Will Ron DeSantis Save Christmas? thumbnail

Will Ron DeSantis Save Christmas?

By Dr. Rich Swier

Last week, the Florida Ports Council put out a press release telling shippers that the state’s ports are open, staffed, and ready for business.

“Florida is where your success comes in, and our seaports are the solution to ensure the cargo shipping logjam doesn’t become the Grinch that stole Christmas,” said Florida Ports Council President and CEO Michael Rubin. He added, “With inflation growing, shipping and manufacturing industries can save time and money by calling on Florida ports. Why pay to moor off the coast of California, when Florida shipping lanes are open and serving as the gateway for getting goods to America’s market?”  

Thanks to Governor Ron DeSantis, Florida is well-positioned to serve as part of the supply chain solution.

Earlier this year, Governor DeSantis infused Florida’s 15 seaports with $250 million in stimulus relief to help offset the impacts experienced as a result of the pandemic. This stimulus is in addition to other port infrastructure and connectivity investments made in Florida to increase our capacity and ability to move cargo and passengers around the world – Florida continues to invest in the infrastructure to become the pier to the world.

Miami, Florida, has opened its arms to tech companies fleeing California. Residents of the Golden State flocked to Florida in 2020 in numbers not seen previously. Maybe cargo ships will be next. Governor Ron DeSantis made some real infrastructure investments to upgrade Florida’s ports.

Let’s see if they pay off and save Christmas for everyone.

EDITORS NOTE: This Defend Florida column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Ports Backed Up, Transportation Secretary Buttigieg Changing Diapers thumbnail

Ports Backed Up, Transportation Secretary Buttigieg Changing Diapers

By Pamela Geller

Clown.

They could temporarily halt all transportation regulations and mandates to fix this but instead they do nothing. Democrats want chaos.

Transportation secretary acknowledges trucker shortage ‘issue’ as part of supply chain disruptions

Bret Baier presses Transportation Secretary Buttigieg on supply chain woes

By Angelica Stabile | Fox News October 15, 2021:

Buttigieg defends Biden’s plan to solve supply chain issues: A lot must ‘go right’

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg acknowledges driver shortage and a supply chain bottleneck with a positive outlook following the president’s plan to keep ports open.

Supply chain disruptions across the U.S. have left shelves empty as the crucial holiday shopping period approaches.

President Biden announced Wednesday that the Ports of Los Angeles will remain open for 60 extra hours per week to feed in shipments to which “Special Report” host Bret Baier asked Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, “Is it too little, too late?”

“The president said this has the potential to be a game-changer,” Buttigieg said. “It’s going to have to be part of a number of steps.”

BIDEN RESPONDS TO SUPPLY CHAIN CRISIS, URGES PRIVATE SECTOR TO ‘STEP UP’

“A lot of things have to go right but the announcement that these ports would go 24/7, that’s a big part of it.”

The secretary referenced a report that indicates the issue does not solely lie in open ports, but also in the availability of trucks and drivers.

Biden under fire as supply chain crisis worsens; blamed Trump for 2020 shortages Video

Buttigieg added there are also issues with different ports coordinating with each other, urging for the implementation of more data sharing.

When pressed by Baier whether the current situation could have been seen coming, the secretary admitted the administration did notice the supply chain backup approaching and had set for accommodations to be put in place to heighten urgency. Buttigieg mentioned that furthering these efforts includes pushing through the highly-debated infrastructure package that allocates $17 billion to U.S. ports.

Baier pushed the former South Bend, Ind. mayor on why that infrastructure bill remains on Capitol Hill despite its addressing of bridges and ports and having the backing of Republicans – the bill remains stalled as Democrats debate among themselves another, more progressive, bill.

“We very much push for this infrastructure bill,” he said. “I’ve worked hard on it. The president has worked hard on it. And the same is true for the Build Back Better agenda – things that most Americans agree on.” Buttigieg agreed that Republicans would indeed support infrastructure, but noted the GOP would vote against the Democrats on what has been dubbed “human infrastructure” such as child care, family leave, climate change and such.

With many wondering whether gifts will be in short supply this holiday season, Baier asked Buttigieg whether this should be of concern. Buttigieg noted, “Part of the reason we are where we are is that the president successfully brought this economy out of the teeth of a recession.

“People are buying more than ever before, we’re seeing record goods coming through our ports. The demand is there, which is great news. It represents a policy success. Now we’ve got to make sure those supply chains are there to support.”

“So, you’re saying that’s a high-class problem?” Baier asked.

“What I’m saying is that we are better off because the economy is growing,” Buttigieg said, “And the economy is growing thanks to the leadership of this president.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Social Security COLA for 2022 Biggest since 1982, But Still Won’t Cover Actual Cost of Living Increases for Many Retirees thumbnail

Social Security COLA for 2022 Biggest since 1982, But Still Won’t Cover Actual Cost of Living Increases for Many Retirees

By Wolf Richter

For retirees, 2021 was a nasty year: Red hot inflation and a stingy COLA. In 2022, they might fall behind more slowly.

Among the red-hot inflation data released today was the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which is used to calculate the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for Social Security benefits. The COLA to be applied to Social Security benefits starting in January 2022 is the average year-over-year percentage increase of CPI-W in the third quarter. And today, the September data was released.

For September, the CPI-W soared by 5.9% year-over-year, after having soared by 5.8% in August and by 6.0% in July. The COLA for 2022 will be the average of those three: 5.9%, the highest since 1982:

A COLA of 5.9% might sound good, and there are hopes that this COLA will allow Social Security benefits to keep up with the actual costs of living, and that may be true for some people, depending on how and where they’re situated, but for many, it won’t be enough, and their actual costs of living will continue to outrun the COLA.

The big issue now is rents, and many Social Security recipients who rent, depending on where they live, already faced double-digit rent increases this year. Then there’s gasoline, which jumped on average 42% year-over-year in September, and utility natural gas which jumped on average 21%. Traveling, now that you have time? The CPI for hotels and motels has jumped by 20% and rental cars by 43%.

And forget buying a vehicle, new or used, because those prices have spiked out of reach for any COLA.

The reason the COLA is still relatively low compared to reality on the ground is that housing costs, which account for nearly one-third of the overall CPI, have been artificially repressed by the calculation method.

The CPI for rent rose only 2.4% year-over-year, while actual rents have soared in many cities by 10% or more, and in some by 20% or more….

*****

Continue reading this article at Wolf Street.

Biden’s Plan to “Help” the American Family Is to Tax Them More thumbnail

Biden’s Plan to “Help” the American Family Is to Tax Them More

By Family Research Council

How does the Biden administration intend to pay for its proposed $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” plan? By taxing the same hardworking American families the plan claims to help. In addition to advancing a radical progressive agenda, the plan carries a hefty price tag that will affect Americans of all backgrounds, both present and future.

If passed, the Biden administration’s plan would usher in the largest tax increase in over 50 years. Despite Biden’s promise that families making under $400,000 will not see their taxes increase, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation has revealed that anyone making $30,000 or more would see their taxes go up. By 2027, taxes on families earning between $75K and $100K would go up by an estimated $3 billion. The Biden administration’s plan raises taxes on savings and investments as well as the death tax, which inhibits families from passing on property and inheritance to the next generation.

