Trump Era Sparks Biggest U.S. Gas Pipeline Boom Since 2008
A massive pipeline buildout is sweeping across Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, marking the largest expansion of Gulf Coast natural-gas capacity since the 2008 shale boom, according to Bloomberg.
As many as a dozen projects are slated for completion next year, enough to boost the region’s gas-shipping capacity by 13%, or about the equivalent of Canada’s total consumption, according to US Energy Information Administration data.
“This is the most activity I’ve seen in my 20 years in the industry,” said Jack Weixel of East Daley Analytics.
Though most projects long predate Donald Trump’s second term, the timing aligns neatly with his push to expand US LNG exports and strengthen US dominance in global energy markets. New LNG terminals scheduled for service in 2027 and beyond will rely heavily on these pipelines. As one analyst put it, “Pipeline development tends to respond to LNG export capacity – not so much drive it.”
The surge is powered by rising global LNG demand and by the US, the world’s largest exporter, sinking tens of billions into new terminals from Sempra, NextDecade, Venture Global, and others. Texas and Louisiana regulators, typically friendlier to fossil-fuel infrastructure, have also sped up approvals.
Bloomberg writes that environmental groups warn the boom locks in decades of gas use, but industry insists LNG helps countries transition away from dirtier fuels.
Among the major lines underway are Enbridge’s 137-mile Rio Bravo line and the 366-mile Blackcomb Pipeline, along with new or expanded systems from Kinder Morgan, Williams and Energy Transfer. The Permian Basin, awash in associated gas, badly needs the relief; prices there routinely fall below zero because pipelines are maxed out. “The general rule of thumb is the Permian needs a mega pipeline every 16 to 18 months,” said Amol Wayangankar of Enkon Energy Advisors.
Energy Transfer says its 442-mile Hugh Brinson Pipeline will be its most profitable asset yet, helped by rising demand from AI-driven data centers. More capacity is also planned for 2027, suggesting the boom is far from over.
As Caitlin Tessin of Enbridge summed it up: “Natural gas is definitely on. The country is thirsty.”
This note builds on our recent premium note about the “largest-ever LNG supply wave” set to hit global markets in the coming years. This surge will likely trigger a bust before setting the stage for a structural rebound in the 2030s.
That’s almost as many turkeys as there are people in Texas, the country’s second most populous state.
Although turkey continues to take center stage on the Thanksgiving table, American turkey farmers are challenged this holiday season by a drop in demand, accompanied by ongoing outbreaks of bird flu, which disrupts supplies, drives up prices, and threatens farm livelihoods.
Rise and Fall of Turkey in America
Turkey consumption in the United States has followed an arc over the past century, driven by agricultural, technological and health trends.
According to the USDA Economic Research Service, the average person in the United States ate less than three pounds of turkey a year in the 1930s and 1940s. By 1960, that number had doubled, as producers introduced specialized bird breeds that yielded more meat.
Advances in production and the introduction of processed products such as luncheon meats, ground turkey, and deli items drove turkey’s popularity in the 1980s. Marketing campaigns promoted the bird as a healthy, low-fat meat.
Annual turkey consumption rose from an average of about 10 pounds per person in 1980, to a peak of 18 pounds per person in 1996.
Since that time, however, consumers have been steadily eating less turkey. In 2025, average turkey consumption is projected to be just over 13 pounds per person, a nearly 40 year low.
In total, the USDA projects 4.5 billion pounds of turkey will be eaten in 2025—the lowest amount since 1990, according to the latest World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report.
The USDA estimates 195 million turkeys were raised in 2025, the lowest number in 40 years. This is the second consecutive annual decline, with production falling about 3 percent from 2024 and around 11 percent from 2023.
The 30 million turkeys Americans will eat this Thanksgiving represents 15 percent of the total number of turkeys raised in the United States this year. It also represents a 35 percent drop from the 46 million turkeys consumed during the Thanksgiving holiday in 2016, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
While health-conscious consumers and dieters propelled turkey’s rise, health concerns about processed foods are now one factor causing turkey consumption to drop.
Consumers are “steering a bit away from highly processed meat,” Heidi Diestel told The Epoch Times. Diestel’s family has raised turkeys in Sonora, California, for four generations.
Bird Flu
Since February 2022, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)—also known as bird flu—has resulted in the death of almost 21 million turkeys, or about one-tenth of the current U.S. turkey flock.
The wave of infections continued in November; the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service confirmed eight turkey operations were affected in Michigan, North Dakota, and South Dakota, impacting 431,300 birds.
Farmers are also taking a hit from Avian respiratory virus, or aMPV—an upper respiratory tract viral infection that affects all types of poultry but is most harmful to turkeys.
HPAI is nearly 100 percent fatal to exposed birds, according to former National Turkey Federation chairman John Zimmerman. Although its symptoms are generally milder, aMPV is equally devastating.
