The report included 35 pages seemingly aimed at debunking the merits of crypto assets…
Crypto executives have expressed irritation over the latest White House economic report — which notably features an entire chapter dedicated to casting doubts on the merit of digital assets.
The Economic Report of the President, released on March 20, marks the first time the White House has included a section on digital assets since it first began issuing the annual economic policy report in 1950.
The co-founder of digital asset investment firm Paradigm, Fred Ehrsam, remarked that 15% of the Economic Report was dedicated to “crypto FUD.”
The report includes 35 pages dedicated to debunking the “Perceived Appeal of Crypto Assets,” along with a short section on the FedNow payment system and central bank digital currencies.
The report’s main argument is that crypto assets fail to deliver on their “touted” benefits, such as improving payment systems, financial inclusion and creating mechanisms to transfer value and intellectual property, stating:
“Instead, their innovation has been mostly about creating artificial scarcity in order to support crypto assets’ prices — and many of them have no fundamental value.”
It also argues that cryptocurrencies fail to perform the functions of sovereign money — such as the U.S. dollar — as crypto prices fluctuate too wildly to be a stable store of value, nor can they function as a unit of account or medium of exchange.
Excerpt from Chapter 8: Digital Assets: Relearning Economic Principles Source: Economic Report of the President
The report also takes aim at stablecoins, arguing they are subject to run risks and thus too risky to satisfy their role as a “fast payment” instrument.
Blockchain Association CEO Kristin Smith called the latest presidential report “disappointing,” saying it shows that some in the government appear “increasingly allergic” to the burgeoning crypto industry, adding:
“We urge the Biden administration to consider how it will be remembered: as a leader of profound innovation or a roadblock to a global tech revolution.”
Decentralization is also highlighted in the report, which argues that “despite claims of being decentralized and trustless, blockchain-based applications are in practice neither.”
Users access crypto assets by going to a limited set of crypto asset platforms, while a small group of miners performs the majority of mining in most crypto assets, it argues.
The latest annual economic policy report was published some two weeks after the collapses of Silvergate, Silicon Valley and Signature banks — all three of which had served aspects of the crypto industry.
Dan Reecer, chief growth officer at decentralized finance platform Acala Network, claims that the report comes “just days” after Operation Chokepoint 2.0 was executed on crypto-friendly banks.
Source: Twitter
He also noted an “obvious early warning” of an upcoming United States CBDC, or digital dollar, referencing a section of the report that seemingly touts the benefits of a U.S. central bank-controlled currency.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is warning of an increasingly drug-resistant emerging fungus that the health agency says presents a “serious global health threat.”
Candida auris is a rare fungal disease that is easily spread through contact with contaminated surfaces or from person-to-person and can cause severe illness in hospitalized patients and those with weakened immune systems, according to health officials.
In some rare cases, the yeast can enter the bloodstream of patients and spread throughout the body, causing serious invasive candidiasis infections, which can affect the blood, heart, brain, eyes, bones, and other parts of the body and can prove fatal.
Data from a limited number of patents shows that 30 to 60 percent of people diagnosed with the fungal disease have died. However, healthy people typically do not get sick from the fungal disease.
The CDC said it is concerned about Candida auris for three main reasons: it is often multidrug-resistant, it is hard to identify using standard laboratory methods, and it has rapidly caused outbreaks in health care settings.
Additionally, individuals who have been hospitalized in health care facilities for long periods of time—especially those who have breathing tubes, feeding tubes, and central venous catheters going into their bodies—appear to be at the highest risk of contracting Candida auris.
Other risk factors are generally similar to risk factors for other types of Candida infections and include recent surgery, diabetes, and recent use of antibiotics or antifungal medications, initial data shows.
CDC Data Shows Rise in Cases
Infections of Candida auris, also referred to as C. auris, have been found in patients of all ages, from preterm infants to the elderly, health officials say.