Although middle class taxes would increase under this plan, the majority of the new taxes are aimed at businesses, both large and small. These taxes on businesses would likely get passed on to the working class, impacting anyone with a 401(k), anyone who works for a business, or anyone who buys products from a business. In other words, everyone. Record rates of taxation will only undo the Trump administration’s work to bring businesses back to America and help rebuild communities hit hard by globalization. The Biden administration’s plan, in contrast, will incentivize businesses to move production overseas, benefitting countries like China that frequently abuse human rights for the sake of profit.

The taxes on businesses could also create even more job losses than the economy is already facing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Interestingly enough, in the past three U.S. recessions, unemployment for professional workers only increased three percent, whereas unemployment for production and transportation workers increased 7.5 percent and construction workers nine percent. This is even further evidence that the Biden administration’s tax and spending plan hurts working-class families the hardest, not the wealthy corporations like it claims.

By pumping a dramatic amount of new spending into the economy in a short amount of time, this plan would likely force inflation even higher, raising the prices of everyday essentials from food and gasoline to shipping, lumber, and other transportation costs. Raising the costs of essential goods while simultaneously raising taxes on the middle class would be disastrous for many American families at a time when marriage and the birth rates are already at an all-time low. Families need more economic security and flexibility, not less, but this plan will only make it more difficult for families to get by.

Finally, the proposed $3.5 trillion in new spending comes on the heels of more than $5 trillion in COVID relief packages passed in the past 18 months. Add this to the $1 trillion in proposed infrastructure spending, and that’s $9 trillion added to the $28 trillion in existing national debt. Just this week, the Congressional Budget Office undercut Democrat talking points on the necessity to raise new taxes to make up for the deficit. In 2021, the government collected $36 billion more in tax revenue than expected — despite the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed into law by President Trump. The notion that tax cuts are what is causing the increase in the national deficit is simply false. Because the government has continued spending massive amounts of money on progressive priorities, there is no money available to spend on things that could truly help families, like a true expansion of the Child Tax Credit or expanding 529 education accounts to include homeschooling expenses. As Democrats attempt to sell the necessity of this tax-and-spend plan over the next few weeks, it is important to remember that America’s hardworking middle-class families will ultimately foot the bill.

RELATED ARTICLE: Psaki Defends Rising Prices: ‘Good Thing’ Because It Means ‘More People Are Buying Goods’

RELATED TWEETS:

Biden’s inflation bomb:

🚨Consumer prices ⬆️ 5.4%

🚨Grocery prices have skyrocketed: eggs ⬆️12.6%, chicken ⬆️7.6 %, & fresh fruit ⬆️5.0%

🚨New car prices ⬆️ 8.7%, largest increase in 4 decades

Inflation isn’t a high class problem, it’s tax on workers & anyone on a fixed income.

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) October 14, 2021

According to this administration, we must choose between massive inflation, shipping bottlenecks, and huge numbers of Americans dropping out of the workforce…or 10% unemployment. Good midterm messaging there. pic.twitter.com/3Zcvt07Y5u

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) October 14, 2021

america runs on dunkin. this is bad. this is really fucking bad. pic.twitter.com/lq8iwpxFSL

— Rob DenBleyker (@RobDenBleyker) October 15, 2021

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Groceries Feed Gains in the Everyday Price Index in September thumbnail

Groceries Feed Gains in the Everyday Price Index in September

By Robert Hughes

The AIER Everyday Price Index increased by 0.6 percent in September, the tenth consecutive month of gain.  Over the last 10 months, the monthly increases have been between 0.4 percent and 1.2 percent, putting the 10-month gain at 7.5 percent or an annualized pace of 9.1 percent. Including the two months prior to the run of increases, the 12-month gain is 7.2 percent, the fastest pace since September 2008.

Food at home (a.k.a. groceries) was the largest contributor to the increase in the Everyday Price Index in September, contributing 24 basis points to the gain. Combined with a 10 basis-point contribution from food away from home (a.k.a.) restaurants, food categories added 34 basis points or about 60 percent of the total monthly rise. Household energy was the other significant contributor to the September increase, adding 11 basis points while motor fuel added 4 basis points.  Combined food and energy categories accounted for 90 percent of the monthly gain in September.

The Everyday Price Index including apparel, a broader measure that includes clothing and shoes, rose 0.7 percent, also the tenth consecutive increase. Over the past year, the Everyday Price Index including apparel is up 6.9 percent, the fifth month in a row above 6 percent. Apparel prices jumped 1.8 percent on a not-seasonally-adjusted basis in September. Apparel prices tend to be volatile on a month-to-month basis, posting six increases and six decreases ranging from -2.2 percent to 2.9 percent over the last 12 months. From a year ago, apparel prices are up 3.4 percent.

The Consumer Price Index, which includes everyday purchases as well as infrequently purchased, big-ticket items and contractually fixed items, rose 0.3 percent on a not-seasonally-adjusted basis in September. Over the past year, the Consumer Price Index is up 5.4 percent.

The Consumer Price Index excluding food and energy rose 0.1 percent for the month (not seasonally adjusted) while the 12-month change came in at 4.0 percent. The 12-month change in the core CPI was just 1.3 percent in February.

After seasonal adjustment, the CPI rose 0.4 percent in September while the core increased 0.2 percent for the month. Within the core, core goods prices were up 0.2 percent in September and are up 7.3 percent from a year ago while core services prices were up 0.2 percent for the month and are up 2.9 percent from a year ago.

Among the notable increases in the core goods category were new vehicles (up 1.3 percent in September and 8.7 percent from a year ago) and household furnishings and supplies (up 1.3 percent for the month and 4.8 percent from a year ago).

Among core services, gainers include motor vehicle insurance (up 2.1 percent and 4.8 percent from a year ago) and owners’ equivalent rent (a.k.a. housing, up 0.4 percent and 2.9 percent from a year ago), while decliners include public transportation (-5.0 percent), lodging away from home (-0.6 percent but up 17.5 percent from a year ago), and auto rentals (-2.9 percent but still up 42.9 percent from a year ago).

Prices for many goods and services in the economy remain distorted by lingering effects from government restrictions on consumers and businesses including shortages, logistical and supply chain issues, and labor problems. As activity returns to normal, supply and demand will adapt and likely lead to slower price increases, but it may take some time before the economy completely returns to normal functioning. Nevertheless, a 1970s-style upward price spiral remains unlikely.

Note: The Everyday Price Index for August is based on incomplete data due to restrictions on data collection by Bureau of Labor Statistics personnel because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

*****

This article was published on October 13, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from AIER, American Institute for Economic Research.

New Inflation Numbers See the Fastest Rise in 13 Years thumbnail

New Inflation Numbers See the Fastest Rise in 13 Years

By Pamela Geller

That the American people haven’t stormed the Bastille and thrown this fraudulent administration out on its treasonous ass is a testament to the continuing power of the Democrat propaganda media.

