Authored by Martin Armstrong via ArmstrongEconomics.com,

The transition to CBDC in Nigeria did not go as planned. The elites always seek out African nations to use as their test subjects. Nigeria attempted to slowly roll out the program dubbed eNaira built on the Hyperleger Fabric blockchain. The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is solely responsible for running the nodes of this digital currency. Beginning stress tests stated this currency could execute 2,000 transactions per section.  In October 2021, the government began offering incentives to citizens who chose to CBN.

A year later, the country was still hesitant to make the switch so the central bank began implementing forceful measures. In October 2022, the CBN decided to cancel and resign the currency in a “move aimed at restoring the control of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) over currency in circulation.” 

They stated that the original paper notes would only be legal tender until January 31, 2023, leaving the people with no alternative but to convert their cash. Nigerians were no stranger to the concept of currency cancellation as it is something the government has routinely done.

The CBN openly announced that the end goal was to target a 100% cashless society replaced with eNaira. Fewer than 0.5% of Nigerians adopted the eNaira and protests erupted across the nation.

By December 2, 2022, the Central Bank of Nigeria issued a letter to all banking institutes implementing a strict ban on physical cash.

The central bank set a cash withdrawal limit of ₦100,000 ($225) per week for individuals and ₦500,000 ($1,123) for businesses. Citizens wishing to take out larger sums were subject to a processing fee between 5% and 10%. ATMs were limited to ₦20,000 ($45) per day, and only ₦200 ($0.45) notes or lower denominations were available in the machines.

@tyson_melbourne6

 

♬ Epic – DM Production

Bloomberg reported that 90% of the country previously used cash for transactions. They did not want to convert to CBDC but were provided with no alternative. Demonetizing the currency reduced available cash from 3.2 trillion nairas to 1 trillion nairas. This led to the central bank creating over 10 billion eNairas. The people are continually protesting these measures as their society which was largely dependent on cash interactions has been destabilized.

This is how it all begins.

They are using Nigeria and other countries as test subjects before rolling out these programs in the West. It is hard for Americans to fathom currency cancelation, as it has never occurred here.

Yet, the Federal Reserve has made it clear that they are looking into this option. Per usual, they market it as a “convenience” for the people.

In truth, it is a way to ensure money stays on the grid under the thumb of government. They will not allow one cent to go untaxed, and as the program expands, they can remove individuals and organizations from participating in society entirely.

Spain’s severe drought and parched soils have sent olive oil prices to levels not seen in more than a decade. The surge in olive oil prices, along with fresh produce, is exacerbating already high food prices as the Northern Hemisphere summer starts in less than a month.  

Data from Bloomberg shows that Spanish extra-virgin olive oil prices have jumped 200% since 2020 to 5,870 euros per metric ton — the highest level since 2010. Most of the price surge was recorded in the last year. 

“Output in the country could more than halve this season due to the arid conditions, according to a Spanish farming industry group,” Bloomberg said. Spain accounts for 40% of the world’s supply, indicating prices across Europe and other regions are being pushed higher. 

Europe’s Monitoring Agricultural Resources recently said Spain is under severe weather stress, with barely any rainfall since January. The drought is damaging crops and threatens to drive food prices even higher across Europe. 

Research firm Gro Intelligence penned a note last week that warned the country is in “extreme” drought across top croplands — the highest recorded reading in at least two decades — while soil moisture levels are the lowest since at least 2010. 

Drought conditions in Spain have been exacerbated by above-average temperatures that could be due to an emerging El Nino weather pattern. We warned this might create disruptions in the agricultural industry.

El Nino comes as global food prices remain at decade highs. 

These price levels are dangerous because high inflation can spark social unrest in countries. 

Authored by Thomas Bropoke via Remix News,

A London theater has received widespread criticism for promoting one showing of a play which the venue urges White people not to attend.

The Theatre Royal Stratford East has organized a “Black Out” night on July 5 for the production of “Tambo & Bones,” a play described as a “racially charged metatheatrical satire.”

The play runs for a month during June and July, but on this date alone White people have been informed they are not welcome to attend.