According to CDC data, the drug-resistant fungus, which was first detected in the United States in 2016, has been spreading “at an alarming rate” among hospitalized patients in recent years, with clinical cases of the fungus nearly doubling in 2021 and continuing to rise in 2022.
There were at least 2,377 confirmed clinical cases of Candida auris in the United States in 2022, according to CDC statistics, up from 1,474 cases in 2021 and 757 cases in 2020.
Data shows the fungal disease is now present in more than half of U.S. states.
Separate data from the CDC published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on March 20 also found that screening cases—in which the fungus is detected but is not causing infection—tripled from 2020 to 2021, from 1,310 to 4,041 cases.
The CDC has said it is concerned with the tripling in 2021 of the number of cases that were resistant to echinocandins, antifungal drugs that are typically the first line of treatment for Candida auris.
CDC officials said in a press release that the number of Candida auris cases may have risen for multiple reasons, including poor general infection prevention and control practices in health care facilities, although enhanced efforts to detect cases may have also contributed to the rise.
“The timing of this increase and findings from public health investigations suggest C. auris spread may have worsened due to strain on healthcare and public health systems during the COVID-19 pandemic,” CDC officials added.
Leading GOP Lawmakers Push To Send Cluster Bombs To Ukraine
So much for weapons deemed inhumane and banned under UN-backed international treaties… apparently it’s OK if they are used against Russians or other official enemies of the United States – at least according to the logic of some US lawmakers.
A group of four Republican members of Congress are urging President Biden to send Ukraine cluster munitions as part of the next major weapons package approval . “Ukraine is seeking the MK-20, an air-delivered cluster bomb, to release its individual explosives from drones, and 155 mm artillery cluster shells,” according to prior reporting in Reuters. These Republican hawks want to provide it.
The Republican letter chastises the White House’s “reluctance to provide Ukraine the right type and amount of long-range fires and maneuver capability to create.”
The letter is signed by the following influential, high-level GOP Congress members:
Jim Risch, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Roger Wicker, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee,
Mike McCaul, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Mike Rogers the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee
Some 120 countries have banned cluster munitions as they have long been understood to be more indiscriminate than conventional weapons, given they randomly disperse small bombs over large areas.
House and Senate GOP leadership exercise their solemn oversight responsibilities by calling on Biden to send cluster bombs to Ukraine https://t.co/7eoG10TJYc
For example, the MK-20, which is one of the weapons on Ukraine’s wish list, disperses 240 dart-like submunitions or bomblets after being deployed.
“The US had been producing and selling cluster bombs to its allies until a few years ago,” Antiwar.com recently pointed out. “In 2016, Textron Systems Corporation stopped producing MK-20s when the US stopped selling them to Saudi Arabia. But there’s still an estimated one million of the bombs Pentagon stockpiles.”
Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850–1900 in 2011–2020. Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase, with unequal historical and ongoing contributions arising from unsustainable energy use, land use and land-use change, lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production across regions, between and within countries, and among individuals (high confidence).
Observed Changes
Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred. Human-caused climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. This has led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people (high confidence). Vulnerable communities who have historically contributed the least to current climate change are disproportionately affected (high confidence).
Current Mitigation Progress, Gaps and Challenges
Policies and laws addressing mitigation have consistently expanded since AR5. Global GHG emissions in 2030 implied by nationally determined contributions (NDCs) announced by October 2021 make it likely that warming will exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century and make it harder to limit warming below 2°C. There are gaps between projected emissions from implemented policies and those from NDCs and finance flows fall short of the levels needed to meet climate goals across all sectors and regions. (high confidence)
Continued greenhouse gas emissions will lead to increasing global warming, with the best estimate of reaching 1.5°C in the near term in considered scenarios and modelled pathways. Every increment of global warming will intensify multiple and concurrent hazards (high confidence).