In addition to the flocks impacted by HPAI, an estimated 60 percent to 80 percent of turkey flocks were affected by aMPV in 2024, according to Zimmerman, a Minnesota turkey farmer, who testified before the House Agriculture Committee in March.
The highly contagious respiratory illness is also known as turkey rhinotracheitis, or swollen head syndrome. It’s responsible for high death rates in commercial flocks and reduces egg production in breeder stock.
“Together, these two respiratory viruses have exponentially increased volatility, supply shortages and market uncertainty,” Zimmerman said.
The H5N1 strain of bird flu, present in wild birds worldwide and primarily responsible for HPAI outbreaks in U.S. domestic birds and dairy cattle, originated in Guangdong, China.
From its first outbreak in 1996, it spread across Asia to Africa, Europe, and then to the United States. The first U.S. case was detected in early 2022, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Known for infecting cattle and ravaging poultry flocks, the virus is also feared for its potential to infect humans. Worldwide, since 2003, more than 890 human H5N1 infections have been reported in 23 countries, according to the CDC’s September update.
In the United States, the CDC has reported 71 cases of human H5N1 infection since 2024, including one death in Louisiana in January.
On Nov. 14, Washington state’s health department confirmed the nation’s first human case of the H5N5 strain of HPAI.
The USDA recently projected that wholesale prices for frozen whole turkey hens will reach $1.32 per pound in 2025. That’s a 40 percent increase from 2024’s price of 94 cents per pound.
“The 2025 rise in price is a response to lower production with HPAI pressures combined with steady demand,” according to a report from the American Farm Bureau Federation.
Despite this year’s jump in turkey wholesale prices, economist Bernt Nelson noted in the report that “prices are still 32 percent lower than just three years ago.”
The most recent USDA Agricultural Marketing Service data show the average per-pound feature price for whole frozen turkeys decreased during the second week of November.
“It’s encouraging to see some relief in the price of turkeys, as it is typically the most expensive part of the meal,” Farm Bureau economist Faith Parum said in a Nov. 19 news release.
Total cash receipts from turkeys in 2025 are forecast at $4.8 billion in the USDA’s September projection. This represents a 30.6 percent increase over turkey receipts of $3.7 billion in 2024, yet it remains 33.3 percent lower than the peak of $7.12 billion in 2022, when the current HPAI outbreak began.
Footage Shows Possible Drone Strike On Major Power Station Near Moscow
Footage circulating on X shows multiple angles of what appears to be a drone strike on a power plant that plays a critical role in keeping Moscow’s energy grid humming.
Visegrád 24 reports that long-range suicide drones struck the Shatura Power Plant in Moscow Oblast, roughly 75 miles east of the capital.
The facility is one of the region’s key power generation hubs, with about 1,500 MW of installed capacity, including a modern 400 MW combined-cycle gas-turbine unit added in 2010. The plant is owned and operated by PJSC Unipro, according to the latest available data.
“It’s one of Russia’s oldest electricity and heat generation facilities, playing an important part in supplying the wider Moscow region with heat and electricity,” Visegrád 24 noted.
BREAKING:
Ukrainian long-range suicide drones have struck the Shatura Power Plant in the Moscow region.
It’s one of Russia’s oldest electricity and heat generation facilities, playing an important part in supplying the wider Moscow region with heath and electricity. pic.twitter.com/qnyIhGvoGN
Another angle of the strike was uploaded on X by OSINTdefender.
The account wrote, “Several massive explosions have occurred at the Shatura Thermal Power Station in the Moscow Oblast of Western Russia, one of the largest power plants in the Russian Federation, following a large-scale drone strike tonight against Moscow by the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”
Several massive explosions have occurred at the Shatura Thermal Power Station in the Moscow Oblast of Western Russia, one of the largest power plants in the Russian Federation, following a large-scale drone strike tonight against Moscow by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/4m8woJkr0E
— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@Archer83Able) November 23, 2025
There has been no official confirmation from Kyiv about the strike, and it comes on the same day Ukrainian and American officials are in Switzerland as part of Trump’s push for Kyiv to accept a peace deal to end the war with Russia. Moscow has not yet commented on the strike nor released details about the power plant’s status or outages.
Trump: Democrats Urging Military To “Disobey My Orders” Have Committed A “Serious Crime”
President Trump issued new comments overnight about a group of unhinged left-wing lawmakers, including Reps. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), Chris DeLuzio (D-Pa.), Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.), and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), as well as Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who told members of the military and intelligence community last week, “You can refuse illegal orders,” stressing, “You must refuse illegal orders.”
“THE TRAITORS THAT TOLD THE MILITARY TO DISOBEY MY ORDERS SHOULD BE IN JAIL RIGHT NOW, NOT ROAMING THE FAKE NEWS NETWORKS TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT WHAT THEY SAID WAS OK,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Trump continued, “IT WASN’T, AND NEVER WILL BE! IT WAS SEDITION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, AND SEDITION IS A MAJOR CRIME. THERE CAN BE NO OTHER INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY SAID!”