While insisting on its website that “no one is excluded from attending,” the venue adds that “this performance has been arranged for Black audience members specifically” and states that the production should be enjoyed “free from the White gaze.”

Director Matthew Xia justified the discriminatory move by claiming Black people need “private and safe spaces” away from White people in order to “experience productions that explore complex, nuanced race-related issues.”

In its FAQs, the venue states the production is for a “Black-identifying” audience, before comprising a list of who it considers to be Black enough to attend.

“We define ‘Black’ as of Black African, Caribbean, Afro-Latinx and African-American heritage, including those of mixed-Black heritage who identify as such.”

‘The anti-racists are the new racists.’

Martin Daubney gives his take on Theatre Royal Stratford East urging white people to not attend a play aimed at black audiences.

📺 Freeview 236, Sky 512, Virgin 604 pic.twitter.com/yBDf73cFso

— GB News (@GBNEWS) May 21, 2023

The move has sparked outrage with critics warning it sets a dangerous precedent and is overtly discriminatory.

“Britain is becoming like pre-civil-rights America: segregation and division on the grounds of race. Welcome to progressivism,” tweeted trade unionist and broadcaster Paul Embrery.

Leader of Britain’s Reclaim party, Laurence Fox, remarked: “I’m so excited to see this production. If it means I have to go in blackface so that everyone feels safe. That’s a price I’m willing to pay.”

The Don’t Divide Us campaign commented that while it doesn’t consider the move to be a dangerous precedent, it did believe it to be “a very stupid and philistine one.”

“Everyone has a unique response to a work of art. We don’t need segregated audiences for that. And psychological exploration is best done in private therapy, not public theater,” it added.

Teacher and education reformer Katharine Birbalsingh CBE tweeted tongue-in-cheek: “Because the trauma from ‘the white gaze’ is too much for us black people. That’s how weak we are. We can’t take white people paying for a ticket to see our production because their evil eyes are set upon us.”

Britain’s first Black police and crime commissioner, Festus Akinbusoye, also condemned the move.

“Society is richer and stronger when an understanding of each other’s cultures and stories are shared and heard. However, I believe the Black Out concept runs contrary to this education and enrichment ethos,” he said.

This isn’t the first time a “Black Out” night has caused controversy.

In February, the National Arts Center in Canada was subject to accusations of segregation and discrimination for doing the same thing with a production of “Is God Is.”

The phenomenon of Black-only events appears to be seeping into Western society, with a yoga workshop at Canada’s University of Guelph making headlines in November last year for prohibiting the admission of all races other than Black.

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

Let’s start with a graphic depiction of where the Global North and the Global South really stand.

1. Xian, former imperial capital, and key hub of the Ancient Silk Roads: Xi Jinping hosts the China-Central Asia summit, attended by all Heartland “stans” (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgzystan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan).

The final statement stresses economic cooperation and “a resolute stand” against Hegemon-concocted color revolutions. That expands what the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) are already implementing. In practice, the summit seals that the Russia-China strategic partnership will be protecting the Heartland.

2. Kazan: the Russia-Islamic World forum unites not only religious leaders but top businessmen of no less than 85 nations.

Multipolar Russia proceeded in parallel to the Arab League Summit in Jeddah, which welcomed back Syria to the “Arab family”. Arab nations unanimously pledged to end “foreign interference” for good.

3. Hiroshima: the ever-shrinking G7, actually G9 (adding two unelected EU bureaucrats).

Imposes a single agenda of more sanctions on Russia; more weapons to black void Ukraine; and more lecturing of China.

4. Lisbon: the annual Bilderberg meeting – a NATO/Atlanticist fest – takes place in a not so secret hotel completely locked down. Top item in the agenda; war – hybrid and otherwise – on the “RICs” in BRICS (Russia, India, China).

I could have been in Xian, or most likely Kazan. Instead, honoring a previous commitment, I was in Ibiza, and then scraped the idea of flying to Lisbon as a waste of time. Allow me to share with you the reason why: call it a little tale from the Baleares, breaking the trademark pledge that what happens in swinging, sweaty deep house Ibiza stays in Ibiza.

