Via Thehub.ca,

Welcome immigrants. Many, but not too many. Mostly educated and skilled. Always legal.

That is the answer. Or at least a short version of an answer. What’s the question? I’m coming to that.

For decades, Canada enjoyed all-party, across-the-spectrum support for immigration. The arrival of new people at consistently higher rates than in Western Europe or the United States did not drive political polarization. This country took in far more immigrants than America relative to the size of its population, and had been doing so for decades, without signs of backlash. Instead of a Left-Right clash on immigration, there was a boring all-party consensus.

When Donald Trump won the U.S. presidency for the first time, visceral anger over immigration was central to his campaign. Perhaps his success with so many voters should not have surprised. By 2016, the share of the American population born outside the country was 13.5 percent, the highest level in more than a century. Maybe a backlash was inevitable.

In Canada, however, it has been well over a century since immigrants were that low a share of the population. In 2016, immigrants were 22 percent of Canadians and rising. That was higher than the U.S. at any time since the Civil War.

Yet in Canada in the mid-2010s, there wasn’t much evidence of a groundswell of popular opposition to immigration, nor were there signs of a political crackup over the issue. Between the Liberal governments of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin and Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, there hadn’t been much daylight on immigration—not in the shared positive attitude toward legal immigration, nor in their common concern to limit illegal and irregular immigration, nor in the actual numbers of immigrants accepted each year. Governments of different ideological stripes struck roughly the same course for a quarter of a century. The broad strokes of Canadian immigration policy did not whipsaw when the party in power changed.

Immigration sparked conflict in other lands, but something about this nation, or how it did immigration, had delivered a different outcome.

From the start of the century until the early 2020s, the statement “there is too much immigration” was agreed with by only around a third of Canadians, versus two-thirds in disagreement.

A 2018 Pew poll found that 68 percent of Canadians said that immigrants “make our country stronger”—the highest level in the developed world. Just 27 percent said that immigrants “are a burden”—the lowest level in the developed world.

A 2019 Gallup survey found that Canada had the world’s most welcoming and positive attitude toward immigrants. In the U.S., the survey found support for immigration declined with age; in Canada, Gallup found no differences by age group. The most pro-immigration Americans were those in their teens and twenties, but even they were not as pro-immigration as Canadian seniors.

A country that tends to humblebrag about its modest successes had a not-so modest success. The ultimate mark of achievement was that Canadians were not preoccupied with immigration. Public disinterest was a sign of public trust. The subject was usually as newsworthy as functioning plumbing.

Until, that is, everything changed.

The italicized credo that I opened with is the short answer to this question: What is the recipe for a successful immigration system?

Or to flesh it out a bit more: What is the recipe for an immigration system that is likely to deliver long-term and widely shared economic benefits to the receiving country; offers immigrants good odds of success; is genuinely welcoming; is seen as fair and meritocratic; is likely to produce more benefits than costs; builds solidarity and citizenship between native-born and newcomers; and is likely to earn a high level of public acceptance?

Read the rest here…

Just as US-Russia talks related to Ukraine have recently hit a stoppage and potential breaking point – with the cancelation of the Budapest summit – Russia has been significantly upping its missile and drone strikes across Ukraine.

The fact that Ukraine’s energy grid is long struggling to keep up with power demand, also as vital infrastructure keeps getting pummeled amid rolling blackouts, means the country is in for a very tough winter. Fresh data demonstrates that October represented a high point in terms of the rate of Russian missile attacks on Ukraine.

“Russia fired more missiles at Ukraine in October than in any month since at least the start of 2023, an AFP analysis of Ukrainian data showed,” the outlet has found.

That record shows that “Russia’s army fired 270 missiles in October, up 46% on the previous month, according to an AFP analysis of daily data published by Ukraine’s air force.”

The Ukrainian government had only started publishing detailed statistics of these strikes at the beginning of 2023, and 270 strikes marks the highest-one month tally since.

President Zelensky has commented, “Russia’s task is to create chaos and apply psychological pressure on the population through strikes on energy facilities and railways.”

As for drone attacks, this number is in the thousands – with many of these likely being decoy drones, but also highly destructive suicide drones which often come in waves, overwhelming Ukraine’s air defenses.

“Russia also fired 5,298 long-range drones at Ukraine in October, the same data showed, down by around six percent on the number it fired in September but still close to record highs,” AFP found.

The number of Ukrainian drones sent on Russian territory is also likely in the thousands. These have actually been highly effective in damaging dozens of Russian oil refineries and defense sector factories in the last several months – with some of the same oil sites having been hit more than once.