In a separate post, Trump noted, “MANY GREAT LEGAL SCHOLARS AGREE THAT THE DEMOCRAT TRAITORS THAT TOLD THE MILITARY TO DISOBEY MY ORDERS, AS PRESIDENT, HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME OF SERIOUS PROPORTION!”
The Democratic lawmakers didn’t specify any specific orders from the administration. Meanwhile, a handful of issues related to military and intelligence operations have flared up recently, including the Trump administration’s National Guard deployment to crime-ridden sanctuary cities controlled by far-left Democrats. Some of these cities include Los Angeles, Chicago, and Portland, Oregon.
“Don’t give up the ship,” the Democratic lawmakers declared at the end of their video. But former CIA targeting officer Sarah Adams blasted the crazed leftists on X, writing, “You guys literally let in 10,000 foreign Islamist terrorists over the southern border — is this a fucking joke?!“
You guys literally let in 10,000 foreign Islamist terrorists over the southern border—is this a fucking joke!?
Last week, Trump accused the six lawmakers of “seditious behaviour, punishable by death” following the video’s release.
Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said “the words that the president chose are not the ones that I would use”, and defended Trump, saying he was simply “defining the crime of sedition”.
Johnson called the Democrats’ video “wildly inappropriate” and “very dangerous”.
“They are literally saying to 1.3 million active duty service members to defy the chain of command, not to follow lawful orders,” Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, added. “It perhaps is punishable by law.”
The video makes it clear that Democrats are inciting revolt and resistance against lawful authority. This is part of their broader strategy to wage a full-blown, color-revolution-style operation through their dark billionaire-funded NGO sphere with a single objective: regime change.
🧵🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: International actors are involved in the State Department led color revolution 🚨🚨
This is not speculation; it’s straight from a recorded call.
Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into… pic.twitter.com/XtinGt306o
What’s clear is that globalist Democrats have no guiding principle beyond removing Trump from power and derailing the entire America First agenda. Let that sink in.
Germany’s cities are on the verge of a massive financial crisis, with the mayor of Essen warning that the data shows that almost every single city in the country is nearly bankrupt.
Currently, the total deficit for all German cities in 2025 is €30 billion, which jumped from last year’s deficit of €24 billion.
Essen’s Mayor Thomas Kufen (CDU), who is also a member of the CDU federal executive board, is sounding the alarm: “Almost every German city is now on the verge of bankruptcy.”
In North Rhine-Westphalia alone, only 10 out of 396 cities and municipalities can present a balanced budget, and these alarming figures from Germany’s largest federal state can be applied to the “entire country,” he said.
Mayor Kufen stressed that the crisis is universal, affecting municipalities regardless of their location: “What’s new is that all cities have their backs against the wall,” he told Bild newspaper.
He warned that “budget freezes would now have to be imposed everywhere,” including in many cities previously considered wealthy.
Kufen emphasized the need for a national discussion on affordability: “We have to talk about what we can do so that our welfare state itself does not become a social case. This means: What do we want to afford and what else can we afford?”
However, he noted that cities cannot make these crucial decisions themselves; only the federal government can
Kufen illustrated the crisis with figures from his own city, Essen, which has a population of nearly 600,000. The city had planned a balanced budget for 2025. “But instead of a slight increase of €1.7 million, we currently have a deficit of €123 million,” he calculated.
Once again, refugee accommodation and integration are near the top of the list for reasons why the city is seeing a budget shortfall. Far from being a solution to Germany’s budget and pension crisis, they have become a massive financial burden for the country, costing at least €50 billion a year in social integration, housing, and benefits.
WATCH: 🇩🇪🇪🇺 Mass immigration is fueling the West’s housing crisis.
Here’s how it’s happening in Germany.
In a powerful speech in the German Bundestag, @AfD politician Carolin Bachmann slams the ruling government for allowing 2 million migrants into the country while families… pic.twitter.com/DMEqiV316S
Kufen points to education and social spending as burdens on his city as well, and in many ways, foreigners here also account for huge costs.
For example, official statistics from Essen indicate there are approximately 22,730 primary school students enrolled in Essen, and out of these, about 5,565 are classified as “Not German,” making up roughly 24.5 percent of primary school students in the city. If this definition is expanded to those with an “immigration background,” then the figure increases to 35 percent.
As with states and cities across the country, the non-German student population has, in general, been a massive budget burden, as these students need extra integration courses and more money per student to compensate for educational deficits.
In regard to Essen, there are also increased personnel costs due to a public sector tariff increase.
As a consequence, Kufen had to impose “restrictive household management” in Essen. This means the city is essentially only paying what is legally required, such as social assistance and wages. For all other expenses over €5,000, “you need an extra permit from the treasurer.”
Summarizing the situation, Kufen said, “There’s not much left.”