I was a guest at a top business gathering – mostly Spanish but also featuring Portuguese, Germans, Brits and Scandinavians: ultra high-level executives – in real estate, asset management, investment banking. Our panel was titled “Global Geopolitical Shifts and Their Consequences”. Before the panel, participants were invited to vote on what worried them most when it comes to the future of their business. Number one was inflation and interest rates. Number two was geopolitics. That prefigured a very lively debate ahead.

When a EU hagiographer goes berserk

Little did I – and the audience – know that would turn into a wild ride. The first presentation came from the director of a “Center for European Politics” in Copenhagen. She bills herself as a political science professor, and is an adviser to EU Chief Gardener Borrell.

Well, I adopted a Cheshire cat stance after the tsunami of clichés spewed out about “European values” and evil Russkies, as well as her being “frightened” by the future of Europe. At least immediate relief was provided by the impeccably diplomatic Lanxin Xiang, an adorable character, always with a cheerful smile on his face, and one of the very few leading experts on China who actually knows what he’s talking about, in fluent English.

Lanxin Xiang, among other accomplishments, is Emeritus Professor of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva; director of the Institute of Security Policy at the China National Institute for SCO International Exchange; and executive director of the Washington Foundation for European Studies. This is a column I wrote about him and his work, published in October 2020.

Professor Xiang offered a masterly exposition on the American obsession to fabricate a “Taiwan problem” and how Europe, already squeezed by the U.S. proxy war against Russia, must be very careful when it comes to lecturing China.

When it was my turn, I went for the kill, dismissing all those EU press release platitudes as absolute nonsense, and stressing how Europe is already being eaten alive by the proverbial “American interests”. As briefly as possible I explained the whole geopolitical background of the war in Ukraine.

Well, this was all delivered to top business people who consume The Economist, Financial Times and Bloomberg as their prime sources of information. Their reaction would speak volumes.

Predictably, the EU-paid bureaucrat completely freaked out, and shrieking with outrage, went full pre-ordained script, from threatening to abandon the stage to accusing me of being “paid by the Kremlin”. I asked her, point blank, to “contradict me, with facts”. No facts were provided. Just fear and bewilderment, mixed with intimations of cancel culture.

To his great merit the vastly experienced moderator, Struan Robertson from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, kept things civil, giving more time for Lanxin Xiang to explain the Chinese mindset and opening the floor for a sequence of very good questions.

In the end, the audience loved it. Many came to personally thank me for information they will never have access to in El Pais, Le Monde or The Economist. A minority in the room was simply stunned – but our debate at least must have left them musing over a lot of preconceived notions.

It’s the total merit of the key organizers, Jose Maria Pons and head of the program Cristina Garcia-Peri, to host such a debate in fabulous Ibiza, in Spain, prime NATOstan territory. In the current situation, this would be absolutely impossible in France or Germany, not to mention Scandinavia or those demented Baltics.

There’s no way to counter-act the fabricated narratives parroted by EU-paid hacks and bureaucrats except for ridiculing them – in their faces. They become livid and barely manage to stutter when their lies are exposed. For instance, one of the questions from the floor, by a top of the line German businessman, enumerated a litany of dark facts about Ukrainian “democracy” that are absolutely verbotten by EUrocracy.

The G-Less Than Zero freaks out

What happened in Ibiza dovetails with what happened in U.S.-nuclear bombed Hiroshima – Hegemons don’t do apologies – and in that locked down Lisbon hotel.

With the G7 “leadership” mired in a sticky swamp of intellectual shallowness, predictably the only agenda in colonized Japan was more sanctions on Russia – imposed over third countries and on companies in the energy and military-industrial sectors; more weapons to the Ukrainian black void; and a ridiculous counter-productive new obsession of piling up on China “containment” for alleged “economic coercion.”

In the photo ops, by the way, it’s not a shrinking G7 that shows up: but a warmongering G9, artificially augmented by that pathetic couple of unelected EUrocrats, Charles Michel and Pustula von der Lugen.

As far as the real Global Majority – or Global South – is concerned, this looks more like a G-Less Than Zero. The more the senseless, illegal Sanctions Wars are “expanded”, the more the absolute majority of the Global South moves away from the collective West, diplomatically, geopolitically and geoeconomically.