Likelihood and Risks of Unavoidable, Irreversible or Abrupt Changes
Some future changes are unavoidable and/or irreversible but can be limited by deep, rapid and sustained global greenhouse gas emissions reduction. The likelihood of abrupt and/or irreversible changes increases with higher global warming levels. Similarly, the probability of low-likelihood outcomes associated with potentially very large adverse impacts increases with higher global warming levels. (high confidence)
Adaptation Limits
Adaptation options that are feasible and effective today will become constrained and less effective with increasing global warming. With increasing global warming, losses and damages will increase and additional human and natural systems will reach adaptation limits.
[Mish Comment: At that point there is high confidence that we all die.]
Overshoot: Exceeding a Warming Level and Returning
If warming exceeds a specified level such as 1.5°C, it could gradually be reduced again by achieving and sustaining net negative global CO2 emissions. This would require additional deployment of carbon dioxide removal, compared to pathways without overshoot, leading to greater feasibility and sustainability concerns. Overshoot entails adverse impacts, some irreversible, and additional risks for human and natural systems, all growing with the magnitude and duration of overshoot. (high confidence)
[Mish Comment: Damn. I was hoping that once we concluded that everyone would die we would throw up our hands and accept fate, but no such luck. To keep the fearmongering perpetually alive, it seems we can come back from the brink of extinction via additional measures.]
Urgency of Near-Term Integrated Climate Action
Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health (very high confidence). There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all (very high confidence). Climate resilient development integrates adaptation and mitigation to advance sustainable development for all, and is enabled by increased international cooperation including improved access to adequate financial resources, particularly for vulnerable regions, sectors and groups, and inclusive governance and coordinated policies (high confidence). The choices and actions implemented in this decade will have impacts now and for thousands of years (high confidence).
[Mish Comment: Wait a second. Can we come back from this or not? I note “very high confidence” that the window of a livable future is rapidly closing.]
Expect More Extremes
Rapidly Narrowing Window
How Much Will It Cost?
A few years ago, the estimate was $98 trillion. Now it’s $131 Trillion. In a few years it will be $200 trillion.
Of course, all government estimates overstate the benefits and understate the costs, typically by a factor of 5 to 10.
So figure the cost would be $1,000 trillion to $2,000 trillion or so.
Annual CO2 Emissions
Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin
If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will do anything that matters about climate change, the video is for you.
If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will not do anything that matters about climate change, the video is also for you.
It’s less than seven minutes long. Play it.
Play the video then think about the path of China and India while noting the whole continent of Africa is not even on the scale.
Note that the population of India will soon to surpass China. What happens when India tries to improve the standard of living for all its citizens?
Climate Deniers
I have been accused of being a climate denier. Mercy. Actually, I am a climate realist.
Climate change is real and constant and has been ever since the earth formed.
The debate is over how much is manmade and even more importantly, what to do about it, whether it’s manmade or not.
Regarding what percentage is manmade, I don’t know, nor does anyone else. But let’s say you disagree.
Then OK, I agree with you. Let’s assume recent climate change is 100% manmade. So what do we do about it?
That has been my line of questioning for a long time. I just have never been able to express my line of thinking as clearly as Kisin in the above video.
A Big Green Mess in Germany With Coal a Stunning 31 Percent of Electricity
Assume there is a problem, then if there is a solution, it will not be the like of Gretta, AOC, Al Gore, president Biden, or the Green Party hypocrites who will fix it.
Look no further than the Big Green Mess in Germany for what happens when politicians are faced with the decision to heat homes cheaply or cut back on CO2.
The EU plans to tax other nations for not addressing climate change, while Germany bulldozes a town to increase the size of a coal mine. It’s also lignite coal, the dirtiest kind.
Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, a Green who is Germany’s economy and climate minister, defended the agreement as “a good decision for climate protection” that fulfills many of the environmentalists’ demands and saves five other villages from demolition.
Meanwhile, the US is marching down an idiotic path towards electric vehicle mandates with no plan on where to get the minerals for the batteries. Nor does president Biden have an reasonable plan for the infrastructure needed.