Addressing the federal government’s gigantic debt package intended to help cities, Kufen explained that Essen will receive €335 million over the next 12 years, equating to “just 28 million per year.”
He argued this is insufficient because the funding is primarily intended to finance construction projects. In Essen, that would “with luck be enough for two and a half schools,” Kufen said, noting that “costs have exploded, especially when it comes to construction.”
Kufen made it clear he doesn’t want to sound “ungrateful.”
“We’re happy to take the money. But if someone thinks that Berlin or Düsseldorf will solve all my problems, all I can say is: It will help alleviate them, but we still have a lot to struggle with.”
The mayor stressed that what cities truly need is “not just the money for investments, but simply less bureaucracy, easier awards, fewer requirements so that I can end up doing more with the little money.”
He also warned that if the state cannot function, then democracy is under threat, saying: “Because that’s where citizens find out whether the state works. Whether I can get a daycare place or whether the street lamps come on at night. If you can no longer do all of this, the people who pay taxes get the impression that politicians are not dealing with it properly. And that’s dangerous.”
It is not just the government either, with data showing that residents in Essen are taking on more and more personal debt due to rising rents, electricity, and even food prices, which have risen further in recent months.
The number of people who have taken on so much debt that they cannot pay it back has risen for the first time in six years as well, reaching 5.7 million people who are defined as “over-indebted.” The report also warns that this trend is expected to worsen due to rising unemployment.
The income threshold for being considered rich in Europe varies considerably from country to country.
In Luxembourg, wealth begins for a three-person household with an annual net income of 175,000€, while in Turkey, even less than 20,000€ is enough to cross the threshold (higher pane below).
Germany ranks in the upper mid-range.
It is also interesting to see how the figures change after adjustment for the cost of living (lower pane below).
Brussels’ Internet Neo-Feudalism: Sledgehammer Or Stiletto?
Submitted by Thomas Kolbe
The European Commission is relentlessly advancing its project to subjugate independent media. Beyond classic censorship, sophisticated technologies like algorithmic search control are being deployed. Alternative outlets such as Tichys Einblick are thus increasingly blocked from public reach. The republican spirit is quietly dying.
In recent months, there has been intense debate over Brussels’ dangerously anti-civilizational tendencies and its growing obsession with control. It is telling that EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen herself has highlighted the stark contrast between the EU citizen’s impotence and a bureaucracy operating with ever fewer limits.
Currently, Brussels is pulling every lever to scrutinize private chats via invasive algorithmic mechanisms, restricting and censoring public communication across digital and social media. Meanwhile, von der Leyen has refused transparency in the Pfizer vaccine scandal.
This behavior can only be described as neo-feudal and post-Enlightenment. Where else in the world do sovereign nations allow their governments to spider-web their own repressive bureaucracies across member states—except in EU-Europe?
London as a Dark Lab
Anyone wanting a glimpse into Brussels’ current trajectory should look to London. Since Brexit, the UK has served as a kind of laboratory for the EU’s centralizing project.
Several years ahead, Britain has enacted some of the harshest censorship laws in the (still) free world. Authorities are no longer focused on uncovering Islamist plots, dismantling rape gangs, or implementing a necessary remigration process to preserve English culture.
No—the state’s attention now targets opposition activity. Leveraging the broad definitions of “hate” and “incitement” online, thousands of law-abiding citizens have been raided and arrested simply for criticizing migration policy or urban chaos.
Under the deceptively benign Communications Act and Malicious Communications Act, the British executive now makes over 30 politically motivated arrests per day for online posts deemed offensive or threatening by authorities—a direct assault on citizen liberties in the birthplace of liberalism.
The Algo-Filter
A similar approach is envisioned by the EU Commission and its loyal satellite capitals. It serves as the center, the guiding spirit of this policy. As political opposition rises—from Germany’s AfD to right-conservative forces in the Netherlands, Czechia, and Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz in Hungary—the narrative foundation for climate socialism and open-border policies risks dissolving in public perception.
Through ever-expanding definitions of “hate and incitement,” framed as shields to immunize social developments—Islamization, economic decline due to Brussels’ growing centralism, or urban decay—from critique, the EU attempts to crush a resurgent conservative bloc before it can form.
This tendency was already noted in February by U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance during his Munich Security Conference speech. According to Vance, the partnership with the EU is at stake if this institutionalized attack on free speech is not firmly blocked.
Enter the Stiletto
To avoid international scrutiny, Brussels also employs a second strategy: the stiletto—finer but equally effective. At the center of censorship remains Google’s dominant search algorithm, where control operates occultly, invisible to the average internet user.
Under the euphemism European Democracy Shield, a practice has emerged of monitoring online content and politically defining “disinformation” to cleanse the digital space. The EU funds allegedly independent fact-checkers who alert national authorities to supposed hate speech, triggering legal actions.
It is a malicious intimidation apparatus. Erich Mielke could not have orchestrated it better.