And that’s why the top Bilderberg agenda at the hijacked Lisbon hotel was to revamp NATO/Atlanticist coordination in a war – hybrid and otherwise – against the driving force in BRICS; the RICs (Russia, India, China).

There were other items on the menu – from AI to the acute banking crisis, from “energy transition” to “fiscal challenges”, not to mention proverbial “U.S. leadership”.

But when you get in the same room people like NATO’s Stoltenberg; director of U.S. intel Avril Haines; senior director for Strategic Planning at the National Security Council Thomas Wright; Goldman Sachs president John Waldron; Chief Gardener Borrell (whose minion was in Ibiza); vice chair of Brookfield Asset Management, Mark Carney (one of their executives also in Ibiza); Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Christopher Cavoli; and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, among other Atlanticist shills, the plot is self-evident:

It’s war on the multipolar world. At least we can dance it away in Ibiza.

At the start of May we explained that it’s not just the Fed’s rate hikes that are behind the nascent regional bank crisis (because with Fed Funds rate at 5.25% and both T-Bills and money market funds offering similar yields, there is no way small banks can compete with these returns, prompting a bank jog (which periodically turns to a sprint) and deposit flight from both checking and saving accounts).

We said that the Fed’s ongoing QT is a just as pernicious threat to the viability of small/regional banks because with every dollar drained from the system as part of the Fed’s quantitative tightening, a matching deposit dollar is also destroyed, to wit:

Under an ample reserves framework, virtually all deposits are created by the Fed.

That’s why banks were forced to load up on low-yielding securities during 2000-2001 and are now getting crushed as yields soar and fixed income/loan prices plunge.

It also means that under QT as Fed reserves shrink, deposits must follow: as such deposits are either forced to shift into Bills/TSYs or are destroyed (bank failures).

Thus, the bank crisis is an inevitable side effect of Fed tightening.

Now, by now everyone knows that when it comes to banks failing (and capitalizing on it) few are as experienced as JP Morgan, aka JP Mega…

JPMega it is pic.twitter.com/D0iLvFfSz3

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 1, 2023

… aka JP More-gain, which now has more than 13% of the nation’s deposits and 21% of all credit card spending: in other words, there has never been a bank that is more systematically important than JPMore-gain… and with every small bank failure, Jamie Dimon’s goliath is only getting bigger. Which is why we found it curious that none other than Jamie Dimon confirmed what we said three weeks ago during JPM’s Investor Day on Monday.

This is what the billionaire CEO said:

We haven’t been through Quantitative Tightening. So we really don’t know what’s going to happen to deposits at all [ZH; actually we do: deposits will shrink dollar for dollar alongside reserves]. And that’s why I’ve been quite concerned about that. I’m probably more concerned about quantitative tightening with anybody in this room.

We’ve never had QT before. It just started, okay? And you see huge distortions in the marketplace already. We’ve never had the Fed in the market like this with that RRP program that Jeremy mentioned ever. They have $2.3 trillion basically lent out to money funds. And I don’t know the full effect of that. And obviously, that’s a direct deduction from deposits are rolling out it made sense to do.

So I think people should build into their mindset that they may have to move deposit beta more than they think and manage that. So I mean, if I was any bank or any company, I’d be saying, can you handle higher interest rates and surprise in deposits, etc?

And this is how JPM itself shows the impact of the shrinking Fed balance sheet and TGA/RRP liquidity drains soak up commercial bank deposits.

By the way, “deposit beta”, as Jamie calls it, for those unfamilliar is a polite way of saying bank run, which is a less polite way of saying bank failure. As for Dimon’s rhetorical last question, the answer is a resounding no, or so JPM’s shareholders would like because for the second time in a month, JPM hiked its Net Interest Margin forecast, this time courtesy of the bank’s FDIC/taxpayer-funded gift in the form of First Republic Bank.

According to a slide in the bank’s Investor Day presentation, JPMorgan will gain an even bigger benefit from rising interest rates because of its “purchase” of First Republic Bank. We put purchase in quotes because in reality it was a gift by the FDIC, which gave JPM all the good parts of the collapsed California bank, while taxpayers were left holding the nuclear waste.