Fed Chair Warns President Biden “We will not be a climate policymaker”
“Without explicit congressional legislation, it would be inappropriate for us to use our monetary policy or supervisory tools to promote a greener economy or to achieve other climate-based goals. We are not, and will not be, a climate policymaker,” said Jerome Powell.
I am not one who often praises the Fed, but that paragraph deserves a standing ovation.
Yeah right. Politicians are going to give Africa, India, and third world countries trillions of dollars and tax the hell out of them if they don’t comply.
The Hope of Fusion vs the Pomp of Politicians and Climate Activists
If there is a climate problem, science will find the answer, not politicians or activists.
EU Already Caving On Their 2035 Combustion Engine Ban, Considering Allowing E-Fuel Vehicles
It appears the EU could already be giving up ground on its proposed internal combustion engine ban, set to be put into place in 2035.
On Tuesday morning it was reported that the EU has now “drafted a plan allowing sales of new cars with internal combustion engines that run only on climate neutral e-fuels”, according to Reuters. The plan comes as part of a compromise proposal with Germany over the existing 2035 ban plans.
Under the plan, cars that run on carbon neutral fuels would be placed into a new type of vehicle category.
E-fuels are synthetically made fuels that can be made using hydrogen in conjunction with captured carbon dioxide or carbon monoxide. The source for the components of the fuels generally has to be sustainable in nature, such as wind or solar power.
The plan proposes including a “fuelling inducement system”, which would ostensibly prevent vehicles from starting if they aren’t running on carbon neutral fuels. We’re sure that won’t be cost prohibitive at all…
But most importantly, the legislation would allow legacy auto manufacturers to keep selling combustion engines after the 2035 proposed ban date, perhaps offering some relief for companies in the midst of transitioning their business models.
Reuters wrote:
After months of negotiations, EU countries and the European Parliament agreed the law last year. But Germany’s Transport Ministry surprised other countries this month by lodging last-minute objections to the law, days before a final vote that would have seen it enter into force.
The Ministry’s core demand is that the EU allow sales of new cars running on e-fuels after 2035. The Ministry was not immediately available for comment.
A Commission spokesperson declined to comment on the draft document, but referred to comments by EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans, who said last week any solution must comply with the 2035 phaseout law agreed last year.
Recall, just yesterday we wrote about how the switch to EVs for major manufacturers was casting a wet blanket over demand for some manufacturers in China.
Companies like Porsche and Honda are already working on vehicles that use synthetic fuels.
Despite Poland’s hawkish war stance and criticism of Hungary’s position on the war, Polish exports worth billions continue flowing into Russia…
Poland has long criticized Hungary for its neutrality in the war in Ukraine and its calls to end sanctions on Russia, but despite the Polish government’s tough rhetoric, billions in exports continue to flow from Poland to Russia
Data from Eurostat shows that Polish exports to Russia fell sharply in the first half of 2022, only to begin to rise again in the second half of the year. In the fourth quarter of 2022, Poland exported €1.2 billion worth of goods to Russia. Although this represented a fall of 44 percent over 2021, it was a marked improvement on the second and third quarters of the year, according to Polish news outlet Forsal.
After initially falling to €300 million in March and €200 million in April, exports to Russia are recovering and are now regularly above €300 million per month.
The total value of Polish exports to Russia for 2022 was €4.7 billion. That means that Poland was the third-biggest EU exporter to Russia. Only Germany and Italy exported more.
Polish exports to Russia are dominated by industrial products, which accounted for almost €830 million. The second-largest contributor was synthetic fibers (€371 million), and in third place came pharmaceuticals with sales worth €353 million, an actual increase of 18 percent over 2021. Footwear also saw a rise in exports to Russia.
