinated students,” wrote Porzio, adding “As such, the decision to summarily deny the classroom teachers amongst the Panel Petitioners based on an undue hardship, without any further evidence of individualized analysis, is arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. As such, each classroom teacher amongst the Panel Petitioners is entitled to a religious exemption from the Vaccine Mandate.”
Porzio also slammed the city’s assertion that allowing teachers religious exemptions would place undue hardship on the city, calling the claim “arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.”
In the order, he granted relief to 10 plaintiffs who completed the administrative steps to request an exemption. He denied relief to six plaintiffs because they did not complete the administrative process.
As part of his ruling, Judge Porzio made reference to Mayor Eric Adams’s lifting of a vaccine mandate for some private employees in 2022, notably celebrities and athletes. He said the decision was evidence that the mandate for public workers was done on an arbitrary basis.
New York City imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all Department of Education workers that started on Oct. 1, 2021, and lasted until Feb. 10, 2023. Reports indicated that thousands of workers, teachers, and other staffers lost their jobs for not adhering to the mandate. –Epoch Times
An attorney for the plaintiffs, Sujata Gibson, said that they have been “fighting for this since August of 2021 for these 10 people specifically. And we won and we won big for them,” adding “They were reinstated with back pay, with no break in service, and attorneys’ fees. That’s huge.”
“The judge’s ruling yesterday, while not everything we wanted, is a precedent-setting victory, and a watershed moment in the teachers’ fight,” she added, noting that thousands of other unvaccinated workers were similarly denied a religious exemption, and can now sue the city based on this new precedent.
Gibson added that another class action lawsuit may be in the cards.
“The court’s ruling on class certification still leaves the door open to future relief for thousands of teachers negatively affected by the vaccine requirement,” she said, adding “We intend to file a motion of reconsideration on a narrower basis.”
It comes months after a lawyer for another group of fired, unvaccinated New York City teachers claimed that Mayor Eric Adams’s administration blacklisted employees who refused to get the vaccine with a special code.
“Loosely speaking, it is like a scarlet letter,” lawyer John Bursch told the New York Post earlier this year. “The employee’s personnel file shows a [generic] problem code that could just as easily be [for] committing a crime as declining to take a vaccine for religious reasons. In some instances, when plaintiffs tried to obtain employment elsewhere, they were told that they were red-flagged because of the problem code,” he said. -Epoch Times
NYC Mayor Eric Adams rescinded the vaccine mandate for workers earlier this year, allowing some 1,700 fired workers to reapply for their jobs (without back pay or retroactive full benefits).
“August was the third straight month in which total year-over-year U.S. rail carloads have fallen,” Association of American Railroads (AAR) Senior Vice President John T. Gray reported on Sept. 6. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 16,173,208 carloads and intermodal units, a decrease of 4.9% compared to last year.
Gray said that a major reason why is that “other than automotive manufacturing, the industrial economy, in recent months, has not been doing as well as other areas of the economy. Until industrial activity, and especially manufacturing recovers, rail volumes in many key markets could remain constrained.”
According to AAR, U.S. Class I railroads for the first eight months of 2023 hauled a total of 7,852,770 carloads, up 0.0%, or 3,625 carloads, from the same period last year; and 8,320,438 intermodal units, down 9.2%, or 838,829 containers and trailers, from last year.
U.S. railroads originated 1,133,375 carloads in August 2023, down 2.0%, or 23,323 carloads, from August 2022. U.S. railroads also originated 1,239,290 containers and trailers in August 2023, down 6.3%, or 83,717 units, from the same month last year. Combined U.S. carload and intermodal originations in August 2023 were 2,372,665, down 4.3%, or 107,040 carloads and intermodal units from August 2022.
In August 2023, nine of the 20 carload commodity categories tracked by the AAR each month saw carload gains compared with August 2022. These included: motor vehicles and parts, up 9,374 carloads or 13.6%; petroleum and petroleum products, up 5,567 carloads or 12.9%; and primary metal products, up 1,792 carloads or 4.6%. Commodities that saw declines in August 2023 from August 2022 included: grain, down 22,064 carloads or 22.9%; coal, down 9,754 carloads or 2.8%; and pulp and paper products, down 2,334 carloads or 10.2%.
Excluding coal, carloads were down 13,569 carloads, or 1.7%, in August 2023 from August 2022. Excluding coal and grain, carloads were up 8,495 carloads, or 1.2%.