The biggest US bank raised its guidance for net interest income this year to $84 billion up from a previous forecast of $81 billion, according to an Investor Day presentation. The reason: the failure of First Republic which directly boosted JPM’s top line by billions!

In other words, as other banks fail, JPM prospers: here is a history of JPM’s Net Interest Income courtesy of Bloomberg. It will only keep rising…

… as more banks fail.

It is no surprise then that it is Jamie’s sincerest wish for rates to keep rising…

“Everyone should be prepared for rates going higher from here,” says JPMorgan Chair and CEO Jamie Dimon during JPMorgan Investor Day https://t.co/h7kZkVjNO2 pic.twitter.com/oNZmrLLr48

— Bloomberg (@business) May 22, 2023

… after all that’s the surest way for John Pierpont’s bank – which still pays 0.01% interest on most of its deposits – to once again become bigger than the US and to finally fulfill the reason behind creation of the Federal Reserves.

By Lydia Saad of Gallup,

Efforts to promote adoption of the environmental, social and governance framework in investing, commonly termed ESG, have gained traction in recent years and have become the subject of pro- and anti-ESG legislation, yet the general public is no more familiar with ESG today than two years ago.

Thirty-seven percent of Americans currently report being “very” or “somewhat familiar” with ESG, unchanged from 36% in 2021. Another 22% today are “not too familiar,” while 40% are “not familiar at all.”

These findings are from a Gallup poll conducted April 3-25, in which respondents were told that ESG “includes factors like the record of a business on human rights, the environment, diversity or other social values” and that some people take these factors “into account when making decisions about buying products and services or investing.”

Most Have No Opinion on the ESG Movement

Underscoring the public’s lack of familiarity with ESG, nearly six in 10 Americans (59%) take the “no opinion” option when asked if they view “the movement to promote the use of environmental, social and governance, or ESG, factors in business and investing” as a positive or negative development. The remaining four in 10 are about evenly divided between expressing a positive (22%) and negative (19%) view of the practice.

While adults who are familiar with ESG are more likely to express an opinion about it than those with less familiarity, they are just as likely to be divided on the question — 36% viewing ESG positively and 35% negatively.

Similarly, adults who report owning stock, about six in 10 respondents in the current poll, are more likely to have an opinion about ESG than non-stock owners, but they are just as divided on the merits of promoting ESG in business and investing.

Americans Lean Slightly Against Factoring ESG Into Investment Decisions

When asked whether retirement fund managers should only take financial factors into account when making investment decisions or also consider ESG factors, the public leans toward the former (48% vs. 41%, respectively). Stock owners’ views on this are nearly identical to the national averages.

Adults familiar with ESG are closely split on the question, with 50% preferring fund managers to limit their investing criteria to financial factors while 46% want ESG factors considered. Those not familiar with ESG lean more strongly toward only considering financial factors but are also more likely to have no opinion on the question.

Partisans Lean Different Ways on ESG, but Neither Group Is Attentive to the Issue

Adoption of ESG principles has been promoted by the Biden administration as well as the Business Roundtable (a leading American business lobby), the United Nations, and other prominent organizations in the U.S. and globally. The leaders and companies embracing ESG in investing have espoused it as a way to minimize investment risk while promoting social goods. Yet critics on the political right decry it as a system designed to achieve progressive goals at the expense of shareholders, and have advanced anti-ESG legislation in many states.

While this political backdrop is evident in the Gallup data, it does not appear to be an overwhelming factor driving the public’s interest in or views about ESG.

• There is no difference between Republicans’ and Democrats’ familiarity with ESG, as just under four in 10 in each group say they are very or somewhat familiar with it and an equal proportion are not at all familiar.
• Further, awareness of ESG hasn’t increased much among either group since 2021, when 33% of Republicans and 38% of Democrats said they were very or somewhat familiar with it.
• Republicans are far more likely to have a negative than positive view of ESG, while the reverse is true of Democrats, but majorities of both groups say they are unsure.
• Only when asked to choose between two modes of investing — with or without taking ESG criteria into account — do majorities of Republicans and Democrats take opposing sides. Sixty-four percent of Republicans think fund managers should only consider financial factors when choosing investments, while 59% of Democrats think they should include ESG.