More attacks into the weekend…

BREAKING:

Major blackouts in the suburbs of Moscow after Ukraine largest one of the largest drone swarm attack of this war against Russian energy infrastructure in thr Moscow region pic.twitter.com/MeWz1iwjeX

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) October 31, 2025

Kiev’s strategy is to attempt to cripple Putin’s military machine by impacting cash flow to the defense ministry via oil exports – though so far this has appeared limited in its effect, also as Moscow keeps finding ways to also circumvent Western sanctions.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe 

Automotive giant Stellantis is expanding its U.S. operations. Any sign of an investment turnaround in Germany, which Chancellor Friedrich Merz touted just weeks ago, is nowhere to be seen.

Investment Freeze at Stellantis – in Germany at Least 

The European carmaker, home to brands like Opel, Peugeot, and Citroën, is turning away from its European sites. On Monday, Stellantis announced it will invest $13 billion in the U.S. over the next four years, increasing American production by 50%. The expansion will create 5,000 new jobs across plants in Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana.

The concrete impact on German production remains unclear. Stellantis offered no comments on potential layoffs, but it’s safe to assume significant parts of production will shift to the U.S. in the coming years. High energy costs and U.S. tariffs likely influenced this decision.

CEO Antonio Filosa emphasized that this largest investment in company history will create American jobs and systematically expand U.S. manufacturing. The U.S. will now be Stellantis’ top priority.

Germany Avoided 

Stellantis’ damning verdict, especially for its German production sites, is just the tip of the iceberg in an accelerated capital flight from Germany. Major German automakers are increasingly relocating production abroad: BMW to Debrecen, Hungary—and Mercedes-Benz to Kecskemét, Hungary.

Industry is abandoning Germany. The manufacture of energy-intensive products, electrical engineering, machinery, and raw materials is no longer profitable under current conditions. It seems almost comical—if it weren’t so tragic—when Minister of Economic Affairs Katherina Reiche, noting Germany’s lack of competitiveness, forms a task force to develop strategies out of the crisis.

A quick ten-second search on „Grok“ could illuminate the issues—the problems are already well known.

The Green Deal Remains the Golden Calf 

Meanwhile, Chancellor Merz made clear during the EU summit that all options are being considered—except tackling the root cause: the grotesque European climate policy that largely triggered this industrial collapse.

The reflexive defense of Brussels’ climate consensus under all circumstances shows Berlin fully understands what’s driving Germany’s economic collapse. Yet the government pins its last hope on a massive debt package that will pour roughly €50 billion in additional annual spending across the country. Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil expressed hope at the UN summit that private industry will invest now that the state is taking the lead.

The response should be: far from it, Mr. Minister. You misread economic reality. The fact that U.S. chipmaker Intel rejected a €10 billion subsidy to set up in Magdeburg shows the problems run much deeper—and cannot be fixed with handouts. Keynesian “voodoo economics” has reached its limits. Germany is on sale; industrial investors have already passed judgment.

Rust Belt on the Horizon 

Political ignorance will cost dearly. Losing the industrial base triggers massive societal distortions. Recent industrial history provides several illustrative examples: the decline of the English textile industry, Argentina’s machinery sector—or closer to home, the collapse of coal and steel in the Ruhr.

Left behind are true Rust Belts, as in the U.S. Detroit, once America’s wealthiest city, fell as its auto industry collapsed, allowing other hubs, particularly in Japan and China, to rise.

The industrial foundation is key to understanding economy and prosperity. Statistically, one industrial job creates four or five additional jobs in supply chains, services, and consumption. Industrial jobs are typically above-average paying; losing them sparks a chain reaction of social and economic decay.

UK as a Case Study 

The U.K. provides a textbook case. Once at the peak of global industrial output, the empire financed massive overseas infrastructure projects. Imperial overstretch followed, investments collapsed, and industrial decline set in. Other industrial centers, notably the U.S., rose.

Left behind was the City of London: a global financial hub surrounded by a powerful insurance architecture across former empire trade routes. A dual society emerged: the finance center exercising global influence, and “Little Britain,” trapped in poverty. Could Germany face the same fate, minus colonial flows of finance and power?

Time Window Closing 

Currently, around 5.4 million Germans still work in industry—autos, machinery, electrical engineering. Since 2018, their number has fallen by roughly 250,000. Industrial output has dropped by an average of 23%, representing at least €35 billion in lost annual value creation.

There is still time to counteract—so far, mostly lower-value production has been outsourced or shut. There is still time to preserve both Germany’s industrial and social foundations in urban regions.

Yet deindustrialization now shows on the municipal level. Regions dependent on autos are seeing local finances collapse amid the catastrophe facing German carmakers. Too much responsibility is centralized; now funds for schools, kindergartens, cultural institutions, and hospitals are missing. Cities like Stuttgart and Wolfsburg, once automotive strongholds, are fiscally drained.

With industry also disappears private patronage. Germany is losing its millionaires and economically successful elite faster than ever. This year, at least 400 wealthy individuals will likely leave, removing over €2 billion in private capital.