Week 35 (Ending September 2, 2023)
Total U.S. weekly rail traffic was 476,851 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.4% compared with the same week last year
Total carloads for the week ending September 2 were 231,113 carloads, down 1.6% compared with the same week in 2022, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was 245,738 containers and trailers, down 8.7% compared to 2022.
North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of the year (ending Sept. 2) on 10 reporting U.S., Canadian and Mexican railroads totaled 337,338 carloads, down 0.1% compared with the same week last year, and 328,232 intermodal units, down 9.9% compared with last year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 665,570 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.2%. North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 22,675,055 carloads and intermodal units, down 4.1% compared with 2022.
Five of the 10 carload commodity groups posted an increase compared with the same week in 2022. They included motor vehicles and parts, up 2,274 carloads, to 16,073; metallic ores and metals, up 1,968 carloads, to 22,786; and chemicals, up 1,889 carloads, to 32,942. Commodity groups that posted decreases compared with the same week in 2022 included coal, down 4,408 carloads, to 68,598; grain, down 4,403 carloads, to 14,961; and nonmetallic minerals, down 1,219 carloads, to 32,305.
Canadian railroads reported 89,904 carloads for the week, up 2.2%, and 72,134 intermodal units, down 14.6% compared with the same week in 2022. For the first 35 weeks of 2023, Canadian railroads reported cumulative rail traffic volume of 5,519,818 carloads, containers and trailers, down 3.3%.
Mexican railroads reported 16,321 carloads for the week, up 9.2% compared with the same week last year, and 10,360 intermodal units, down 3.5%. Cumulative volume on Mexican railroads for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 982,029 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, up 5.1% from the same point last year.
US Gov’t Begins Probe Into Huawei’s Breakthrough Chip
Huawei Technologies Co. roared back into the spotlight this past week after a Bloomberg report showed their new phone is powered by a 7-nanometer processor, which is just a few years behind Apple’s iPhone. And who’s getting the jitters over this new development? Those very same Capitol Hill lawmakers, who, for the last several years, sanctioned not only Huawei but also China’s chip sector to stymie homegrown tech progress. That move didn’t pan out as planned.
Now, the US Commerce Department is panicking while it rushes to understand how sanctioned Huawei was able to design and manufacture a 7-nanometer processor for its new Mate 60 Pro smartphone. The whole purpose of blacklisting the company and many other Chinese tech firms was to restrict access to US technology to make these sorts of devices.
Bloomberg pointed out the Mate 60 Pro went on sale while the US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo was on a trip to China last week. This is a sign that China is ‘thumbing their noses’ at the US for the wave of sanctions that have failed so far.
“We are working to obtain more information on the character and composition of the purported 7nm chip,” a Commerce spokesperson said in a statement.
The spokesperson continued, “Let’s be clear: export controls are just one tool in the US government’s toolbox to address the national security threats presented by the PRC. The restrictions in place since 2019 have knocked Huawei down and forced it to reinvent itself — at a substantial cost to the PRC government.”
According to Nazak Nikakhtar, who worked as the Commerce Department’s Assistant Secretary for Industry & Analysis in the Trump administration, the Commerce Department will begin its own investigation into Huawei’s new phone. The Commerce Department’s Office of Export Enforcement will likely lead the study to determine if China’s top chipmaker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp.’s Kirin 9000s chip, was made using US technology.
The Mate 60 Pro news is a sign that suggests President Xi Jinping’s efforts to develop technological self-sufficiency are working. The Bloomberg report on the phone showed it has “an unusually high proportion of Chinese parts … a sign of the country’s progress in developing domestic tech capabilities.”
Meanwhile, China has banned iPhone use by central government employees and has expanded it to local governments and state-owned companies. Such curbs threaten multinationals like Apple, which derives 20% of its sales from the world’s second-largest economy.
Tom Nunlist, an associate director from the Beijing-based consulting firm Trivium, said, “Chip tech export controls may have been Washington’s one and only ace in the tech war.”
One can only assume there will be more comments from Washington, like one from Representative Mike Gallagher, the chairman of the House Select Committee on Competition with China, who said, “The time has come to end all US technology exports to both Huawei and SMIC to make clear any firm that flouts US law and undermines our national security will be cut off from our technology.”
The tech war isn’t over — this will only give the Biden administration more ammo to unleash even more sanctions despite the current sanctions have worked to stymie tech progress.
Truth is beauty and beauty is truth and it’s really beautiful when you can manipulate the truth to suit your own ends.
Welcome to the world of PolitiFact – and every other “fact-checking” service operating today.