Wall Street Journal: 

Is inflation still “transitory,” as the Federal Reserve and White House like to say? Not if you’ve been visiting the grocery store, gas pump, online retailer, or anywhere else across the U.S. economy. The Labor Department said the consumer price index rose 0.4% in September, up from 0.3% in August. This means the price level has increased 5.4% in the last 12 months and 6.5% on an annual basis so far in 2021. This is the largest year-over-year increase since 2008, and the details in the report add to the evidence that inflation is likely to be persistent (WSJ).

Heather Long w/Townhall: 

“Prices are rising, real wages are down, and Americans are struggling to get back to work—all hallmarks of Joe Biden’s Build Back Broke agenda. With consumer prices rising higher than expected and families facing the highest inflation rate in over 13 years, there could not be a worse possible time for Biden and Democrats’ trillions in reckless tax hikes and spending,” Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel released in a statement Wednesday morning (Townhall).

RELATED ARTICLES:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDE: CNN Prepares Americans for Socialist Scarcity thumbnail

VIDE: CNN Prepares Americans for Socialist Scarcity

By Robert Spencer

Robert Spencer on OAN with Kara McKinney.

Watch:

RELATED PODCAST: Joe Rogan Presses Sanjay Gupta on CNN: “Do You Think That That’s a Problem, That Your News Network Lies?”

RELATED TWEET:

Is the media supposed to protect you from government abuse or help them get away with it?

— Mini AOC (@RealMiniAOC) October 14, 2021

RELATED ARTICLES:

MyLondon news site claims St. George is really Islamic mystical character al-Khidr

France: Illegal Muslim migrant enters church, yells in Arabic, spits on the ground, threatens the sacristan

France: Mosque closed after it was discovered to be preaching armed jihad, Islamic martyrdom, and terrorism

Norway: Muslim who murdered five with bow and arrow will be examined by psychiatric experts

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Judge Rules Against Arizona In Minimum Wage Lawsuit thumbnail

Judge Rules Against Arizona In Minimum Wage Lawsuit

By Cole Lauterbach

A county judge says Arizona cannot extract the additional cost of doing state business in a city that increased its minimum wage, making it more expensive to operate there.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge James Smith sided with the city of Flagstaff about whether a provision in the 2019 Arizona budget allowed the state to fine the city for the difference in doing state business at a higher minimum wage compared with the state minimum hourly rate.

The state is affected by the minimum wage difference because it employs contract workers in the city who would be subject to the higher wage law, which reached $15 an hour this year.

The state minimum wage is $12.15 an hour. In an assessment, the state said the difference is more than $1.1 million the city owes.

In the Monday ruling, Smith didn’t bite on the city’s claim the fine was unconstitutional by violating the Voter Protection Act of 1998. Instead, Smith ruled that Arizona officials missed the July 31 deadline to issue the fine because the nonemergency legislation didn’t take effect until late September.

However, Smith did hint that siding with the state could require the court to essentially change the law regarding the assessment, not notification, of a potential fine for such an offense.

“If the Legislature meant to write ‘notify,’ then it presumably would have done so,” Smith wrote.

Flagstaff City Hall would not comment on the ruling. A spokesperson for Gov. Doug Ducey’s office refrained from offering a comment because the litigation is still ongoing.

The case is set to continue in a trial at an undecided date.

Should the state ultimately lose the challenge, it would have consequences outside of Flagstaff. Tucson voters will decide next month on whether to approve Proposition 206, which would increase the city’s minimum wage to $15 by Jan.1, 2025. It would increase annually based on inflation.

*****

This article was published on October 12, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from The Center Square.

The AEI Housing Center’s Critique of “How We Investigated Racial Disparities in Federal Mortgage Data” thumbnail

The AEI Housing Center’s Critique of “How We Investigated Racial Disparities in Federal Mortgage Data”

By Edward Pinto

The Rest of the Story

The American Enterprise Institute’s Housing Center released a special briefing: “The Rest of the Story The AEI Housing Center’s Critique of ‘How We Investigated Racial Disparities in Federal Mortgage Data.‘” The call reports on the Housing Center’s analysis of and critiques of a widely-circulated report by The Markup/Associated Press: “How We Investigated Racial Disparities in Federal Mortgage Data (2018).

Audio Recording

Key takeaways

  • A recent The Markup/Associated Press (AP) analysis found that decline rates, after controlling for 17 independent variables, are higher for the protected classes than for Whites.
  • However, as we have pointed out for home valuations and appraiser bias*, these arguments alleging systemic racism do not hold up to close scrutiny.
  • The Markup’s analysis did not include applicant credit scores, which are highly predictive of defaults. It also ignores lending outcomes – the other half of the story.
  • We address these issues by incorporating credit scores and evaluating risk-adjusted default rates by race and ethnicity. This allows us to evaluate lending outcomes, not just lending inputs.
  • We find that risk-adjusted default rates are higher for protected classes than for Whites by a statistically significant amount.
  • Given data limitations on denials, especially lack of credit score, it is impossible to calculate risk-adjusted decline rates for protected and non-protected class applicants. However, because we found that loans to protected class borrowers have higher risk-adjusted default rates than for Whites, this indicates lenders are extending more lenient underwriting to protected class borrowers than would otherwise be justified based on risk characteristics. Thus, one may infer that risk-adjusted decline rates, if calculable, would be lower for protected class applicants than for Whites, the opposite of the finding by The Markup/AP.

If you would like to receive invitations to our monthly update calls, please subscribe here. For data on mortgage risk, please use our Mortgage Risk Index Interactive.

Taiwan’s Wealth Shows Cuba’s Poverty Is the Result of Socialism, Not a Blockade thumbnail

Taiwan’s Wealth Shows Cuba’s Poverty Is the Result of Socialism, Not a Blockade

By Emmanuel Rincon

Cuba and Taiwan began the ’70s with similar economies, but today the GDP of the Caribbean island is five times less than that of Taiwan.

For decades the Communist Party of Cuba has blamed the United States for Cuba’s misery and poverty, alluding to the “blockade” that the U.S. maintains against Cuba. However, the alleged blockade wielded by the island is in reality a trade embargo that only makes it impossible for people and companies in certain sectors within the United States to do business with Cuba, the rest of the world can trade freely with the island.

Even the United States annually exports about $277 million in goods to Cuba despite the trade embargo, a majority of these exports are foodstuffs.

In addition, despite the establishment of a dictatorial regime in Cuba that has been in power for more than 60 years without any kind of alternation, elections, or basic freedoms, the whole world recognizes the communist authorities and Cuba has a presence in all multilateral international organizations, the main one being the United Nations.

Then there is Taiwan, which has characteristics very similar to those of Cuba since it is also an island that is close to one of the two world powers—China. In the case of the authorities of Taipei they have been completely blocked by the Asian giant, since China claims sovereignty over the island.