Last year, €64.5 billion in corporate direct investment was shifted abroad—much of it to the U.S. This is capital translating directly into economic activity, not stock market circulation.

History teaches: if elites lose faith in a society or business location, social crisis inevitably grows from that vacuum.

Authored by Gary Abernathy via The Empowerment Alliance,

The public “net zero” pledges by countless corporate and political entities in recent years were always baffling. How could the United States or much of the industrialized world reach “net zero” emissions without destroying modern living?

As a reminder, “net zero” is a term coined to illustrate a goal of “eliminating greenhouse gas emissions produced by human activities, which is accomplished by decreasing global emissions and abating them from the atmosphere,” as defined by Net0.com, a company that describes itself as “the market leader in AI-First Sustainability, enabling governments and enterprises worldwide to enhance their environmental performance and decarbonize profitably.”

Net0 posits that “the global scientific community agrees that to mitigate the most severe impacts of climate change, we must reduce worldwide net human-generated carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 45 percent from their 2010 levels by the year 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by around 2050.”

In a political atmosphere shaming anyone who didn’t join the climate cult – led in the U.S. by the Biden administration and globally by the U.N. – attempting to outdo each other for the most aggressive “net zero” policy was all the rage.

“As of June 2024, 107 countries… had adopted net-zero pledges either in law, in a policy document such as a national climate action plan or a long-term strategy, or in an announcement by a high-level government official,” boasted the United Nations. “More than 9,000 companies, over 1,000 cities, more than 1,000 educational institutions, and over 600 financial institutions have joined the Race to Zero, pledging to take rigorous, immediate action to halve global emissions by 2030.”

But as politicians know, promises and actions are often unrelated. Most people endowed with even a modicum of common sense and a grade-school understanding of basic science knew that meeting “net zero” goals would require a reduction in the use of our most affordable, effective and reliable energy sources to a degree that would devastate modern economies.

The fact that “net zero” pledges were nothing but a cruel joke was made clear last month in a story by NPR headlined, “Leaders promised to cut climate pollution, then doubled down on fossil fuels.” Most thinking people were as surprised by that headline as by discovering wet water, hot fire or flying birds. It was not necessary to read further. “Of course,” they said to themselves, moving on to the next story.

But there are, sadly, climate cult converts who, in their shock, likely needed more details.

They discovered: “The world is producing too much coal, oil and natural gas to meet the targets set 10 years ago under the Paris Agreement, in which countries agreed to limit climate pollution and avoid the worst effects of global warming,” NPR reported.

“A new report, led by the nonprofit research group Stockholm Environment Institute, shows countries plan to produce more than twice the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than would be consistent with limiting global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit),” the story said.

For the true believers, here’s the real punch to the gut: “The SEI report shows the 20 most polluting countries, including China, the U.S. and India, actually plan to produce even more fossil fuels than they did two years ago, when the report was last updated.”

Of course, as he did in his first term, President Trump is pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement as he unleashes American industry and works to ensure energy affordability, independence and security for the nation. Legislation to roll back taxpayer subsidies for “renewables” and return to “reliables” has already been passed or introduced in various states and is soon likely to be fortified at the federal level.

After wasting billions of tax dollars on wind and solar subsidies that could have been directed toward schools, healthcare or other real needs, the fever is finally breaking. The world is slowly but surely awakening from the delusions of climate zealots who insisted that we were on the verge of catastrophe with constantly worsening weather disasters.

Just last May, for example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicted an “above-normal 2025 Atlantic hurricane season.” And just a few months earlier, PBS NewsHour reported on a study showing that “human-caused climate change made Atlantic hurricanes about 18 miles per hour (29 kilometers per hour) stronger in the last six years.”

The message was clear. More hurricanes. Stronger hurricanes. This year’s reality so far?

“The 2025 Atlantic hurricane season is the first time in 10 years that a hurricane has not made landfall in the United States through the end of September,” according to American Press. While “hurricane season” extends through November, September is usually the busiest month.

The weather is – and has always been – unpredictable. Severe weather events like hurricanes, tornadoes, monsoons, floods, blizzards and drought have always been with us, and always will. The attempt to demonize humankind for the frequency and severity of the weather has been politically motived and economically disastrous.

“Net zero” pledges are being revealed for the false promises they most often were, designed mainly to win plaudits from the Lecturing Left. For leaders grounded in facts, real-world needs have always meant that no one is easing off the gas.

Over the past 2 years, a huge disconnect has emerged between energy, in the conventional sense of power and electricity, and energy stocks, mostly associated with oil explorers and refiners. The former has exploded, as part of the “picks and shovles” thesis – after all, someone has to energize all those data centers – sending utilities, gas names, nuclear and uranium stocks to multi-year highs, while the latter have flatlined if not stagnated as the price of oil has continued to plumb new lows. 

But one US supermajor may be about to change all that. 