To begin with, the entire premise of “fact-checking” is ludicrous as it is based on the idea that media outlets do not – and do not need to – automatically start from a factual basis for their reporting.
As an editor once said to me: “Just because someone says something doesn’t mean you have to put it in the paper.”
If the media followed this one simple rule, there would be no need for “fact-checking” at all.
But the media does not and will not follow this rule because printing lies – as long as they are said by a government official the media likes or about an official they don’t like – is now an integral part of the industry.
Lies from government officials and lies from nonprofit and advocacy groups and non-governmental organizations (who directly pay news outlets for the “coverage” of an issue they are involved in) are all waived through as gospel. And these types of lies – lies they agree with – tend not to get “fact-checked” anyway, making the entire process even more dangerously absurd.
It’s dangerous because a “true” rating is just that: something has been determined to be true and can therefore never be questioned again or something is mostly true so any error can be tied back to an accidental misspeak. And then this “truth” can be spread as 100 percent Grade-A verified fact, no matter whether it actually is or not. It has received an imprimatur from on high and that’s that.
Problematic truths that are so obviously true are dealt with in a slightly different manner – they are “contexted” into being false.
The process seems pretty simple: Person outside the power structure says X, person inside the power structure says Y, so therefore X is false. Person inside the power structure says X, person also inside, but lower down and/or “expert,” the power structure says X so therefore X is true.
In searching through a random assortment of “fact-checks,” that process appears to happen time and time again.
Let’s start with one quick example – money was set aside in the Biden Infrastructure bill last year to create a system that would enable your car to tell if you’re drunk (without one of those blow tubes) and not let the car start if you were. The concept was immediately criticized as being a government-mandate “kill switch” for every new car after 2035 or thereabout.
Each of the “fact-checking” services quickly and thoroughly said no, no that’s not true, it’s not a “kill switch.” And they quoted an auto safety expert saying so.
Of course, the experts were already in a partnership with the government to develop the technology in question and said that the data collected by the vehicle would “never leave the vehicle” and that the system is not currently envisioned as a law enforcement tool.
Therefore, the “kill switch” story was false.
It was false because the legislation doesn’t use that exact term – so what? – it was false because the people developing it said they had no plans to use it that way, it was false because the system would be isolated to each vehicle – impossible: does Tesla send someone to your house when they need to do an update? – and it was false because people who have a financial and political incentive to say it was false said it was false.
In other words, you can’t call him Bob because it says Robert on the birth certificate.
The “fact-checking” process is itself inherently false because it starts with a conscious, biased choice of which “facts” to check (by the way, we reached out to PolitiFact and its parent nonprofit, the Poynter Institute, and neither responded, but there is this on the website and do please ignore the actual true fact that Poynter is a hyper-progressive organization that itself has a track record of politically shading the truth, is a key player in the Censorship-Industrial Complex, and is funded by Facebook, the Newmark Foundation, and the Koch brothers.)
Let’s say a fact-checker decides to look into X which they think at the outset is false, but it turns out to be true. Does it get written up? If it helps certain people, the answer is yes – if it goes against the current thoughtcloud, the answer is no.
In public relations there is a concept known as “third party validation.” That involves getting a very trusted someone or some group that is seemingly unrelated to whatever project or product you are pitching to say “Hey – that’s really good.” The PR team can then say to the public that so and so group that “you’ve known for years – they care for sick puppies remember? – they think it’s neat we want to bury toxic waste next to the elementary school so it has to be a good idea, right?”
The public trusts the validator so it lets its guard drop, it second-guesses itself even if the truth of the matter is plain to see.
Sometimes the third-party validator is innocent; sometimes – more often than not – they’re getting a little sumthin sumthin on the side like a shiny new building (see: environmental groups staying quiet about wind farms killing whales.)
In a specific instance, a writer was contacted and asked to prove the main point of a very inconvenient COVID-related article. The writer sent the fact-checker all of the backing material – public records, reputable studies, etc. – proving the assertion was true.
That fact-check – on an important subject directly related to public health dangers – never appeared.
Because they couldn’t dare to call it false – there was a paper trail – and they couldn’t call it a truth because it just didn’t fit.
Then there is the issue of intentional obfuscation. PolitiFact said reports that “California passed a law ‘reducing penalties for oral, anal sex with willing children’” were false because the state didn’t reduce the penalty – it merely stopped placing those offenders on the registered sex offender list if the age difference was less than 10 years.