Taiwan is recognized by only a dozen nations around the world, has no representation in the United Nations, and its official name cannot even be pronounced at any international event: be it an Olympic Games, a United Nations General Assembly, or even by the embassies of most countries in the world—including the United States. And yet, despite all these difficulties, today Taiwan’s economy is one of the most important in the world, with a poverty rate of 0.7%, as opposed to Cuba, which has one of the most depressed economies on the planet and 90% of its population living in poverty. What is the difference between the two islands? The economic and political model they applied in their nations.

Two Islands With Similar Histories

Cuba and Taiwan, despite being located at two different poles of the planet earth, have very similar characteristics, the one that most resembles them is the fact that they are less than 200 kilometers away from the two superpowers of the world—the United States and China respectively—and suffer trade embargoes or political blockades by the neighboring superpowers; on the other hand, Cuba has a little more than 11. 3 million inhabitants—a couple of million more have fled the country, while Taiwan has 23.5 million residents, despite the fact that Cuba has a land area about three times larger.

Despite the similarities, both nations are currently a long way apart in terms of economic, social, cultural, and technological development, as well as individual freedoms and democracy. Today, Taiwan’s economy is five times larger than Cuba’s, but fifty years ago things were not so different, in the 1970s the GDP of both countries was similar and the largest industry of both was agriculture.

Taiwan: Capitalism, Liberty, & Free Markets

The painful results of the cultural revolution in Mao Zedong’s communist China, which caused the death by famine of at least 30 million Chinese, illuminated the path of the region’s governments, who quickly understood that the failed model of putting the State in control of the means of production would make them all more vulnerable and miserable.

Then the People’s Republic of China’s neighbors began a series of economic and political reforms that would drastically change the quality of life of their inhabitants; Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and, of course, Taiwan, would begin to open their markets, encourage private enterprise and transform their authoritarian regimes into nations with democratic institutions, and little by little the sun began to shine for the so-called Asian tigers.

Despite territorial limitations and China’s political blockade of the island, Taiwan’s inclusive institutions paved the way for the production of technology to supply a severely deficient world market. Taiwanese entrepreneurs began to specialize in the production of semiconductors, those microchips that today we find in all electrical devices in the world, from computers to smartphones and even cars, and little by little the poor island of the past became a rich and developed country.

Currently, Taiwan has the sixth freest economy according to the Index of Economic Freedom, Singapore is the first nation in this section, while Malaysia ranks 22nd and South Korea 24th.

In an article published by the Taiwanese embassy in Mexico, the authorities stated that: “Taiwan, thanks to the policies of its government, began a rapid and overwhelming commercial development, becoming a stable industrial economy. Today it is the 22nd largest economy in the world. This allowed it to establish relations with countries that were in search of good trade relations.”

In the same brief they explain the transition that occurred in Taipei:

“Despite having started as a one-party military dictatorship, in the 1990s it began a process of democratization that today has it as one of the freest countries in the world, with high rates of press freedom, health service, public education, economic freedom, and human development. That is why communist China sees Taiwan, and its international recognition, as an existential threat. The contrast is stark. Democracy has not only proven that it can work but has brought multiple benefits to the population. The Taiwanese have a better quality of life, and opportunities for personal development, than the average Chinese on the mainland. And all this within a framework of freedoms that are unthinkable in a communist China that censures dissidence and whose ruling party increasingly tightens its control over all aspects of the country”.

Cuba: Socialism, Misery, & Ideology

On the other side of the planet, in Cuba, they decided to cover their eyes with the results of the cultural revolution perpetrated in China, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union. While Taiwan took off with a capitalist model, Cuba remained anchored in the old revolutionary dogmas of Fidel Castro, who far from trying to change, he sought to expand his regime of misery in the rest of the continent, achieving it quite successfully in countries such as Venezuela and Nicaragua.

The Cuban revolution took power on the island in 1959 by force of arms and never let go again. With popular slogans such as redistribution of wealth, supposed aid to the poor, and socialism, Fidel Castro began to expropriate land and private companies to be managed by the state, and in a short time Cuba, which used to be one of the largest producers and exporters of sugar in the world, found that it could no longer even produce sugar for internal consumption and had to import it.

For decades, the Cuban revolution was able to stay in power exclusively thanks to the financing offered by the Soviet Union with the aim of increasing the ideological enemies in the backyard of the United States. After the fall of the USSR, in the ’90s Cuba lived one of the worst decades of its history, until the political astuteness of Fidel Castro managed to put Hugo Chavez in power in Venezuela, and since then they lived off the oil of that country until the same failed socialist model ended up ruining the nation with the largest oil reserves in the world, and Cuba was again involved in a tremendous economic crisis, with millions of citizens in extreme poverty, which has recently provoked one of the largest civil uprisings against the communist authorities.

Cuba and Taiwan began the decade of the ’70s with similar economies, but today the GDP of the Caribbean island is five times less than that of Taiwan, and 90% of its population lives in poverty, while in the Asian island only 0.7% of its population is poor.

It is definitely not the fault of the “blockade”, but of socialism. 

*****

This article was published on September 29, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from FEE, Foundation for Economic Education.

Tucson Keeps Missing the Bigger Picture thumbnail

Tucson Keeps Missing the Bigger Picture

By Craig J. Cantoni

That’s especially so on immigration, Amazon, and the minimum wage.

The Tucson establishment often misses the bigger picture in the pursuit of transitory feel-good measures. Take the subjects of immigration, Amazon, and the minimum wage—subjects that I don’t have ideological or partisan heartburn over but do care that Tucson is consigning itself to permanent also-ran status by missing the bigger picture.

Immigration

Establishment leaders are planning to provide temporary housing and devote other resources to aid poor and poorly educated migrants who are crossing the border in record numbers. No doubt, they and their constituents care about the migrants and feel they are doing the right thing. Kudos to them for caring.

The bigger picture is similar to what it was a hundred years ago with my poor and poorly educated Italian immigrant forebears—namely, such immigrants can be a net positive for the nation as a whole in the long run, but in the shorter run, they can put a strain on local communities in terms of increased costs for education, medical care, social welfare, and law enforcement.

In other words, the costs are concentrated and the benefits are dispersed.

The City of Tucson can’t afford the concentrated costs. It already suffers from a poverty rate twice the national average, a rate of property crimes near the top nationally, horrendous test scores in too many k-12 schools, a below-average rate of homeownership, large swaths of unkempt public and private property, crumbling streets from decades of deferred maintenance, and a brain drain of young talent that moves to Phoenix and other vibrant cities for opportunities.

The surrounding unincorporated county is wealthier but is an amorphous, poorly maintained blob without a center or defining character. Being unincorporated, it is incapable of providing the level of services and amenities that a well-run municipality can offer.

The blame for Tucson’s travails shouldn’t be put on migrants, however—not when most of the travails are due to shortsighted, poorly run, and highly partisan city and county governments, enabled by voters who have voted for the status quo for decades and by establishment leaders who don’t seem to know how badly the governments and the metropolis compare to well-run locales on key measures.

By the measure of the cost of municipal services, it doesn’t compare well at all. For example, when my wife and I moved four years ago for family reasons from metro Phoenix to metro Tucson, to a house of equal value, our combined cost for property taxes, water, fire service, and trash pickup increased by 50% while the quality of public services and amenities fell significantly.