Bottom Line

ESG proponents are actively working to have ESG scores become a standard part of corporate fiduciary reporting so that consumers and investors can make informed decisions about whom to do business with. Meanwhile, Republicans have ramped up their opposition to the movement, both vocally and politically, passing legislation to prevent state governments from investing in funds that use certain ESG criteria.

As a Harvard Law School publication recently noted, “When it comes to ESG in the United States, among the most dramatic developments is an ideological battle unfolding at the state level, pitting liberal-leaning state governments that have embraced ESG-focused investing against conservative-led states that would seek to exclude it.”

Yet, public opinion reflects little of this political battle, with most Republicans and Democrats largely unfamiliar with ESG and expressing “no opinion” on whether it is good or bad, when given that option. To be sure, Republicans’ and Democrats’ underlying tendencies align with their parties’ respective positions on ESG policy — but at least for now, the issue does not seem highly politicized among the American public.

Authored by Jayant Bhandari via LewRockwell.com,

In late 2016, the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, came on TV at 8 pm to announce that most currency bills would no longer be legal tender after midnight. An individual was allowed to convert only about $30 per visit to the bank. This led to massive crowds (not lineups, because Indians don’t follow the lineup system) at the banks, suffering, chaos, and deaths—there were no exceptions for the sick, older people, and pregnant women.

Eventually, more than 100% of the demonetized cash returned to the banks, although I know no one who didn’t forget to convert some of his misplaced currency bills. What happened? Demonetization ended up laundering massive amounts of counterfeit currency. But thinking through the consequences of their utopian—rather puerile—policies isn’t within the competencies of the Indian bureaucrats. Worse, to patch up, they kept issuing contradictory policies that even school students should not make. This led to a constant cycle of paranoia, rumors, and confusion.

The declared objective of the exercise was to destroy black money. Of course, it did nothing of the sort. Soon more cash was in people’s hands than ever before, and kept on rising, a clear sign of a higher distrust among the people and the rising corruption.

Over the years, corruption in India has become increasingly shameless and blatant. I have never encountered a public servant who does not ask for a bribe. Who among them wants corruption to end?

So, what was the real purpose behind the demonetization of 2016?

As India gets closer to election time, cash disappears from the market, prices of expensive properties fall, and shares of certain companies get sold off. This happens because these vehicles act as a reservoir for black money and, when encashed, are used for hiring goons and bribing voters: giving out free cash, alcohol, etc. All this is done openly.

Cash sits in the vaults of political parties, ready to be given away for votes. Property transactions entail the exchange of as much as 80% in cash, which sucks up black money and regenerates it when needed at a low transaction cost—the stamp duty is based on the declared price of the properties. Stocks of certain companies rise and fall as black money is laundered for payments that must be officially reported. What are supposed to be investment vehicles often lead to a loss, seen as nothing but the cost of storing black money.

In 2016, one could conclude that the ruling BJP government, insiders to the demonetization policy, had converted their cash into what was to stay legal tender and harmed the value of the black money in the hands of the opposition.

Recently provincial elections were held in the state of Karnataka, where the BJP, which also controls the federal government, ruled. It lost the elections. That wasn’t because the hate-filled fanaticism against minorities they had ignited failed to get traction but because some votes of one opposition party, JDS, moved to another, winning party, Congress. Congress had promised to offer more freebies: regular cash payments for doing nothing and more free grains.

Hate didn’t lose, and freebies won.

As we approach the next federal elections, due within a year, physical cash has disappeared from the market, now sitting in the coffers of political parties.

Stocks of some companies dealing with money laundering and political purposes have fallen. However, this could be because of the fear of short-selling ignited by the US short-seller Hindenburg.

On 19th May 2023, India announced another demonetization, on this occasion of INR 2,000 bills. As usual, their notice is confusing and contradictory. On the one hand, it says that the INR 2,000 bill stays legal tender, but on the other, they give a deadline of 30th September 2023 to bring them to the bank. Indian federal government bureaucrats fail the rationality test school students are supposed to pass. Or, perhaps, this policy gives leeway to the ruling party, BJP, to use their INR 2,000 bills, while other parties would find themselves entrapped.