Submission to EU Dictates
For Google, this architecture effectively forces submission to the EU regime: content rated positively by EU-accredited fact-checkers is prioritized, while alternative publications—like Tichys Einblick, Apollo News, NIUS, or Junge Freiheit—are algorithmically demoted. This occurs even when posts generate substantial traffic that would normally place them at the top of search results.
What happens when media discourse is pressed into a state corset? Power shifts from the sovereign to a limitless, invasive political elite that—particularly in the EU—can advance its eco-socialist project farther than ever conceivable under normal conditions.
A broadly informed, critically awake society would never have allowed entire populations to be driven into unemployment and poverty under the destructive dictates of man-made climate alarmism. Nor would open-border policies have persisted in the face of Europe’s visible Islamization, threatening social security systems and the cultural ferment of the continent.
Trump Ended the Censorship
In the United States, this practice ended with President Donald Trump’s election. As a result, people using VPNs navigate a completely different news environment from those unaware of such manipulations.
Through this, the EU controls public discourse and seeks to reduce the spectrum of opinion into an EU-compatible monologue. It mirrors the so-called Tal der Ahnungslosen (Valley of the Clueless) during the GDR era, where people around Dresden had no access to West German TV and believed in socialism’s blessings.
If von der Leyen and her commission are not stopped in institutionalizing this regime EU-wide, freedom will vanish. Public discourse will be silenced. The iron cloak of dictatorial lethargy will descend over EU-Europe. What we observe in the UK now threatens EU citizens.
The Snake Bites Its Own Tail
So, to answer the opening question: is the EU wielding a sledgehammer or a stiletto in its censorship campaign? Both tools are used simultaneously in the fight for interpretive dominance online. If the right-conservative opposition does not intervene in time, public debate will be brutally stifled.
New cryptographic communication methods may emerge to preserve rudimentary free speech—until Brussels’ own arrogance strangles it. The cynical consequence: people will self-censor even in private, cultivating a climate of mutual distrust. This is utterly condemnable.
Add in the digital control euro, and the picture becomes clearer. An institution that dictates both public discourse and citizen transactions is a dictatorship. In Europe, it is an eco-socialist dictatorship, economically so weak that we can hope both attacks on freedom will literally starve mid-course.
* * *
About the author: Thomas Kolbe, born in 1978 in Neuss/ Germany, is a graduate economist. For over 25 years, he has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.
The bewildering truth behind human technological enslavement is that it is impossible without the voluntary participation of the intended slaves. People must welcome technocracy into their lives in order for it to succeed. The populace has to believe, blindly, that they cannot live without it, or that authoritarianism by algorithmic consensus is “inevitable.”
For example, the average person living in a first world economy voluntarily carries a cell phone everywhere they go at all times without fail. To be without it, in their minds, is to be naked, at risk, unprepared and disconnected from civilization. I grew up in the 1980s and we did just fine without having a phone on our hip every moment of the day. Even now, I refuse to carry one.
Why? First, as most people should be aware of by now (the Edward Snowden revelations left no doubt), a cell phone is a perfect technocratic device. It has multilayered tracking, using GPS, WiFi routers, and cell tower triangulation to track your every step. Not only that, but it can be used to record your daily patterns, your habits, who your friends are, where you were on any given day many months or years ago.
Then there’s the backdoor functions hidden in app software that allows governments and corporations to to access your cell’s microphone and camera, even when you think the device is shut off. The private details of your life could be recorded and collated. In a world where privacy is being declared “dead” by boasting technocrats, why help them out by carrying something that listens to everything you say and chronicles everything you do?
Globalists often openly admit that the dynamic of global tracking and the end of anonymity is about willful participation. In a 2023 Swiss TV interview former head of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, made this statement:
Schwab was discussing his vision of the “new world” and the sacrifices people will have to make to live within it. I would point out that he says “YOU will have to accept total transparency…” not “WE will have to accept total transparency…” He’s not including the elites in his futurist ideal of total surveillance.
Michael F. Neidorff, then-Chairman and CEO of Centene Corporation (a major US health insurer), during a 2017 World Economic Forum (WEF) session in Davos titled “What If: Privacy Becomes a Luxury Good?” asserted that:
“By definition you give up privacy by being involved in something. Big data can be incredibly beneficial, but the fact that it is not anonymised is where the problem emerges…”
The globalist concept of the end of privacy is expanded upon in WEF member Ida Auken’s essay titled: “Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better.” Her paper is the quintessential technocratic propaganda narrative – Similar to the narratives of Soviet futurists early in the Cold War, the elites often lure the public into participation in technocracy by promising them a life of infinite wealth and ease. “One day soon…” they say, “…our technology is going to erase labor, the need for money and the wealth gap.”
That is to say, they all promise the same bullshit about how you won’t have to work, your time will be free and owning property will become superfluous because everything will be handed to you for nothing. Of course, the trade-off is that your life will become an open book for the people in power and your very survival will be completely dependent on their whims. Step out of line, and they can easily push a button and end your existence as you know it.