On Friday, Exxon CEO Darren Woods said he is holding advanced talks with power providers and technology companies to cut the emissions of AI data centers that rely on natural gas by deploying carbon capture technology.

“I’m hopeful that many of these hyperscalers are sincere when they talk about the desire to have low emission facilities, because certainly in the near to medium term we’re probably the only realistic game in town to accomplish that,” Woods said on Exxon’s earnings call.

Exxon, which is the largest US oil producer and refiner, and which went through its own personal hell as part of the ESG lunacy of the past 5 years, aims to capture 90% of the carbon dioxide emissions emitted by natural gas plants that power data centers, Woods said.

The oil major is talking with power companies to decarbonize their plants, he said adding that “we’re pretty advanced in the conversations.”

According to CNBC, the tech sector has mostly secured renewable energy to offset the emissions from their data centers, though they are now making major investments in nuclear power as well.

Separately, some companies are turning to natural gas as well as they search for reliable power. Meta, for example, signed an agreement with the utility Entergy in Louisiana to power a data center campus with natural gas.

“We secured locations. We’ve got the existing infrastructure, certainly have the know-how in terms of the technology of capturing, transporting and storing [carbon dioxide],” Woods said.

A Rhode Island federal judge praised President Donald Trump’s “quick and definitive response” to a Friday order for facilitating the timely funding of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments. 

“The court greatly appreciates the president’s quick and definitive response to this court’s order and his desire to provide the necessary SNAP funding,” US District Court Judge John J. McConnell Jr. (Obama) wrote in the footnote of a Saturday court order. 

The order, forcing the USDA to ensure SNAP benefits for November reach approximately 42 million Americans (around one in eight) who were facing a halt in benefits amid the government shutdown. McConnell ruled that recipients must receive their benefits by the end of Monday, Nov. 3, or that partial payments be issued no later than end-of-day Wednesday, November 5. 

“There is no question that the congressionally approved contingency funds must be used now because of the shutdown,” the judge wrote, citing contingency funds from fiscal years 2024 and 2025, along with Section 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935, to justify ensuring SNAP payments are made. 

The USDA had argued that it lacks the legal authority and sufficient funds to provide full SNAP benefits for November with the shutdown in force, and contended that even if contingency funds were available,  they would not cover the full payments – while implementation of reduced benefits nationwide would be challenging from an administration standpoint.

According to lawyers for the Trump administration, $5.25 billion is currently available in the program’s contingency fund, however ensuring November payments will require at least $8.5 billion. 

McConnell’s order requires the use of all available contingency funds. 

“There is no question that the congressionally approved contingency funds must be used now because of the shutdown; in fact, the president during his first term issued guidance indicating that these contingency funds are available if SNAP funds lapse due to a government shutdown,” McConnell wrote. 

In a separate ruling last week, Boston US District Judge Indira Talwani (Obama) also ruled that the USDA must continue SNAP payments – calling the program’s suspension ‘unlawful.’

On Friday, Trump wrote on Truth social following McConell’s ruling “I do not want Americans to go hungry,” adding “[I] ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible. . . . If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding.”

Where it stands: The USDA has until noon on Monday to present their plan to comply. If full payments are not completed, partial payments are to follow by Wednesday as noted above. 

Two weeks after a sudden flareup over Chinese rare earth mineral exports nearly sparked another market meltdown, the issue has been resolved, at least according to the Trump admin. 

According to a fact sheet published by the White House on Saturday which outlined some details of the trade pact agreed to earlier this week by President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, China will effectively suspend implementation of additional export controls on rare earth metals and will issue general licenses valid for exports of rare earths, gallium and germanium “for the benefit of U.S. end users and their suppliers around the world” meaning the effective removal of controls China imposed in April 2025 and October 2022. The US and China previously said Beijing would suspend more restrictive controls announced in October 2025 for one year.

Washington will also pause some of Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs on China for an additional year and is halting plans to implement a 100% tariff on Chinese exports to the US that was threatened for November. The White House also said that the US will further extend the expiration of certain Section 301 tariff exclusions, currently due to expire on Nov. 29, 2025, until Nov. 10, 2026.

Meanwhile, China will also terminate investigations targeting US companies in the semiconductor supply chain, including those into Nvidia and Qualcomm, Bloomberg reported.

However, skepticism emerged about the viability of the deal after comparing the readouts of what the White House said was agreed to, and that published by Beijing: what emerges are several key disagreements, prompting some China experts to conclude that “there is no deal” and that “we’re going to be doing this again in 1-2 months.”

First pic is what USA said China agreed to do

Second and third pics are what China said about the meeting

Doesn’t seem like there is a consensus https://t.co/VcvV7uV21f pic.twitter.com/GFRsDqZYd6

— molson 🧠⚙️ (@Molson_Hart) November 2, 2025

It also means that even a small hiccup in the already tense relations between the two countries likely means a reversion to the trade war status quo, threats of more tariffs by the US and rare earth retaliation by Beijing. 