Corruption and tyranny continue to increase, and the economy continues to falter in India, quite in contrast to the bullish statements being made in the Western media. And a sane Indian voter has a choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Most Indians, even when they are rich and middle class, don’t care about the larger interests of society. They act out of envy and to gain personal advantages. The chaotic, stressful mess of India is what they get and deserve.

The following are screenshots of the Reserve Bank of India press release.

It is also linked here.

Authored by Ellen Wan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Who would think the innocuous bathroom towel could potentially pose a threat to one’s health? An indispensable tool in our bathing routine, seemingly clean, or lightly used bath towels, coupled with a potentially humid bathroom environment can harbor innumerable disease causing bacteria.

Germs contained in towels can cause skin disease, hair loss, urinary tract infections, and even spread drug-resistant bacteria that can be fatal.

Most of the bacteria in towels comes from the user’s body, face, and hands. With the high humidity usually found in a bathroom it becomes a highly favorable environment for rapid bacterial growth. Towels that appear clean to the naked eye may be full of tens of thousands of bacteria, posing potentially serious health threats.

Bacteria on towels pose three major health risks:

1. Breed and spread bacteria

A Japanese life encyclopedia TV program called Non Stop, tested the bacterial content of bath towels, and found that freshly washed towels contained 190,000 count of bacteria. After one day of use, the number increased to 17 million—nearly 90 times more than day zero. The bacterial count found on towels used for three days soared to 87 million and as high as 94 million on towels used for one week without being washed.

Noritoshi Ri, director of the Hygiene & Microbiology Research Center, Tokyo, explained in the TV program that the bacteria count in a towel after one week of use can reach 10 billion plus—equivalent to that of a drainage pipe.

2. Cause skin diseases

William Chao, a certified diplomate of the American Board of Toxicology, toxicologist, and professor at Chung Yuan Christian University in Taiwan said that if towels are left unwashed for three days, they will contain a variety of germs and that using them for cleaning is “like wiping your body against a toilet.” In addition to E. coli—most abundant on and in toilets—more types of bacteria could be found according to the different physical conditions of the towel’s user, and included Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella, and Legionella.

Wiping your body with unclean towels can lead to skin problems. William Chao said that the germs contained in the towel are prone to causing skin allergies, folliculitis, hair loss, and other skin diseases. Many people have the habit of sharing towels, including families with children and couples.

If one of the users has an infection, the towel may become a breeding ground for the bacteria, causing mutual and repeated infections. When one towel user is undergoing treatment for an ailment there is the chance that the germ will reside with the partner and soon return to the initiator, creating a cycle. This is quite often the case of the fungal infection Hong Kong foot, or athlete’s Foot (Tinea pedis) and viral warts.

Chao noted that if your body is itchy after taking a bath, or you often have allergies or infections, it is recommended to check the cleanliness of your bathroom environment. Even within a family, it is recommended each use their own towel.

Rin Doi, director of a Japanese Dermatology Clinic, said in the same “Non Stop” program that for people with skin allergies, or for the tender skin of infants and young children, using towels with high bacterial content will cause infection. Especially if there is a wound—it is more likely to become inflamed and purulent.

3. Bring higher risk of death

In 2003, the New England Journal of medicine published a study of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among players and staff members of a professional football team. Drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is immune to common antibiotics such as oxacillin, penicillin, amoxicillin, and cephalosporins. In addition to players sharing saunas, whirlpools, and training, therapy equipment, and the turf of the playing fields, players frequently shared towels to wipe their sweat, hands, and faces.

The study found that the frequently occurred skin abrasions among players; a lack of regular access to hand hygiene for trainers who provided wound care; skipping of showers by players before the use of communal whirlpools; and sharing of towels — all factors that might facilitate the transmission of infection.

According to the “Antimicrobial Resistance: Global Report on Surveillance,” published by the World Health Organization in late 2022, drug-resistant bacteria are becoming more prevalent in communities and can cause life-threatening bloodstream infections.