Not having to register as a sex offender for the rest of one’s life is absolutely clearly a reduction in the penalty, but because the law in question didn’t specifically change the direct punishment at the time of conviction the claim was therefore false.
In other words, the staff at PolitiFact must have decided that having to register as a sex offender for life is not a penalty.
Helpful hint – do not invite PolitiFact to your kid’s middle school graduation.
And the public wonders how so many in the media can willfully not see the truth staring at them in the face – that’s how it’s done (if you don’t want to lose your job.)
On a personal note, that particular fact-check reminds me of a time when I was mayor of Lake Elsinore, Cal. and asked my City Manager how much the minor league baseball stadium that was built before I was elected cost. He gave me a figure and I noted that it didn’t appear to include a certain related property transfer.
He responded by saying I had previously asked how much the stadium cost, not the stadium project (roads, sewers, land, etc.) in total. The difference was about $14 million.
Lesson: always ask the right question. But I digress.
There is also the puzzlement of where “fact-checkers” get their own facts. In the case of PolitiFact, when it comes to the transgender youth issue, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health is a go-to organization despite its aggressive politicization of the issue, its creation of a “standards of care” protocol that is jaw-droppingly counter-factual, and its promotion of genital tucking for children.
This approach is standard for “fact-checkers” as most turn to “experts” who have financial, political, and cultural reasons to say what they say. The “fact-checkers” know in advance what the “experts” will say because of who they are and what they do; therefore all you have to do is call the right one that will agree with your desired rating outcome and that’s that.
And never ever call someone who might say something you may not want to hear.
And it doesn’t matter how often they have been wrong in the past – see Dr. Peter Hotez and COVID – just stay with them to make sure you get the answer you want (bad reporters do this, too.)
The COVID-related examples of fact-checkers being aggressively, dangerously wrong are too numerous to mention. However, these past three years have revealed a corollary matter: fact-checking tends to involve asking a liar if something a connected person said is a lie and declaring it the truth when the second liar says it’s true and occasionally a few more liars are thrown in the mix to add weight. And it involves asking the same liars to judge the truth of something coming from somewhere else or someone outside the incestuous oppression bubble now floating over the globe.
It is a vulturous circle.
The record of the fact-checking industry during the pandemic is not only abominable, it even made everything much much worse. Everything – and everyone -outside the approved script was vilified, lives were upended, jobs were lost.
It turned out – of course – that most everything the fact-checkers deemed false was in fact true and that everything they deemed true was in fact false.
Even further, the idea that the “vaccines” were not properly tested and might – just might – not be called for for everyone was treated as being on a par with assertions like “Jews can’t see fuchsia” and “Hats were invented in Tunisia in 1743.”
There is also the matter of falsehood by association.
The recent terrible fires in Maui launched many, many absurd claims onto the internet. Laser beams started the fire, Oprah started it to buy land, etc. Other obviously not “facts” checks include Trump said Biden is an extraterrestrial, Hillary Clinton was executed, Michelle talked about Barack being gay, and on and on. This Weekly World News kind of stuff appears often, right alongside serious and debatable topics.
Recently, GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy’s “pants on fire” rating for saying climate policies kill more people than climate change (an appropriate topic for debate and very arguably true, by the way) appeared right next to another “pants on fire” saying that, no, the assistant director of FEMA had not been arrested.
Giving an equal rating to a legitimate political concept and to a typical example of internet batshittery makes the origins of both equally untrustworthy in the public’s mind.
In other words, the intentional point is to make Ramaswamy look just as nuts – and untrustworthy in general – as the people who think Hillary was executed five years ago or that hats were invented in Tunisia in 1743 or that Jews can’t see fuchsia.
It is somewhat akin to the intellectual destruction wrought by the term “denier.” The word is used to shut down debate and to implicitly tar the “denier” as being like people who deny the Holocaust occurred because that’s where the use – appropriately in that case – of the term originated.
If you “deny” climate change it’s just as bad as denying the Holocaust; if you’re considered as wrong as a flat earther, you must be wrong about everything.
For “fact-checking” to have any legitimacy whatsoever, it needs to ditch rating the crazies. It also should start each week with releasing a list of 20 items, check each of those, and then write about all of them, true or false. At the very least, the public would know the fact-checkers aren’t hiding facts they don’t like.
Truth is not always beautiful; in fact, it typically is not. It is hard and cold and sterile and unflinching and stares back at you until either you acknowledge it or you become terrified and have to look away.
Looking at truth, finding truth, speaking truth – all are acts of real courage.