The value of imports from Russia, on the other hand, was down significantly, falling 61 percent compared to 2021 when energy accounted for the bulk of imports; the decline came despite the rise in energy prices. As a result, Poland fell to seventh from second place in the EU with regard to the volume of imports from Russia. Hungary has moved in the other direction, climbing from 13th to 3rd place as a result of a 194 percent increase in imports from Russia.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has refused to send weapons to Ukraine or allow weapon transports through his territory, stressing that Hungary wants no part in the war. The country’s government has called for an immediate ceasefire and negotiations. In addition, Orbán has argued on numerous occasions that sanctions against Russia are harming Europeans more than Russians and that sanctions should be dropped by the end of the year, a stance that likely led to Orbán landing on a Ukrainian “kill list” and earning the scorn of war hawks in Poland.
Poland’s leader, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, has gone so far as to say the alliance between Hungary and Poland is over.
Orbán said in August of 2022 that the goals of both Poland and Hungary are the same “but the problem is of the heart,” claiming that Hungarians see the conflict in Ukraine as a war between two Slavic nations, whereas Poles “feel that they are also fighting in it.”
“I confirm the words of PM Orbán, that Poland and Hungary have parted ways,” said Morawiecki while also adding that Poland is not a part of the conflict.
European Spring? Germany Braces For Major Strikes While France Burns
The “winter of discontent” that has been sweeping across Europe has now escalated into a “spring of discontent,” with strikes and protests set to spread from France, Greece, and other surrounding countries to Germany.
According to Reuters, Germany’s Verdi union and the railway and transport union EVG are preparing to unleash paralyzing strikes on the country’s airports and railways next Monday.
Verdi is negotiating for 2.5 million public sector workers, including ones at airports and other public transport hubs. The union has demanded higher wages due to persistent inflation pressures. EVG is negotiating for 230,000 employees at railway company Deutsche Bahn and bus companies.
Meanwhile, a recession looms for Europe’s largest economy, which finds itself in the midst of an inflationary crisis. After experiencing a 0.4% GDP contraction in the fourth quarter of 2022, it’s anticipated that the economy will once again contract in the first quarter.
“German economic activity will probably fall again in the current quarter,” the Bundesbank said. “However, the decline is likely to be less than in the final quarter of 2022.”
Two consecutive quarters of negative growth indicate recession and come as inflation weighs heavily on consumption. The combination of the two crushes living standards and is sparking a wave of discontent.
While Germany braces for strikes and protests next week, France, Europe’s third-largest economy, is already burning as President Emmanuel Macron rammed through unpopular pension reform.
With growing instability in Western nations and the threat of a broadening banking crisis, the primary concern is whether NATO is adequately equipped to handle future conflicts.
Hungary is “authoritarian” and NATO should consider withholding sensitive information from Turkey and Hungary, Die Welt foreign policy commentator Clemens Wergin writes
German newspaper Die Welt claims in an opinion piece that Turkey and Hungary should not be trusted within the NATO alliance. The paper writes that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan continues to block Sweden’s NATO accession, and Hungary wants EU money in exchange for approving the membership of both nations.
The author of the piece, Clemens Wergin, also claims that both nations have developed “unseemly” ties to Russia and then asks whether NATO should even share sensitive data with both countries.
“And in their turn toward authoritarianism, Ankara and Budapest have also distanced themselves significantly from the community of values for which NATO stands. The alliance is therefore well advised to treat both as partners with reservation. This should include, for example, no longer necessarily sharing certain sensitive data with Turkey and Hungary within NATO,” Wergin writes.
When Wergin, the chief foreign policy correspondent for Die Welt, refers to “authoritarianism,” he makes no mention of the fact that French President Emmanuel Macron is facing mass protests in his country after ramming through pension reform without even a vote in parliament, or that he then banned protests in certain areas of Paris following the decree. In Germany itself, the current government is looking to ban one of the country’s top opposition parties, Alternative for Germany (AfD), even as the party soars in popularity. Such an authoritarian move would be met with an outcry from Brussels and Berlin if Orbán were to even consider banning opposition parties in Hungary.