That doesn’t include the value of the time we spend picking up litter along a busy street every morning on our daily five-mile walk, a chore not done by government or by property owners that front the street, including retail businesses, apartments, condos, a gated HOA, a private golf course, an upscale resort, and a public school. Clearly, something is amiss with civic pride in the Tucson metropolis.

Amazon

The foregoing problems are compounded by Tucson being largely bypassed by big, rich companies as a location for headquarters or major offices, even though the companies claim to value diversity and care about the poor. The truth is, their “woke” executives and knowledge workers favor sparkling, dynamic, prosperous enclaves.

Local leaders celebrated when Tucson was selected as the location for two low-wage Amazon warehouses, which are two out of over 900 Amazon facilities across the U.S. But they apparently didn’t see the bigger picture of Amazon locating highly paid software engineers, logistics experts, marketing specialists and other professionals in scores of other cities across the nation, including Phoenix, but not in Tucson.

To that point, the company chose leafy, clean, prosperous Arlington, Virginia, as the location for its second headquarters for its highly paid professional and managerial employees. Arlington is next door to the imperial city of Washington, D.C., where bad immigration policies have been hatched by both political parties and imposed on the provinces.

Pop Quiz: Do you think that Arlington or Tucson can better afford the costs of assimilating and aiding large numbers of poor and poorly educated migrants? Hint: The median household income in Arlington is $120,000, versus $43,400 for Tucson; the poverty rates are 7.6% and 22.5%, respectively; and the percentages of adults with at least a bachelor’s degree are 75.3% and 27.4%, respectively.

If your answer is Arlington, then that raises the question as to why local leaders haven’t demanded that migrants without visas be transported to Arlington or similar wealthy towns for temporary living and follow-up actions instead of a poor city like Tucson (and Del Rio). Not only can those other places better absorb the costs, but the migrants would be better off in terms of facilities and resources.

Minimum Wage

Tucson is considering an increase in the minimum wage, an issue that comes with pros and cons. But once again, the bigger picture is missed in the debate.

The bigger picture is that whatever the minimum wage ends up being, it will do nothing about the root causes of Tucson’s socioeconomic problems. The root causes include a paucity of political competition within the city and county, a lack of large municipalities in the metropolis to compete with the power of the City of Tucson and Pima County and shake them out of their hubris, the fact that 36% of the metropolis is unincorporated (versus 6% in metro Phoenix), the paradox of the dominant culture being anti-development but the metropolis being marred by some of the ugliest development imaginable, and another paradox of Tucsonans valuing the metropolis’s natural setting and nearby national forests but tolerating a plethora of commercial businesses and apartments with tacky and often illegal signage in front, with frontages overgrown with weeds and littered with trash, and with acres of parking lots devoid of anything green.

But the biggest root cause of all is that provincialism keeps local leaders from seeing the bigger picture.

Biden White House Warns American Consumers Of Empty Shelves Come Christmastime thumbnail

Biden White House Warns American Consumers Of Empty Shelves Come Christmastime

By The Daily Caller

American consumers should expect to see higher prices and even some empty shelves during their holiday shopping this year, President Joe Biden’s White House told Reuters on Tuesday.

The warning comes as the Biden administration works frantically to push back on skyrocketing inflation and strained supply chains across the country. Economists predicted earlier this year that the final months of 2021 would see total consumer prices rising 3.2% over 2020.

“There will be things that people can’t get,” a senior White House official told Reuters on Tuesday. “At the same time, a lot of these goods are hopefully substitutable by other things. … I don’t think there’s any real reason to be panicked, but we all feel the frustration and there’s a certain need for patience to help get through a relatively short period of time.”

A Sept. 29 study from Salesforce predicted that retail prices could rise as much as 20% compared to 2020. Women’s clothing, jewelry and watches had already risen 11.9% and 12.9% respectively as of August.

“Barriers at ports and skyrocketing costs of containers, two major pressures shaping holidays, should cause consumers to be concerned about product availability,” Salesforce warned.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki and other administration officials have repeatedly insisted that the inflation is “transitory” and will normalize sometime in 2022. The White House has repeated the line numerous times since worries over the economy began to outpace COVID-19 in polls across the U.S.

“What is the White House’s message to average Americans, including those who are on limited income though who are experiencing higher prices right now for food and clothing and other goods and services? You mentioned it’s expected to die down next year, but what is your message to them in the meantime, is it simply just to wait it out?” a reporter asked Psaki during a press briefing in July.

“That’s certainly not what I’ve ever said,” Psaki responded. “Our message is that we understand the threat that inflation poses. We will be vigilant about any responses needed. It’s important for Americans to know and understand that these impacts are temporary, and some of these price increases are a result of the economy turning back on.”

Some experts have disagreed, however, arguing that the inflation is here to stay “for years” thanks to Biden’s unprecedented spending programs.

“The 100% cause of inflation is the government,” Peter Schiff, the chief economist and global strategist at Euro Pacific Capital, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “It’s when the government spends money that it doesn’t collect in taxes and then the Federal Reserve monetizes the resulting deficits by printing money.”

COLUMN BY

ANDERS HAGSTROM

White House correspondent. 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Inflation Is Burning a Hole in Our Wallets; It’s Also Theft

Experts Slam Biden’s Economic Agenda Following June Jobs Report

The Numbers Are In, Biden’s Inflation Is Not Going Away

EDITORS NOTE: This The Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Navajos Oppose Drilling Ban in Biden’s massive “Human Resources” Bill thumbnail

Navajos Oppose Drilling Ban in Biden’s massive “Human Resources” Bill

By Bonner Cohen

A provision tucked into the $3.5 trillion spending and tax bill would ban new drilling for oil and natural gas on and near Navajo land in northwestern New Mexico.

Convinced that the ban would cause severe economic harm to tribal members in the affected area, the 24th Navajo Council sent a Sept. 27 letter, obtained by the Washington Times, to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy requesting a field hearing in Nageezi, New Mexico before Congress acts on the legislation.

“We applaud Congress for its inclusion of tribal program investments in the propose $3.5 trillion budget resolution and reconciliation proposals,” the letter said. “However, we write to respectfully inform you of our opposition to the [manager’s] amendment of the House Natural Resources Committee proposal that includes a section to prohibit new oil and gas development within the Chaco Cultural Heritage Area in northwestern New Mexico and the Navajo Nation.”

The House Natural Resources Committee’s Democratic chairman, Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, sponsored the manager’s amendment withdrawing new mineral leasing and nullifying inactive leases within a 10-mile buffer surrounding the Chaco Cultural Heritage Area, a 34,000-acre site known for its ancient architectural ruins. No drilling is allowed with the park.

Confronted with the bill’s anti-drilling language, the Navajo favor a five-mile buffer zone, which would protect the site and allow for energy development that will benefit tribal communities.

“The official position of the Navajo Nation reflects the interests of the Navajo allotted landowners [allottees] in the greater Chaco area and it provides a compromise between a threat to their livelihoods and the bills calls for increased protections from mineral development,” the letter explained.

Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, told the Washington Times that the five-mile buffer would “ensure protection of cultural resources while enabling responsible development of energy.”

“Environmental Injustice”

“Now the Democrats are trying to sneak into the reconciliation bill a measure that would shut down the livelihoods of Navajo families who depend on oil and gas for income in an otherwise marginal, impoverished area,” she said in an email to the Times. “Depriving them a major source of income is not only environmental injustice but bad for Navajo consumers paying high prices at the pump.”

The Times reports that the manager’s amendment “further curtails mineral development by reversing a land swap between the federal government and mining interests in Arizona’s Oak Flat area; prohibits new oil-and-gas leasing in Colorado’s Thompson’s Divide; and bars offshore leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf …”

At this point, it appears that the $3.5 trillion spending and tax bill will have to be scaled back if it is to receive enough Democratic votes to pass the Senate. This means that some provisions will have to go, a process that will be negotiated in the coming weeks. Whether Grijalva’s manager’s amendment survives and, if so, in what form is anybody’s guess.

If the amendment is left intact, the Navajos in New Mexico will become the latest victims in the headlong – and heedless – rush to rid the nation of fossil fuels in the name of combatting climate change. The effort will have no effect on the climate; the same cannot be said for the Navajos.

*****

This article was published on October 8, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from CFACT, Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow.

PPP’S PUBLIC – PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS = THE DEATH OF FREE MARKETS thumbnail

PPP’S PUBLIC – PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS = THE DEATH OF FREE MARKETS

By Karen Schoen

LIFE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE IS DEATH IN DISGUISE

Remember: The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the REVOLUTION.

Have you wondered why so many companies were so quick to go WOKE and destroy America?  Could it be that as companies became GLOBAL, America became irrelevant?  Global Corporate CEO’s and VP’s took money, tax rebates, grants, subsidies etc.  from the American Taxpayer and many purchased multiple residents all over the world.  America was just another country, nothing special. In addition, the highly skilled American worker was too expensive and cut into their profitability. So as their choice, they screwed the American worker. The criminals in the government made up rules and regulations to eliminate competition of their favored company. Lastly let us not forget that by eliminating competition the “market” is favorable for investing in government favored companies so congress could make a fortune on insider trading, investing and creating new companies that will comply.

OK the pieces were beginning to fit.  Thanks to Karen Bracken’s incredible research on ESG (Environmental, Social ‘Justice’ Governance), the woke actions of these companies are evident and finally make sense. On Nov 8, 2019, Forbes had an article introducing ESG to the business community in 2020.   What is ESG?  ESG is the Environmental, Social and Governance score given to a business to determine how well they “follow the government message”  In other words go WOKE, “Hate America and hate the American citizen who votes against the DNC communist message.”   Apparently grading individuals on Social Credits is not enough for the communist Democrats. Limiting mobility, purchases and services based on how well individuals score by supporting everything the government does is not broad enough.  The corporations must follow orders as well.  Why would a corporation intentionally destroy their base?  Because once the world has opened as their customer, Americans are no longer the only game in town. Money, Money, Money!!!

ESG refers to a company’s commitment to do more than make a profit, such as actively strive to contribute positively to the environment or social causes and to conduct themselves responsibly. Why would a company do that?  Because ESG is now the way that investors rate the corporation for investment funding. Bad score= no money.  Trash America = more money. By forming Public Private Partnerships the government is now involved in business and can “suggest” certain actions or else no government contract, no access to grants or low interest loans and tax subsidies. Since many smaller middle class companies are totally private and do not rely on the government they must be destroyed. No Competition or dissention allowed. Covid accelerated this plan. We now have an answer to the question, is the government trying to destroy America? The answer is YES.

More money is made with global customers than American customers.

What is a PPP (PUBLIC – PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS)?  A PPP is a way in which a corporation, through a new entity takes control of Government Assets.  The government, made up of unelected bureaucrats, people, make laws to regulate companies into the desired path.  The ESG (Environmental Social Governance) score keeps the corporations in line. Corporations are woke and must use the CRT method for reprogramming its workers.  They must get a good score or no government contracts. You can call it Global Corporate Fascism, reinventing government, transfer of wealth, but it is really a new structure of communism. The public pays, the private profits. This is a massive form of wealth redistribution. Once again the public gets screwed.

Let’s break this down.

Rules:

  • Public – (government) all levels of government, Local, State, Federal, Foreign, and of course the United Nations.
  • Private – Big power Corporations, National Corporations, International Corporations, Universities, Foundations, Associations, any entity with big money.
  • Partnerships – Business arrangement, which public and private combined together.
  • NGO’s – Non government organizations, any organization with environmental interest, like the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, Florida Forever, etc. that takes control of assets. This would be in land acquisitions, conservation, land corridors, Greenways, Parks, Preserves, permanent easements, etc. It would be on coastal waters, lakes, rivers, streams, another means of taking assets, owning and having full control. With no representation to the people, the goal is profit. Sound familiar? It should by now it’s called the United Nations Sustainable Development, Agenda 21/2030/GND/Global Reset. The United Nations promote PPP’S, they play a very important role in their personal agenda making it easier for government to control businesses.  PPP are in direct opposition to any free market system. If a company needs government money, why are they still in business?

PPP’S are heavy into infrastructure because it crosses county and state lines which gives the government more control over local elected officials. With this economy, state and local governments do not have the money for roads, tolls, bridges, energy, water, and restoration. People do not want their taxes raised, as they are already tax enough.  When our elected representatives vote to empower appointed groups of people who are not accountable to the public, they are voting for Communism. That’s how Communism works. It is unelected groups of people who are authorized to make public policy using the agenda of some unseen apparatus in the background, coupled with the power of government to enforce it. In the case of the United States the transformation to Communism agenda is coming from the United Nations.

In Florida, PPP’s are abundant. PPP’S, Enterprise Florida, Public Service Commission (PSC), Workforce Florida, Inc. Duke Energy, Florida Power and Light, Progress Energy, ( Smart Meters) Florida Chamber of Commerce, and all of these promote Regionalism in Florida. Governor Scott signed H/B 85 to expand Public – Private Partnerships.  He was the same Governor that said there would be No Agenda 21 in Florida, more Lies.

Every county board, county administrator, city council, and manager in Florida works with PPP’S. All of Florida’s regional planning councils, (unconstitutional ) Sustainable Development Planners, Florida Association of Counties, due the bidding of PPP’S. But that’s not surprising since they work with U.N. organizations to implement the Agenda..

PPP’S are a Soviet structure. What is a Soviet… An elected governmental council in a Communist country.  Alliances are the PPP’S and they are implementing the socialist agenda thus transforming the United States into a Communist Country. The Public – Private Partnership (PPP) is yet another ruse of big government to steal your wealth and private property or other assets and, in the process, “fundamentally change America” and plunder the productive members of society.  A PPP is the essence of Marxism and crony capitalism. Elected government officials and their bureaucracy favoring corporations who support the political agenda of the ruling class, so both can profit at the expense of our individual freedom.  Why did Biden give up Afghanistan? Here is your reason…Money, Power, Control.