Estimated Chinese Official Gold Reserves Cross 5,000 Tonnes
By Jan Nieuwenhuijs of Gainesville Coins
My estimate for China’s official gold reserves reached 5,029 tonnes by the end of June 2023. In the first six months of 2023 the Chinese central bank bought an estimated 353 tonnes. Although demand in H1 2023 was down 34% from H2 2022, demand was still strong and a driving force of the price of gold.
One of the best kept secrets in the world of finance is how much gold is owned by the Chinese central bank, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC). In a previous article I have explained that growth in PBoC gold reserves can’t be gauged by tracking how much gold is mined or net imported in China, because this is virtually all sold through the Shanghai Gold Exchange to the private sector. The PBoC acquires gold abroad with US dollars and ships the metal to Beijing without leaving a trace in customs reports. There is but one way to find out how much the Chinese central bank is buying: through people in close contact with the banks and refineries that deal with the PBoC.
My starting point is an educated guess shared with me in 2015 by an industry insider that worked for one of the large precious metals consultancy firms. According to this source the PBoC roughly held 3,300 tonnes by then. Two other sources familiar with the matter, but prefer to stay anonymous, told me unreported central bank purchases—the difference between total estimated central bank purchases and reported purchases—can be used to evaluate the PBoC’s quarterly additions. Unreported purchases can mostly be accredited to the Chinese central bank, they told me.
Every quarter the World Gold Council (WGC) publishes a single sum picturing how much gold is estimated to have been purchased by all central banks and international financial institutions combined. This estimate, based on public data and industry intelligence, includes reported and unreported purchases. From the WGC on their official sector estimate:
Net purchases (i.e. gross purchases less gross sales) by central banks and other official sector institutions, including supra national entities such as the IMF. Swaps … are excluded.
A … vital source is confidential information regarding unrecorded sales and purchases.
The WGC’s quarterly estimate is usually higher than what central banks report to have bought, any difference reflecting unreported purchases. For lack of an accurate cut, I guess eighty percent of these unreported purchases relate to covert PBoC shoppings. Anecdotal evidence assures me this is an appropriate percentage to use.
Let’s take the third quarter of 2022 as an example. The WGC disclosed central banks bought an estimated 459 tonnes of gold during this period. Reported purchases by all central banks accounted for 109 tonnes*. Eighty percent of the 350 tonnes difference is 280 tonnes, which is what the PBoC surreptitiously obtained (during Q3 2022 reported changes by the PBoC of its official gold reserves were zero). In December 2022, the Financial Times wrote regarding the Chinese central bank’s secret buying in Q3 2022:
Mark Bristow, chief executive of Barrick Gold, the world’s second-largest gold miner, said China had bought tonnes of gold around the high-200s mark, based on his discussions with numerous sources.
Bristow’s ballpark estimate at “the high-200s mark” matches my estimate of 280 tonnes, confirming my approach is reasonable.
Conclusion
The PBoC reported to have bought 103 tonnes over the first six months of 2023, while unreported purchases accounted for 250 tonnes, totalling 353 tonnes in net additions. Although PBoC purchases in H1 2023 were down 34% from H2 2023, demand was still robust and likely a driving force of the gold price during this period. Elevated central bank buying is expected to sustain, support the gold market’s long-term bullish trend, and stimulate private demand.
Altogether, my best guess is that the Chinese central bank currently holds 5,029 metric tonnes of gold in total**, which is almost 3,000 tonnes more than what is reported at 2,113 tonnes. My estimate would make China the second largest official gold reserve country after the US.
My estimate for private gold reserves in China stands at 24,698 tonnes, and thus total reserves within the mainland are 29,727 tonnes. In my previous article I have explained in detail how I calculate private gold holdings in China.
* Against my expectations, measuring reported World official gold holdings is not easy. Many central banks don’t report to the IMF how much gold they have, or report with a lag. For the countries that stopped reporting, such as Iran and Syria, the IMF carries forward the last available data point. With a lag of a few months the IMF reports its own estimation of World holdings, but it’s unknown how this is calculated. Hence, I prefer not to rely on the IMF’s World series.
In addition to the WGC’s lump sum of total estimated purchases, it also publishes quarterly and monthly series—“Quarterly times series on World Official Gold Reserves since 2000” and “Changes in World Official Gold reserves”—that enclose reported net purchases per country. However, the latter two data sets each have their limitations. The “Quarterly times series on World Official Gold Reserves since 2000” doesn’t include every country, and in the “Changes in World Official Gold Reserves” the BIS and ECB are excluded, by way of example.