To that point, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday that despite deals, the US and its allies need to be wary of China.

“This is a problem that has been with us for several decades, it’s never been addressed with these rare earths, the rare earth magnets,” Bessent said on Fox News Sunday. “The Chinese have cornered the market, and unfortunately, at times, they proved to be unreliable partners.”

Bessent added that he hoped “we can depend on them to be more reliable partners” after the implementation of the deal. 

The grumpy old men at The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board think China’s rare earth restrictions were a surprise.

China has been planning this for 30 years while the U.S. was asleep at the switch.

We’re wide awake now, rallying our allies and de-risking global supply… pic.twitter.com/fjkoRuY8bI

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) November 2, 2025

Later on Sunday, Trump appeared on 60 Minutes after a 5 year hiatus, and said that “I got sort of everything that we wanted,” of his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. 

“I mean, we’re doing very well with China, and hopefully they’re gonna do very well with us,” adding that China’s threat of rare earths restrictions has “gone.” 

The grumpy old men at The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board think China’s rare earth restrictions were a surprise.

China has been planning this for 30 years while the U.S. was asleep at the switch.

We’re wide awake now, rallying our allies and de-risking global supply… pic.twitter.com/fjkoRuY8bI

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) November 2, 2025

Many hardly share Trump’s view, noting that the deal at most gives the US a 1 year period in which to launch an Operation Warp Speed 2.0 (see below) in which to boost domestic production and reroute supply chains in order to make the US self-reliant on rare earths, a massive challenge in a world where China is the defacto sole-source of refined RE.

The landmark summit between Trump and Xi, their first face-to-face meeting of the US president’s second term, saw the leaders stabilize relations in the short term after an escalating trade fight that had roiled markets and sparked fears of a global downturn.

Under their agreement, according to the White House, China agreed to pause sweeping controls on rare-earth magnets in exchange for a US agreement to roll back an expansion of curbs on Chinese companies. China had used its dominance in the processing of rare-earth minerals as leverage, threatening to restrict their flow to the US and allies countries.

The US also agreed to halve a fentanyl-related tariff to 10% from 20%, while Beijing will resume purchases of American soybeans and other agricultural products. The US has said China will buy 12 million metric tons of soybeans during the current season, and a minimum of 25 million metric tons a year for the next three years. Trump on Friday indicated he would like to remove all of the fentanyl-related tariffs if China continued to crack down on exports of the drug and precursor chemicals used to make it.  

“As soon as we see that, we’ll get rid of the other 10%,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday.

The US also said on Saturday that Beijing will take steps to allow the Chinese facilities of Dutch chipmaker Nexperia BV to resume shipments, confirming a Bloomberg report from a day earlier. This move will likely ease worries about chip shipments that had threatened auto production as a trade fight between China and the US escalated.

But as Bloomberg notes, while the agreement has calmed tensions, the pact may be a short-term truce in an extended trade fight with the measures just meant to last one year. And despite addressing some key issues – and with both sides winning key concessions – the agreement fails to comprehensively address all of the issues at the heart of the US-China trade fight and other geopolitical flashpoints such as Taiwan and Russia’s war in Ukraine.

According to an analysis by TS Lombard’s Grace Fan (available to pro subs), amid Trump’s flurry of Asia dealmaking, capped by a fresh US-China trade war détente, “the spectre of escalation remains bracingly in view, after Trump unexpectedly threw open the door to new US nuclear weapons testing for the first time in three decades to counter Russia/China.”

That said, investors can take comfort in the détente’s ‘deliverables’ as keeping a risk-on market rally on both sides of the Pacific alive, including: 1) A 10% cut in US tariffs on China aided by Chinese purchases of US soy (+25mmt/yr for 3 yrs); 2) a 1-year delay to both the expanded Chinese 9 Oct rare earth (RE) and the US 29 Sept (“Affiliates”) export controls rules; and 3) a 1-year delay of new bilateral shipping fees. Left out was Taiwan, TikTok and Nvidia’s Blackwell chips, suggesting more market upside when and if a latter deal ultimately gets greenlit as we expect.

Fan notes that aided by his Rare Earths trump card, Xi scored two big wins: 

• Delayed US “Affiliates Rule”. This is one of the first known instances of China successfully rolling back a major US chip export control expansion but likely not the last. In a big shift owing to Trump’s transactionalism, US national security is now on the bargaining table in a way it never was before. An estimated 20,000 affiliates at least 50% owned by Chinese blacklisted entities and caught in the rule’s dragnet could be let off (e.g., Dutch-based chipmaker Nexperia), easing recent supply chain constraints for automakers among other firms.
• Immediate 10% fentanyl tariff cut = more level playing field with ASEAN. China’s now lower tariff rate (+20% under Trump 2.0) puts it back in competition with regional exporters, making ASEAN (led by Vietnam) the relative loser here (with +19-20% “reciprocal” tariffs, +40% for transshipments). Still, keep an eye on Trump’s two recently finalized trade deals (Malaysia, Cambodia) plus “framework” agreements (Vietnam, Thailand) as new details are fleshed out.