Every aspect of technocracy requires ever growing dependency, but also a certain level of faith; faith that the technocrats are smarter than you and have your best interests at heart. Most people don’t have that kind of faith in other people, especially government bureaucrats and corporate CEOs. However, I have noticed an unsettling trend of blind faith in Artificial Intelligence.
After all, algorithms are the ultimate objective source, are they not? They have no emotions, so how could they suffer from bias?
Ah, and there’s the big con. As I’ve said for many years now, AI is so overrated it’s mind boggling. The amount of electrical power and human capital being invested into AI is already immense and even more resources will be required for these systems to continue “evolving”. And yet, no AI has EVER invented anything new without extensive human input at every level. AI does not create autonomously and I question if it ever will.
Why are we pumping so many resources into something that really is nothing more than a glorified search engine? Don’t get me wrong, I realize that AI has great potential as a tool for development. It certainly makes things easier for research and for speeding up projects, but it’s not intuitive and it’s often wrong.
I’ve used apps like ChatGPT and Grok on occasion to find obscure sources for data and quotes, but you already have to know what you’re looking for in order to do this. Every app has lied to me at times, giving false information and unprompted propaganda (Grok at least admits it can provide biased content or admits it was wrong when cornered by conflicting data).
But once again, AI cannot mislead you unless you participate in the delusion that AI in infallible. Sadly, too many people are stumbling into this trap. I see people constantly quote AI without checking sources. They use AI as the source, and this is what globalists want.
If the majority of people on the planet start using AI as the academic or philosophical default, then the globalists win. Every person will get the same answers, which will be programmed by the powers-that-be, and even if those answers are wrong they will be considered correct because no one will have contrary information.
I was recently watching a discussion with Elon Musk at the Saudi Investment Forum launched as an extension of the Saudi 2030 Agenda (it’s basically all the same people as the World Government Summit in Dubai), as well as his comments at the recent Tesla shareholder’s meeting. Musk argued that:
“Long term, the AI is going to be in charge, to be totally frank, not humans… If artificial intelligence vastly exceeds the sum of human intelligence, it is difficult to imagine that any humans will actually be in charge. So we just need to make sure that AI is friendly…”
He also expounded on a rather Utopian vision of the next couple decades (as all futurists do), predicting a world without work, without scarcity and without most human struggles we are accustomed to. It’s a very similar vision sold to the public by elites and corporate moguls predicting a 15 hour work week during the First Industrial Revolution. Musk’s ideal is only different in that he calls for a benevolent AI trained by libertarians rather than an overlord AI trained by globalists.
Bottom line: AI will only “be in charge” if the populace allows it to be in charge. We can shut it all down anytime we like. You can pull your cell phone out of your pocket right now and throw it away, cutting down your digital footprint and becoming virtually invisible compared to yesterday. By extension, society as a whole can say no to AI governance. The question is, will we?
I’ll give Musk the benefit of the doubt for now that he wants AI for good, but I can’t help but point out that the collectivist ideal is always floated on the promise of economic Elysium. The world of ease Musk imagines will probably never exist. I think the system would collapse first.
That is to say, technocracy will be attempted but it will implode when it is discovered that AI is not a miracle drug and that the benefits do not outweigh the loss of freedoms the digital gulag requires. Laziness only works as an opiate for the masses when it does not result in pain. Pain creates motivation, and motivation leads to rebellion.
Furthermore, the energy resources we have right now are in no way capable of fueling the kind of AI renaissance the elites want. Even Musk admits that energy is the ultimate bottleneck and that a 50% to 100% increase in output worldwide would be needed to power future AI development. Alternative estimates call for a 300% increase in energy output.
No large-population country in the world including the US has the kind of grid needed to allow every citizen to own and operate an electric car. Imagine the amount of power required to to employ millions upon millions of AI run robots and machines to take the place of human laborers?
Typical green energy is not going to do this, it’s highly inefficient. Only a vast expansion of nuclear power might do the trick (or fusion if they ever get it right). The economic cost would be unprecedented (hundreds of trillions of dollars). The labor required to generate that kind of energy wealth would mean MORE work for humanity, not less. Meaning more struggle, more anger, and a greater chance of societal breakdown.
I have a lot of problems with futurists, but one thing that bothers me the most is their habit of ignoring the human factor in their technocratic theories. AI running the world is not inevitable, it is contingent on voluntary human compliance, just as everything about technocracy relies on human compliance.
I’m not saying we should be “anti-technology”, just that we can and must be masters of technology. We determine the future, not AI. Technology is peripheral and ultimately irrelevant in comparison to the human experience. If a piece of tech doesn’t actually make our lives better and more free and instead makes our existence a misery, then it should be turned to ashes along with the globalist institutions that demand we “own nothing and be happy.”