For my personal valuation of reported World official gold holdings, I track the same central banks and institutions as the WGC for their quarterly estimate, to get the difference between them as accurate as possible. I start off with what is reported to the IMF and use a country’s last reported figure if they stopped reporting. I compare these numbers to the WGC’s “Changes in World Official Gold Reserves” and make changes if necessary. I include the BIS’s own gold reserves (not any swaps on its balance sheet), as well as the IMF and ECB’s own gold. Gold liabilities on the balance sheet of the Turkish central bank are excluded, in the same way the WGC does. For Australia I count all gold and gold receivables, so also gold lent out. Known gold reserves from sovereign wealth funds and ministries of finance are also included.
** In my prior article on estimating the PBoC’s gold reserves I tallied unreported purchases but wrongly excluded reported additions after 2015. Mea culpa! In the above analysis both are incorporated.
Full Authoritarian: New Mexico Governor Suspends Constitutional Gun Rights For Law-Abiding Citizens In Albuquerque
On Friday evening, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) issued an emergency order suspending the right of law-abiding citizens to open and conceal carry firearms in crime-ridden Albuquerque and the surrounding county for at least 30 days, after declaring a public health emergency in response to a spate of recent gun violence.
Grisham, who apparently thinks criminals will follow her orders, says she expects legal challenges, but was ‘compelled to act’ following recent shootings, AP reports.
The Governor of New Mexico has just declared the 1st & 2nd Amendment “does not exist” due to an “emergency.”
Under this legal theory *all* of our “rights” are essentially eliminated.
Watch the most evil & tyrannical 60 seconds you’ve ever heard from a politician: pic.twitter.com/xLpMSTbyi2
“Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop,” Grisham posted on X.
Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop. https://t.co/KJdXUMBVaG
Grisham declared in a statement, “As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed. And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game—when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn—something is very wrong.”
Yes governor, now law-abiding citizens won’t be able to match force with criminal threats while in public, after failed progressive policies transformed Albuquerque into a crime-infested metro area with soaring violence.
According to a recent report by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Albuquerque had one of the highest homicide rates in the country.
Turley continued, “Democratic leaders have increasing turned to a claim used successfully during the pandemic in declaring a health emergency to maximize unilateral authority of governors.”
“The taking away of individual rights as an emergency measure is hardly new. For centuries, governments have claimed that the suspension of individual rights is necessary for the good of citizens,” he said.
You thought the “public health emergency” power grab was a one and done with COVID?
Grisham’s move signals a new attack strategy by Democrats on the Second Amendment. We must remind readers ever since the ‘defund the police’ movement began several years ago, many Democratic-led cities have faced soaring crime rates. Failed social justice reform only sparked more violence, which may have been intentional to create a crisis and then offer a novel solution with even more gun control.
This “Public health order” is a trial balloon for things to come. The moment we allowed them to do this with COVID, we opened the door. https://t.co/FFSiwDHPzk
The 2nd amendment isn’t a recommendation. It’s a right.
Friendly suggestion to @GovMLG on how to *actually* reduce violent crime in your state: focus on sealing your own state’s southern border & stop the virtue signaling elsewhere. https://t.co/RgzpFZAPs8
Democrats have faced gun control roadblocks ever since the US Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen in 2022, which hindered their ability to pass expansive laws restricting guns ever since.
Now, the tactic is to use emergency orders to suspend rights – which police chiefs for both Albuquerque and Bernalillo Counties have said might be civil violations.
Social media users on X weren’t pleased with the governor:
Every law enforcement officer in your state should unite & ignore you.
So should the citizens of NM. Do not comply.
Because criminals will undoubtedly ignore you & this unconstitutional order empowers them. https://t.co/UCmavZwsJb
Given the real problem of crime in some places, and that people carrying for self-defense are not the perpetrators, the appropriate response is to refuse to comply. https://t.co/7XVqMYvfs1
Literally treason. You’re not a dictator. You do not have the authority to disregard the US Constitution. The US Constitution cannot be altered via EO. You do not get to disregard your oath of office. Your days in office are numbered. https://t.co/msp9ufnSVu
How many of those murders, or any murders, are by people with CCW permits?
Will you be personally reimbursing the taxpayers after the inevitable legal challenges result in the government having to pay plaintiffs’ legal fees under 42 U.S. Code § 1988? https://t.co/rp66l6Rdji