Trump’s consolation prize are the new RE alliances plus soy purchases. According to TS Lombard, saddled by Beijing’s April 4th Rare Earth export controls, the US is arguably in a worse position now vs pre-Liberation Day. Yet Trump’s flurry of RE deals this week (Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Thailand) offers hope that a valuable lesson may have been learnt: the only way out of the RE trap is working with allies on ‘Operation Warp Speed’ 2.0. Trump’s go-ahead for Seoul to build nuclear-powered submarines at a Philly shipyard and clarity on Korea’s $350bn FDI ($150bn for shipbuilding; US$200bn in cash capped at US$20bn/year) also sets the stage for more US reindustrialization – so long as visas are granted. 

All this keeps Trump on track for trade war de-escalation by year-end in time for the 2026 midterm election countdown in our base case. What’s still missing: a lot of fine print, USMCA renegotiations, resolution of the Brazil/India 50% tariff disputes and the looming Supreme Court tariff ruling (oral hearing: 5 Nov) that could scramble, however temporarily, Trump’s game plan.

The Department of Energy on Friday announced a $100 million funding package to revamp the nation’s existing coal-fired power plants, in a bid to support the US coal industry. 

The DOE said in a statement that it had issued a notice of funding opportunity for “practical, high-impact projects” aimed at modernization and refurbishment – including projects designed to enhance efficiency, extend operational lifespan, and improve the performance of coal and natural gas facilities.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced that the initiative is designed to keep US coal plants running and ensure access to affordable energy (as data center energy demands are shoving working class families in the financial hurt locker). 

“For years, the Biden and Obama administrations relentlessly targeted America’s coal industry and workers, resulting in the closure of reliable power plants and higher electricity costs,” Wright said in a statement. 

“Thankfully, President [Donald] Trump has ended the war on American coal and is restoring common sense energy policies that put Americans first.”

As the Epoch Times notes further, the initiative follows the DOE’s announcement in September that it would invest $625 million in funding to expand and reinvigorate the U.S. coal industry in an effort to increase energy output.

The Trump administration is seeking to reverse the decline of coal use in the country. In April, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to “identify coal resources on federal lands, lift barriers to coal mining, and prioritize coal leasing on those lands.”

The president also directed federal agencies to “rescind any agency policies that seek to transition the Nation away from coal production or otherwise establish preferences against coal as a generation resource,” according to a White House fact sheet.

Following the order, the DOE unveiled initiatives to boost domestic coal production, including facilitating new investments in coal-powered electricity generation, commercializing coal ash conversion technologies, and designating steelmaking coal as a critical material and mineral.

The Energy Information Administration (EIA) stated on July 14 that coal consumption in the U.S. power sector has decreased since the 2000s due to rising competition from natural gas and renewable energy sources, as well as stricter emissions regulations on coal-fired power plants.

The EIA projected that the total operating capacity of U.S. coal-fired power plants will drop to 145 gigawatts (GW) by the end of 2028, a decline of more than 15 percent from the 172 GW in operation as of May.

The Midwest region has 10 coal plants scheduled to retire by 2028, followed by five in the Mid-Atlantic, four in Tennessee, and three in the Northwest.

The agency noted that on a regional basis, 58 percent of the planned coal capacity retirements are in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic regions.

Naveen Athrappully contributed to this report.

Update (0755ET):

Police briefly invoked “Plato,” the code for a marauding terrorist attack, but later withdrew the designation after finding no evidence of terrorism, following a mass stabbing spree aboard a high-speed LNER train traveling from Doncaster to London, carried out by two suspects, one a Black British national and the other a British national of Caribbean descent, aged 32 and 25.

British Transport Police said eleven people were hospitalized, nine of whom initially suffered life-threatening injuries. As of early Sunday, four have been discharged, while two remain in critical condition.

“British Transport Police declared a major incident yesterday, and counter-terrorism policing were initially supporting our investigation. However, at this stage, there is nothing to suggest that this is a terrorist incident,” Superintendent John Loveless told reporters earlier. 

Defence Secretary John Healey described the mass stabbing as an “isolated attack but warned about a “new era of threat.” 

Earlier, transport secretary, Heidi Alexander, told reporters that passengers would see “a high visibility presence” of police on trains and train stations “to reassure the public.” This was a similar message to the British Transport Police’s comments. 