Communist are Technocrats, they seek to plan, organize, and streamline all aspects of life through central planning. (like unconstitutional regional planning councils). Thus people aren’t considered as discrete independent individuals.  Rather, people are considered assets of the state, factors of production, “human capital, human resources, human infrastructure” to be managed by  the owner of the state and the elite minions and useful idiots who administer the system.

September 13, 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack and Coca-Cola Americans President Steve Cahillana announced a PPP to restore and protect damaged watersheds on National lands. Cahillana said to create healthier, more Sustainable Communities. This opened my eyes. United Nations Sustainable Communities, Agenda21 stated goals of controlling all forms of water supply. Today Biden’s unelected secretaries, including newly appointed Tom Vilack and local mayors collude with Chinese Communist party on Agriculture policy.

United Nations Agenda21 from the U.N. Bruntland Commission in 1992 says that No private enterprise should exist, only PPP’S.  Business is evil, should be controlled by the community, while the owner is responsible, and pays taxes. These ideas are tenets of Socialism/Marxism.

“ESG (Environment-Social(Justice)-Governance) Credit Score system that is replacing the traditional Credit Score system we have always used in the past.  This new credit score system will score businesses on how well they tow the globalist line.  WELL, what a coincidence….Biden(Obama) just announced he wants to do away with all the traditional credit bureaus.  Of course he said this is necessary because there are racial disparities in the current system.  But of course never mentions it will be replaced with ESG Credit Scores coming from the fascist government. There are several major banks that already use ESG and it is part of the Great Reset and the new economy, stakeholder capitalism (fascism).  Individuals that are patriots, conservative, vote Republican will end up on the low end of this system and will not be able to get a mortgage loan or a loan for any reason.  Again, this is why you are seeing businesses fighting states on their laws.  Business in bed with government ends up making slaves out the tax payer and destroys our Constitution and states rights. Again, using race to drive the Great Reset agenda.” Karen Bracken

Note: In the Infrastructure Bill of $3.5 Trillion, grants will be given to companies that comply.  Hefty penalties will be placed on companies that don’t demand their employees or customers vax, while rebates are given to those who buy union autos.

When your local government authorities start to exceed their constitutionally granted powers by working with Private International and National organizations through PPP’S, they no longer represent the people, the U.S. Constitution, freedom, and their oath of office. These are people that are so self centered with their own careers, self worth, and power status, that they have sold their souls to the communists.

Is America Worth Saving?

Will you make sure you research every candidate that you vote for? This is what we have to do as Americans to save our country, and to make sure our children are not made slaves to an un-Christian Nation of corruption.

Will you pay attention, run for office and attend meetings in your local community?

Will you share the truth with others who may not be like minded but want to hear the truth?

Will you contact your legislature and voice your opinion?  House 202-225-0911, Senate 202-224-0911, or contactmypolitician.com

G-d Bless America, and Her People.

©Karen Schoen. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: ‘Watters’ World’ investigates Nancy Pelosi’s financial dealings

Food Prices Hit Highest Level in a Decade Crushing Ordinary Americans thumbnail

Food Prices Hit Highest Level in a Decade Crushing Ordinary Americans

By Pamela Geller

Gas is at a level not seen since the disastrous Obama years. But not to worry, the Democrat elite are getting richer and richer on the backs of the American worker.

Imagine getting paid $7.2 million from banks and hedge funds that thrive in a low interest rate environment while preaching to the middle class how inflation is transitory. https://t.co/96ZrFJqVf0

— Nancy Pelosi Portfolio Tracker (@NancyTracker) October 11, 2021

Food Prices Hit Highest Level in a Decade

Food prices across the world have risen to their highest levels in a decade on the back of tightening supply conditions coupled with robust demand, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

By:  The Epoch Times, October 11, 2021:

The FAO’s food price index, which measures world food commodity prices, has surged by 32.8 percent in the 12 months through September, coming in at a reading of 130 points, a level not seen since 2011. On a month-over-month basis, the index rose 1.2 percent.

Accounting for the bulk of the rise in the index were higher prices of most cereals and vegetable oils.

The FAO vegetable oil price index was up 60 percent in September from a year earlier, and 1.7 percent higher than in August. The cereal price measure was up 27.3 percent over the year last month, and 2 percent from August.

Dairy and sugar prices also rose in September by an over-the-year 15.2 percent and 53.5 percent, respectively, while the meat price index was up 26.3 percent above its year-earlier level.

While much of the inflation story has been focused on surging energy costs and products affected by the semiconductor chip shortage such as used cars, rising food cost signals are increasingly flashing red.

As the U.S. economy rebounds, packaged food companies are grappling with inflation, with Conagra Brands Inc. saying on Oct. 7 that it would increase prices again on its frozen meals and snacks.

Conagra said it was facing rising costs of ingredients including edible oils, proteins, and grains, forcing it to increase prices on frozen goods by 3.5 percent and on staple meals by 3.3 percent.

Food-makers General Mills, Campbell Soup, and J.M. Smucker also have raised wholesale prices in response to rising ingredient and freight costs.

Pork and beef prices have surged in the past few months, while the Labor Department’s August inflation report showed that meat, poultry, fish, and eggs were up 8 percent over the past year and 15.7 percent from prices in August 2019, before the pandemic. Beef prices jumped 12.2 percent over the past year, and bacon was up 17 percent during the same period.

Experts say increasing energy costs around the world could exacerbate the problem.

“It’s this combination of things that’s beginning to get very worrying,” Abdolreza Abbassian, senior economist at the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, told Bloomberg in a recent interview. “It’s not just the isolated food-price numbers, but all of them together. I don’t think anyone two or three months ago was expecting the energy prices to get this strong.”

Food price inflation is also driving up consumer expectations for future price increases.

The New York Fed’s August survey of consumer expectations showed that Americans anticipate food prices to rise by 7.9 percent in a year, higher than the overall inflation expectation of 5.2 percent.

Federal Reserve officials have repeatedly characterized the current bout of inflation as “transitory” though they have increasingly expressed concern about the risk of a de-anchoring of inflationary expectations. That’s where confidence in the “transitory” narrative falls and people start to believe and behave as if inflation will be far stickier than previously believed, impacting wage and price-setting behavior and potentially even sparking the kind of upward wage-price spiral that bedeviled the economy in the 1970s.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

GOP Governors: Biden Ignores Meeting Request On border crisis, propose own solutions thumbnail

GOP Governors: Biden Ignores Meeting Request On border crisis, propose own solutions

By Bethany Blankley

Twenty-six U.S. governors requested to meet with President Joe Biden to propose solutions to the ongoing border crisis, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said at a Wednesday new conference. Because Biden did not respond to the request, the governors said they decided to take their message to the American people, proposing their own solutions to the drastic increase in illegal immigration this year that’s led to what they called a humanitarian crisis across the country.

Convening in the border town of Mission, Texas, Abbott, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and eight others said they’ve proposed a 10-point plan to help end the humanitarian crisis caused by Biden’s open-border policies.