As migration patterns shift across the U.S., some cities are emerging as magnets for new residents. A combination of affordability, climate, and job opportunities continues to draw people to the South and West.
Las Vegas stands out with the highest share of newcomers from other states at 33%. Mesa, Arizona (30%), and Colorado Springs, Colorado (30%) follow closely, reflecting the continued appeal of the Sun Belt. Affordable housing, favorable tax environments, and strong employment in sectors like logistics and construction make these cities attractive to many Americans.
Rank
City
New residents in 2024
Share from out of state
1
New York, NY
702,239
20%
2
Los Angeles, CA
371,154
13%
3
Houston, TX
355,915
12%
4
Chicago, IL
329,189
21%
5
San Antonio, TX
264,464
13%
6
Phoenix, AZ
227,814
18%
7
Austin, TX
194,566
14%
8
Philadelphia, PA
193,315
22%
9
Dallas, TX
185,894
16%
10
San Diego, CA
176,790
19%
11
Columbus, OH
168,336
16%
12
Jacksonville, FL
156,514
17%
13
Seattle, WA
153,010
27%
14
Fort Worth, TX
141,316
15%
15
Charlotte, NC
133,366
26%
16
Nashville, TN
124,427
26%
17
Denver, CO
120,430
22%
18
San Francisco, CA
116,055
16%
19
Indianapolis, IN
110,523
15%
20
Boston, MA
110,165
28%
21
Oklahoma City, OK
105,814
21%
22
Atlanta, GA
103,432
23%
23
Tucson, AZ
101,549
19%
24
Portland, OR
92,250
26%
25
San Jose, CA
90,440
11%
26
Raleigh, NC
85,838
15%
27
Colorado Springs, CO
84,594
30%
28
Detroit, MI
81,239
7%
29
Milwaukee, WI
81,169
14%
30
Las Vegas, NV
80,024
33%
31
Minneapolis, MN
79,346
16%
32
Louisville, KY
78,571
14%
33
Albuquerque, NM
76,481
19%
34
Memphis, TN
76,188
18%
35
Omaha, NE
74,190
24%
36
Baltimore, MD
73,830
19%
37
Mesa, AZ
70,216
30%
38
Kansas City, MO
69,669
25%
39
Orlando, FL
69,634
9%
40
Fresno, CA
67,275
4%
Big Cities Still Draw the Most Movers
Despite slower growth, America’s largest metros continue to see huge inflows.
New York City tops the list with more than 702,000 new residents in 2024, even though only 20% came from out of state.
Los Angeles (371,000) and Houston (356,000) also remain top destinations, driven by work opportunities and cultural influence.
Regional Trends Reveal Shifting Appeal
Texas dominates the top 10 with four cities—Houston, San Antonio, Austin, and Dallas—all drawing strong inflows.
Meanwhile, colder cities like Minneapolis and Detroit show much lower out-of-state shares, suggesting domestic migration continues to favor warmer climates and lower costs of living.
Coastal cities such as Seattle (27%) and Boston (28%) still attract significant out-of-state movement, likely reflecting their robust job markets.
With the fiat US dollar price of gold multiplied 2.6x since October of 2022 (as of October 20, 2025 when this was written) and rising exponentially (Figure 1), some people are deeply worried that something is seriously wrong with the dollar and with the global financial system generally. Is the soaring price of gold a sign of monetary instability? Or is it just a transitory “nothingburger”?
Figure 1: Gold spot price per troy ounce, most recent five years
Central bankers are now being asked such awkward questions, and they are giving sharply divergent answers. During a Q&A session at a convention of business economists on October 14, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell responded:
EMILY KOLINSKI MORRIS: You used the term gold standard. And you didn’t mean it in this context that I’m going to pivot here, because there’s a question from the audience that’s getting a lot of upvotes. So, one of your predecessors, Alan Greenspan, used to view the price of gold as an indicator of inflation risk. So, in that context, how do you view the rally that we’ve seen in gold? And if you want to throw in Bitcoin, you can comment on that too.
JEROME POWELL: I’m not going to comment on any particular asset price, including that one. And I think we think of inflation as driven by fundamental supply and demand factors. And it’s not something we look at actively.
Powell is saying that the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which tries to fix the quantity of dollars in existence, allegedly doesn’t care about the price of gold in particular because it views gold’s price as just one price among a vast array of prices that informs their decision-making. According to this view, gold is just another commodity which makes only a small, insignificant contribution to the overall demand for dollars and has no impact on the supply of dollars.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you have also said recently that you think investors have begun to question whether the dollar would still warrant its status as the ultimate safe haven currency. I mean, the American dollar is one of the strongest weapons, frankly, that the administration has to use. Do you think that it is the rise of cryptocurrency that is most threatening to that or why are you worried?