King Charles commented on the attack:

My wife and I were truly appalled and shocked to hear of the dreadful knife attack that took place on board a train in Cambridgeshire last night. Our deepest sympathy and thoughts are with all those affected, and their loved ones. We are particularly grateful to the emergency services for their response to this awful incident.

Viewing Britain from afar, just across the Atlantic, is depressing. The rapid decline of a nation spiraling into a progressive hellhole and multicultural dystopia offers lessons for America and the America First movement.

Given that authorities downgraded the Plato designation, does this mean the two attackers just randomly started knifing train passengers at the same time? Is this now the kind of “basic” attack being normalized, or were these attackers simply “blowing off some steam”?

Why is it that a witness described the train attacker/terrorist as a black man dressed in black, yet it’s really hard to find any description of the assailant in published news feeds? https://t.co/H5WzaK1UvV

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) November 2, 2025

Police are not treating the random stabbing of ten people on a train as terrorism related at this point.

It must be another case of random mental illness. pic.twitter.com/yZXMVnxbHl

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) November 2, 2025 

Interesting….

Conversion to Islam in the UK has been particularly popular among second, third and fourth generations of immigrants of the Afro-Caribbean Christian community. According to the academic Anabel Inge.

The second influential trend Inge identified was more localised… pic.twitter.com/3QWbEgmKCQ

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) November 2, 2025

“If that wasn’t terrorism… then what the hell is,” former Reform deputy leader Ben Habib said in a video posted on X. 

Inspector Loveless described the two alleged stabbers on the Huntingdon train as British.

Starmer described Rudakubana as a Welshman!

The British people want the unvarnished complete truth.

Daily now we are being assaulted.

👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/HwQFMEK6q0

— Ben Habib (@benhabib6) November 2, 2025

While UK authorities twiddle their thumbs, possibly downplaying this attack (like other attacks), Britons are being arrested for social media posts.

At the same time, conservative UK activist Tommy Robinson has drawn large crowds at free speech rallies, where people are standing up to voice their concerns about the destruction of Britain, Europe, and the ongoing war on Christianity.

The prospect of civil conflict is rising:

• Britain’s Descent Towards Civil War Is No Accident

• British Army Colonel: Civil War Is Coming

Why are EU elites unwilling to take meaningful actions to fix societal collapse?

*   *   * Meanwhile in America, you can defend yourself

British police said 10 people have been hospitalized, nine with critical, life-threatening injuries, following a mass stabbing attack on a London-bound train Saturday evening, and that counter-terrorism police are supporting the investigation.

The attack was carried out by two unidentified suspects at 7:35 pm as the Doncaster to London King’s Cross train headed south toward Huntingdon, a market town a few miles northwest of the university city of Cambridge. The two men dressed in all-black were tasered, restrained, and taken into custody by police, according to that report.

Two men arrested after mass stabbing on LNER train at Huntingdon. Attack at 19:30, emergency stop 19:44. Multiple passengers slashed, blood on floors, passengers barricaded in toilets. One guard critical. Three air ambulances. Over 30 armed officers. One suspect tasered, one… pic.twitter.com/IvmgcUq90c

— Lewis.B.Rendell Official (@Lewisrendell1) November 1, 2025

Emergency services, including armed police and air ambulances, responded quickly as the train drew into Huntingdon. The attack appears to have been contained swiftly after the train arrived at the station, and police officers wearing forensic suits, with a police dog, could be seen on the platform.

MASS STABBING UK 🇬🇧

Multiple people stabbed on train in Huntingdon, two men arrested pic.twitter.com/Qdu3nppdXp

— Culture War Intel (@CultureWar2020) November 1, 2025

Cambridgeshire Constabulary, the local police force, said armed police attended the incident after officers were called to the scene at Huntingdon station at 7:39 p.m. on Saturday. It added that the two people were arrested at the station, which is around 75 miles (120 kilometers) north of London.

A mad rush commenced in the train during the attack, sending bloodied riders rushing down aisles and hiding in bathrooms to avoid further carnage. The life-preserving dash led to travelers being “stamped [on] by others, according to The Times of London.

One witness stated that there was “blood everywhere” after the attack, The Times of London reported.

“They were making their way through the carriage to get away from the suspects. They were extremely bloodied,” a man using the name Gavin told Sky News.

That witness stated he saw one of the attackers on the platform with a “quite a large knife.”

“The suspect had also come off the train as well. So while we were being told to come out of the station the suspect was obviously running rampant,” Gavin told Sky News.

In a statement early Sunday, British Transport Police said two individuals have been arrested in connection with the stabbings. One of them was described on social media as “two black men.“

Witness said 2 black men went on a killing spree slitting peoples throats stabbing them in the back absolute carnage from Peterborough all the way to Huntingdon.

But hey. white middle age angry man hanging flags on that lamppost is the problem.🤷🏻‍♂️ pic.twitter.com/sL969LXFjJ

— kingy 👑 (@k1ngy__) November 2, 2025

No motive for the attack has been given, but British terror cops were probing the incident.