Regarding the “blackmail” Wergin claims Hungary is subjecting NATO to, it should be noted that the EU first “blackmailed” Hungary, demanding the country make rule-of-law changes in order to unlock billions in EU funds. Arguably, the Hungarian government has more of a democratic mandate than the German government, with Orbán’s Fidesz party receiving such high levels of support that it resulted in yet another landslide victory last year and a two-thirds majority in parliament.
Wergin argues that Finland is likely to join NATO soon, as Erdoğan has given up his opposition to that country’s NATO membership. That means Finland is likely to join NATO without Sweden. He posits that this is because the Turkish decision is putting considerable pressure on the Hungarian government, which is also blocking membership, to agree to at least Finnish membership as well.
“As a result, it has now become more likely that at least Finland, which is particularly vulnerable due to its long land border with Russia, will be able to join NATO in the near future. Sweden, on the other hand, will probably have to wait at least until after the elections in Turkey. Northeastern Europe would thus become an area of divided security for the time being, with the Finns inside the NATO umbrella and the Swedes on the outside,” he argues.
He continues by writing that both states had turned the Nordic countries’ urgent application for membership, triggered by the Russian war, into a “farce” and prevented admission for extraneous reasons. Erdoğan wanted Sweden to impose a tougher policy on Turkish opposition groups and had also been outraged by an anti-Islam action by right-wing provocateur Rasmus Paulson, who had burned a Quran in Stockholm. He claims Paulson was funded by Russia but offers no evidence in support of his claim.
On his recent trip to Turkey, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán repeated his country’s stance for immediate peace talks to end the war in Ukraine, saying that Europe was suffering from “war psychosis,” with the continent drifting further into war day by day.
The town’s Christmas celebration commemorates both favorite son Jimmy Stewart, who starred in the iconic movie, and the story’s message of redemption and hope.
In the film, a bank run threatens to devastate an affordable-housing business run by George Bailey, Stewart’s character. The Great Depression has come to Bedford Falls. With over 9,000 banks failing during that period, bank runs were common.
For nearly 100 years since that fictional Beaver Falls bank run, the federal government has insured bank depositors for the purpose of stopping bank runs, which have historically triggered economic depressions. That decision was part of a sweeping political movement in response to the financial crisis of the 1930s: the New Deal.
Could a political movement arise from the recent failure of Silicon Valley Bank, which collapsed in mere hours? That question may be best answered by looking to the distant past.
In what came to be known as the “Bank War,” President Andrew Jackson made it his mission to dismantle the U.S. National Bank, which many blamed for triggering the Panic of 1819. Elected in 1828, just forty years after George Washington was inaugurated, the nation’s first populist president consolidated a political base against federal overreach. He succeeded by stopping the bank from being rechartered.
Near the end of the nineteenth century, the Panic of 1893 catapulted an unknown congressman from Nebraska to the Democratic Party’s 1896 presidential nomination. Comparing the economic plight of common Americans to a crucifixion, William Jennings Bryan heralded the arrival of the Progressive Era, which would legislate against the excesses of the Gilded Age.
A decade and a half later, the Panic of 1907 gave Democrats momentum to seize unified control of Congress and the White House. Signed into law in 1913 by President Woodrow Wilson, the Federal Reserve Bank created a nationalized system to regulate banking. Wilson’s presidency would be the pinnacle of the Progressive Era.
In 1929, the stock market’s Black Tuesday triggered a series of bank runs that cratered the American economy. The ensuing destitution deeply scarred a generation of Americans and realigned the electorate, which chose Franklin D. Roosevelt to implement the New Deal – the largest expansion of the federal government in American history.
A half-century later, stagflation – inflation without economic growth – during the Carter administration culminated with a run on First Pennsylvania Bank in 1980, resulting in the third-largest bank bailout in American history. Voters’ response was to launch the Reagan Revolution, which would attempt to pare back some of the New Deal. A former New Dealer himself, Reagan advocated for the restoration of federalism as the key to economic stability and growth.