CHRISTINE LAGARDE: I see signs that the attraction of the dollar is slightly eroded, and future will tell whether there is more erosion of that. But when you look at the rise of cryptos, number one, when you look at the price of gold. Gold is typically, in any situation, the ultimate destination for safe haven. Price of gold has increased by more than 50% since the beginning of the year. —
MARGARET BRENNAN: — So people are worried. —
CHRISTINE LAGARDE: — That’s a clear sign that the trust in the reserve currency that the dollar has been, is and will continue to be, is eroding a bit. In addition to that, we’ve seen capital flows outside of the U.S. towards other destinations, including Europe. So, you know, for a currency to be really trusted you need a few things. You need geopolitical credibility. You need the rule of law and strong institutions. And you need, I would call it, a military force that is strong enough. I think on at least one and possibly two accounts, the U.S. is still in a very dominant position, but it needs to be very careful because those positions erode over the course of time. We’ve seen it with the Sterling Pound, you know, way back after, after the war. But it happens gently, gently, you don’t notice it and then it happens suddenly. And we are seeing intriguing signs of it, which is why I think that having a strong institution with the Fed, for instance, is important. Having a credible environment within which to trade is important. So volatility, uncertainty, to the extent it is fueled by the administration, is not helpful to the dollar.
While Lagarde seems to agree with Powell that cryptotokens are not that important, gold is profoundly different. For her, gold is the “ultimate destination for safe haven” and the rise of its dollar price is a sign that “trust in the reserve currency” of the world is eroding. According to Lagarde, trust in a currency requires geopolitical credibility, a rule of law, strong institutions, and a strong military. Trust is something that can disappear suddenly and, without it, gold is the haven that the world turns to.
As an empirical matter, gold is still critically important as a part of the official reserves that central banks and governments use to prop up the purchasing power of their fiat currencies when needed. In fact, reported official reserve holdings of gold now exceed those of US Treasury securities, the first time that has happened since 1996. Lagarde seems to be correct (at least to the extent one can believe official Reserve statistics) that trust in the dollar is slipping away in favor of gold, at least among her central banking peers.
More importantly, economic theory and a common sense understanding of economic history favors Lagarde’s views over Powell’s. The fundamentals of monetary supply and demand are well described in chapter 11 of Murray Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State. While a government can often use its tax codes and regulations to compel domestic use of its own currency, it can’t effectively prevent its citizens from holding other highly-marketable assets (what Rothbard calls a quasi-money) as substitutes for holding cash balances as a reserve for their future purchases, nor can it always compel foreigners to use its currency to settle international transactions (though, as Lagarde noted, superior military strength might sometimes enable it to do so).
The anticipated future purchasing power of money (PPM) is always an issue because the utility of money depends entirely upon subjective anticipations that it can be exchanged for a sufficient quantity of other goods whenever desired. In the case of constantly-depreciating fiat monies like the US dollar, the use of short-term US Treasury securities as a quasi-money reserve asset makes the dollar itself acceptable overseas because Treasuries can be readily exchanged for dollars whenever needed, and because interest payments on Treasuries reduce the costs associated with on-going dollar PPM declines.
Trust in the issuer of a fiat global reserve currency is always a challenge because foreigners have to depend upon the ability and willingness of the issuer to honor its obligations (e.g., US Treasury securities) to pay sufficient interest on those obligations to offset PPM declines sufficiently, and to keep its markets open to imports so that foreigners can earn enough revenues denominated in the reserve currency to purchase and accumulate those obligations.
If the issuer gets in a fiscal jam and can’t or won’t pay enough interest to compensate for PPM declines (which themselves are often closely linked to using fiat money creation to deal with fiscal problems), or gets in the habit of selectively reneging on its obligations to particular foreigners it doesn’t like, or starts closing its markets to foreign exporters or foreign investors, the crutch of using interest-bearing debt as a quasi-money to shield foreign users of the currency against PPM declines no longer works. In that case, foreigners will be obliged to find some other reserve that does work.
What does always work is a quasi-money that isn’t someone else’s liability and isn’t denominated in terms of someone else’s fiat currency or propped up by reserves of someone else’s fiat currency, namely, gold. Gold is a natural substance that doesn’t require trust in other governments or even trust in the behavior of gold miners (who can at most add only a small percentage annually to the total stock of gold in existence). Gold doesn’t lose its real purchasing power over the long run like fiat-denominated assets do; it has lower storage and transaction costs than other highly marketable natural commodities and doesn’t have the technological vulnerabilities and limitations of artificial commodities like cryptotokens.
While it is a matter of entrepreneurial judgment and not economic theory to affirm gold’s superiority as the ultimate “store of value” and potentially even as the preferred replacement for fiat monies (though silver has often been a strong competitor to gold for the latter role), I must agree with Lagarde’s assessment of the empirical facts concerning reserve asset competition, not with Powell’s dismissive attitude about gold—when the chips are down and the world is forced to turn to an unconditionally trustworthy reserve of purchasing power, the world will turn to gold. What soaring gold prices might indicate is that the world is now turning to gold.