“Ten people have been taken to hospital with nine believed to have suffered life-threatening injuries,” the statement said. “This has been declared a major incident and Counter Terrorism Policing are supporting our investigation whilst we work to establish the full circumstances and motivation for this incident.”

The police force also said that “Plato,” the national code word used by police and emergency services when responding to what could be a “marauding terror attack,” was initiated. That declaration was later rescinded but no motive for the attack was disclosed.

The mass stabbing in Huntingdon was a “Code Plato” which is a “marauding terror attack”.

Britain is dying. Please @POTUS @realDonaldTrump, @JDVance, @elonmusk… wield your power. I can’t believe I’m saying this but you need to sanction the British government. It no longer has a… pic.twitter.com/M8dPyfCg5W

— Richard J. Shaw (@R_J_Shaw) November 2, 2025

“We’re conducting urgent enquiries to establish what has happened, and it could take some time before we are in a position to confirm anything further,” Chief Superintendent Chris Casey said. “At this early stage it would not be appropriate to speculate on the causes of the incident.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer lamented the bloodshed and offered condolences in a social media post.  He did not say anything about the identity of the attackers for their motive.

“The appalling incident on a train near Huntingdon is deeply concerning. My thought are with those affected, and my thanks go to the emergency services for their response,” the British leader said on X.

Paul Bristow, the mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, said he had heard of “horrendous scenes” on the train.

London North Eastern Railway, or LNER, which operates the East Coast Mainline services in the U.K., confirmed the incident had happened on one of its trains and urged passengers not to travel because of “major disruption.”

An eyewitness to the attack said “We ran from the back of the train to the end as everyone was screaming to run, explaining there was somebody stabbing everyone and everything.” His conclusion recaps how so many Brits are feeling in a country they can no longer recognize, overrun with illegal immigrants: “Knowing somebody has weapons and you have nothing, knowing they’re willing to strike woman and I think children. It wasn’t the England I grew up in.”

Knowing somebody has weapons and you have nothing, knowing they’re willing to strike woman and I think children. It wasn’t the England I grew up in.

That was barbaric.

— Olly Foster (@Oliver_foster_) November 2, 2025

A hero older man blocked a knife-wielding attacker from stabbing a younger girl as victims fought back with a bottle of Jack Daniels during Saturday’s UK train attack, according to a report. The unidentified man suffered gashes to his head and neck while preventing the train attackers from slaughtering a youngster on the blood-soaked LREN train from Peterborough to London, Witness Olly Foster told the BBC.

Scott Adams, the 67-year-old Dilbert creator, will publicly ask President Donald Trump on Monday to intervene and save his life. In a post on X, Adams said he is “declining fast” from metastasized prostate cancer and needs Trump, who once offered help, to force Kaiser Permanente of Northern California to schedule a critical treatment immediately.

Kaiser has approved Adams for Pluvicto, a newly FDA-approved radioligand therapy that targets advanced prostate cancer cells, but has failed to book the brief IV infusion, according to Adams.

“My healthcare provider, Kaiser of Northern California, has approved my application to receive a newly FDA-approved drug called Pluvicto,” Adams wrote on X. “But they have dropped the ball in scheduling the brief IV to administer it and I can’t seem to fix that.”

“I am declining fast. I will ask President Trump if he can get Kaiser of Northern California to respond and schedule it for Monday,” the longtime comic writer continued. “That will give me a fighting chance to stick around on this planet a little bit longer.”

“It is not a cure, but it does give good results to many people,” he added.

Pluvicto is not a cure but has extended survival for many patients whose cancer, like Adams’, has spread to the bones and resists hormone therapy.

In May on his Coffee with Scott Adams Rumble show, the comics writer revealed the same aggressive cancer as former President Joe Biden. “My life expectancy is maybe this summer,” he said, describing constant, migrating pain and months using a walker. “Every day is a nightmare.”

Scott Adams gives solid words of wisdom after revealing his cancer diagnosis.

“I realize that for some of you, this is hitting you hard because you’re hearing it for the first time.”

“I have to say that everybody has to die, as far as I know. And it’s kind of civilized that you… pic.twitter.com/g5eRulqKH8

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) May 19, 2025

Adams said he tried Ivermectin and Fenbendazole without success.
Once syndicated in 2,000 newspapers, Dilbert was canceled in 2023 after Adams’ controversial racial remarks.

In a swift response, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replied to Adams’ post: “Scott. How do I reach you? The President wants to help.”

Scott. How do I reach you? The President wants to help.

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) November 2, 2025

Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya quickly followed: “Just connected you guys via text.”

Just connected you guys via text.

— Chamath Palihapitiya (@chamath) November 2, 2025

Trump’s response was prompt and laconic: “on it” the president said.