The report states that Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter bacteria that cause blood infections in hospitals have 50 percent resistance to antibiotics, and that 8 percent of blood infections caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae are also resistant to antibiotics typically used as a last resort, Carbapenems, which increases the risk of death from uncontrollable diseases.

The report also showed a 15 percent increase in bloodstream infections and gonorrhea infections caused by drug-resistant E. coli and Salmonella compared with 2017.

These superbugs could also reside on your towels. According to a 2014 study on kitchen towels, coliform bacteria were detected in 89 percent of the kitchen towels in 82 households, and E. coli was detected in 25.6 percent of the towels. Moreover, researchers also discovered Klebsiella pneumoniae and Salmonella in the towels.

Three Treasures for Washing Towels to Remove Odor?

Miscellaneous bacteria that multiply due to unclean towels will produce odors. Japanese towel critic Tetsuya Abe demonstrates how to wash towels on a TV show. He first boils a towel in hot water for 3 to 4 minutes, then rinse it with water, and the odor (bacteria) on the towel disappears.

Kensuke Kanzaki, director of the long-established Japanese laundromat “Hakuyosha,” recommended using sodium percarbonate to help cleaning. Sodium percarbonate, baking soda, and citric acid are known as the “Three Treasures of Cleaning for the Mothers.” They are not only non-toxic, odorless, and pollution-free, but also have bleaching power, decontamination, and odor removal properties. Kensuke Kanzaki said in a post that the use of sodium percarbonate is very simple. Just put the towel(s) into the washbasin, sprinkle 1 cup of sodium percarbonate evenly on the towel(s), add 140-176 °F (60-80 ℃) hot water, soak for 30 minutes, and then clean it in the usual way.

When it comes to soaring skylines and architectural marvels, no country has embraced the vertical revolution quite like China.

In this graphic, which uses data from the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), Visual Capitalist’s Jeff Desjardins and Nick Routley reveal the 25 cities with the most skyscrapers and supertall buildings globally.

Unsurprisingly, China’s cities dominate the list, solidifying the country’s reputation as a global powerhouse of tall buildings.

The 25 Top Cities by Skyscraper Count

Topping the charts is Hong Kong, with an impressive 657 skyscrapers, including six supertalls (buildings over 300 meters tall).

Hong Kong, along with Shenzhen (#2), and Guangzhou (#5) are part of the burgeoning megacity known as the Pearl River Delta, which is home to over 1,500 skyscrapers. This is even more impressive when considering that Shenzhen was a small fishing village until the 1970s.

New York City secures the third position on the list, boasting an impressive tally of 421 skyscrapers. Although it may have relinquished its title to Chinese cities, the city’s skyline endures as a globally renowned symbol, prominently featuring the iconic Empire State Building. Notably, while the Empire State Building enjoys widespread familiarity, it no longer ranks among the world’s 50 tallest structures.

Rounding out the top five is Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, which grabs the fourth position with 395 skyscrapers, a staggering 28 of which are supertalls. This desert oasis has become synonymous with grandiose architecture and record-breaking structures, exemplified by the Burj Khalifa, which is the world’s current tallest building at 828 meters (2,715 ft).

China’s Numbers in Context

Looking at this data from another perspective, China actually has more skyscrapers on this list than the rest of the world combined.

China’s rapid urbanization, economic growth, and ambitious construction projects have fueled this impressive feat. There’s no doubt that the country’s relentless pursuit of vertical development, coupled with its booming population and thriving cities, has positioned China as the unrivaled leader in the global skyscraper race.

The Future of the Global Skyline

As the world continues to reach new heights in architectural marvels, there are even more supertall skyscrapers in the pipeline that will reshape skylines across the globe.

From the soaring Jeddah Tower in Saudi Arabia, poised to surpass the Burj Khalifa as the world’s tallest building, to the remarkable Merdeka 118 in Kuala Lumpur, which is set to claim the title of the world’s second-tallest structure when it opens in June 2023, these projects will captivate city dwellers for years to come.

Even as these new monumental buildings rise, China’s prominence in the world of skyscrapers—with three cities in the top five globally—is likely to remain unchallenged.