The Great Recession of 2008 was triggered by a banking failure totaling trillions of dollars. The federal response, the Troubled Assets Relief Program, sought to backstop the failing financial system – but its massiveness also helped give rise to the Tea Party, which preached a small-government ethos. In 2016, that conservative political movement would help elect Donald Trump, who campaigned against the excesses of a federal government in which millions of Americans had lost faith.
Each of these six major financial panics launched a political movement. Americans were evenly split on choosing conservative and liberal solutions to the financial challenges they faced. The response to the Panic of 2023 will be the tiebreaker.
One thing is clear. At $319 billion and counting, the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank alone in the last two weeks are already on par with the entire 2008 financial crisis, which saw 25 banks failing, with $373 billion in combined assets. And with $620 billion of unrealized losses that triggered this crisis still pending, we may be just getting started.
What path policymakers will choose this time around is unclear. The country has never been more evenly split politically. Meanwhile, the regulatory system has attempted to stem the tide without the involvement of Congress or the White House. A political reconciliation, in other words, has been deferred.
Political issues come and go, but financial panics create political movements because they hit Americans directly, in their bank accounts. Voters pay attention.
The movement that results from this panic will depend ultimately on whom voters blame for it. That scapegoat, whether real or imagined, will determine where on the political spectrum the movement leans.
Many Americans continue to identify government itself as the top non-economic issue they face. Inflation, a problem created by government, is their top economic problem. Most Americans believe the federal government is too big and doing too much. In places like real-life Indiana, Pennsylvania or fictional Beaver Falls, it is abundantly clear that Americans have lost faith in their leading institutions.
“You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money,” George Bailey tells his antagonist in “It’s a Wonderful Life.”
Bailey was referring to the machinations of a powerful banker, but his words are fitting in an unintended sense, too: in American politics, realignments begin because the world revolves around voters and their money.
In an op-ed titled“The Age of AI has begun” on “The Blog of Bill Gates,” Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates discussed the upcoming paradigm shift in technology. Having been instrumental in developing personal computers several decades ago, the billionaire seems to know a thing or two about technological innovation. He believes that OpenAI’s language generation artificial intelligence tools will be at the forefront of the next technological revolution.
Gates wrote, “I’ve seen two demonstrations of technology that struck me as revolutionary.”
“The first time was in 1980, when I was introduced to a graphical user interface—the forerunner of every modern operating system, including Windows,” he said.
Gates said the second big surprise came last year with the impressive advancement in OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
“The development of AI is as fundamental as the creation of the microprocessor, the personal computer, the Internet, and the mobile phone,” he said. “It will change the way people work, learn, travel, get health care, and communicate with each other.”
Gates said he’s been in contact with OpenAI since 2016 and last year challenged the team to train the chatbot to pass the Advanced Placement biology exam. A few months later, he said the bot could pass a college-level biology course.
After seeing the results, Gates began to contemplate the future and how AI will be intertwined with humans on a day-to-day basis, just like computers and smartphones.
“This inspired me to think about all the things that AI can achieve in the next five to 10 years.”
Gates has emerged as a significant player in the AI arms race, as Microsoft, the company he founded, has pledged over $10 billion in funding to OpenAI.
However, like any new technology, there’s always a concern. Gates addressed some of those issues:
“Any new technology that’s so disruptive is bound to make people uneasy, and that’s certainly true with artificial intelligence. I understand why—it raises hard questions about the workforce, the legal system, privacy, bias, and more.”
On the bias issue, there have been numerous complaints about AI trainers skewing ChatGPT toward answering questions with a left-leaning spin. This has been such a significant problem that Elon Musk is allegedly taking on — in a new project to develop a ‘non-woke’ alternative chatbot.
Even the co-creator of ChatGPT warned that the world might not be “that far away from potentially scary” AI.
… and what’s disturbing — is if AI is programmed to enforce the truths determined by figures like Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and the federal government.
While Gates expresses enthusiasm about the potential of AI to be game-changing for humans, there is a flip side to it. The technology could become a tool for extreme censorship, which could make the Twitter censorship program seem trivial in comparison.