“We’re not going to sit around while Biden refuses to act,” Ducey said. “We’ve tried to meet with the president and be part of the solution, but he refuses. No, worse – he ignores us, just like he’s ignoring the border and the well-being of the American people. If the president won’t meet with us, then we’ll share our policy ideas today. Hopefully he will hear our solutions and begin to act.”

Abbott and Ducey created an Emergency Management Assistance Compact in June requesting aid from governors to help quell the overflow of migrants entering the country illegally. Many governors sent law enforcement personnel on short-term missions to help Texas’ and Arizona’s efforts.

The governors’ 10-point plan includes the reinstatement of the “Remain in Mexico” policy that requires immigrants to return to their home countries until amnesty hearings are concluded in the U.S.; and finishing securing the southern border with Mexico, including completion of the border wall that was a priority of former President Donald Trump.

A third demand is the reinstatement of Title 42 health restrictions at the border, which require immigrants to be deported if they pose a health risk, including testing positive for COVID-19. Another is ending the Obama-era catch and release program, which they said is incentivizing criminals and cartels to illegally traffic people and drugs into the country.

The proposed solutions also include clearing the judicial backlog that is slowing the legal immigration process, and deporting all migrant criminals, a policy the Biden administration also changed. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ most recent memorandum states that even entering the U.S. illegally is not reason enough to be arrested even though illegal immigration is a federal crime.

The governors also propose the federal government dedicate more resources to eradicate human trafficking and drug trafficking, which they said has over-extended local law enforcement agencies across the south. And they propose re-entering all agreements with Northern Triangle partners and Mexico, which Biden let lapse.

The majority of the proposed solutions are in direct opposition to Biden administration policies.

Prior to engaging the help of other states, Texas launched its own border security measures after Biden took office, costing Texas taxpayers $3 billion so far.

The Texas Legislature also passed several bills, which Abbott signed into law this year to strengthen border security efforts, including a budget authorization to build a border wall in Texas.

New state laws that went into effect this year increase penalties for those committing crimes in Texas, including nine that crack down on human trafficking, and manufacturing or distributing the highly addictive narcotic fentanyl. Several governors at Wednesday’s news conference said they have seen drastic increases in fentanyl distribution and overdoses in their states.

“The Biden administration’s open border policies have led to complete chaos at the southern border, and pose a threat to the safety of Texans and all Americans,” Abbott said. “Texas has stepped up to keep our communities safe and mitigate this crisis ourselves, and our efforts have been made stronger by the support and assistance of governors from across the nation.”

Joining Abbott and Ducey were Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, Department of Public Safety Director Steve McCraw, Texas Military Department Adjutant General Tracy Norris and Deputy Adjutant General Monie R. Ulis, and National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd.

*****

This article was published on October 7, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from The Center Square.

Controversial BLM Pick Tracy Stone-Manning Confirmed To Lead Agency thumbnail

Controversial BLM Pick Tracy Stone-Manning Confirmed To Lead Agency

By Neland Nobel

That elections have consequences is certainly more than a slogan. It could not be more true when it comes to this pick for this agency.  Democrats have confirmed a bona fide Eco-Terrorist to run the Bureau of Land Management that supervises much of our public lands and those that use them.  This will have grave consequences for the western part of the United States and Arizona in particular.

As a younger woman, she wrote letters in favor of those accused of tree spiking and was prominent in environmental organizations in Montana.

The vote below tells you the consequences of electing two Democrats from Arizona.  While both like to pretend the tack to the center, this vote seems like a clear slap in the face to rural Arizona and to common sense. Notice that both Sinema and Kelly voted for this nominee.  Another “moderate” Joe Manchin did as well.  The final vote was 50-45.

As much as we admire the spunk Senator Sinema is currently displaying, as well as Senator Manchin on budget matters, it just goes to show that when the ideological chips are down, Democrats will vote for Democrat nominees. We are also gravely concerned they will not hold on budget matters and will accept a huge increase in spending, maybe not as huge as currently proposed.

Conservatives need to concentrate their political efforts on voting out Mark Kelly in the next election cycle.

As Senator Barraso from Wyoming put it, “Senate Democrats just voted to confirm Tracy Stone-Manning to lead @BLMNational. She colluded with eco-terrorists. She stone-walled a criminal investigation for years. She lied to the Senate. And she still holds radically dangerous views.

“The BLM director in Alaska is our landlord, and I don’t want an ecoterrorist as my state’s landlord,” Alaska Republican Dan Sullivan said.

The nomination had been stalled in committee with a 10-10 split but Democrats had the power to bring it to the floor and with their majority, pushed the nomination through.

Grouped by Home State

Alabama:

Shelby (R-AL), Nay

Tuberville (R-AL), Not Voting

Alaska:

Murkowski (R-AK), Nay

Sullivan (R-AK), Nay

Arizona:

Kelly (D-AZ), Yea

Sinema (D-AZ), Yea

Arkansas:

Boozman (R-AR), Nay

Cotton (R-AR), Nay

California:

Feinstein (D-CA), Yea

Padilla (D-CA), Yea

Colorado:

Bennet (D-CO), Yea

Hickenlooper (D-CO), Yea

Connecticut:

Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea

Murphy (D-CT), Yea

Delaware:

Carper (D-DE), Yea

Coons (D-DE), Yea

Florida:

Rubio (R-FL), Nay

Scott (R-FL), Nay

Georgia:

Ossoff (D-GA), Yea

Warnock (D-GA), Yea

Hawaii:

Hirono (D-HI), Yea

Schatz (D-HI), Yea

Idaho:

Crapo (R-ID), Nay

Risch (R-ID), Nay

Illinois:

Duckworth (D-IL), Yea

Durbin (D-IL), Yea

Indiana:

Braun (R-IN), Nay

Young (R-IN), Nay

Iowa:

Ernst (R-IA), Nay

Grassley (R-IA), Nay

Kansas:

Marshall (R-KS), Nay

Moran (R-KS), Not Voting

Kentucky:

McConnell (R-KY), Nay

Paul (R-KY), Not Voting

Louisiana:

Cassidy (R-LA), Nay

Kennedy (R-LA), Nay

Maine:

Collins (R-ME), Nay

King (I-ME), Yea

Maryland:

Cardin (D-MD), Yea

Van Hollen (D-MD), Yea

Massachusetts:

Markey (D-MA), Yea

Warren (D-MA), Yea

Michigan:

Peters (D-MI), Yea

Stabenow (D-MI), Yea

Minnesota:

Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea

Smith (D-MN), Yea

Mississippi:

Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Nay

Wicker (R-MS), Nay

Missouri:

Blunt (R-MO), Nay

Hawley (R-MO), Nay

Montana:

Daines (R-MT), Nay

Tester (D-MT), Yea

Nebraska:

Fischer (R-NE), Nay

Sasse (R-NE), Nay

Nevada:

Cortez Masto (D-NV), Yea

Rosen (D-NV), Yea

New Hampshire:

Hassan (D-NH), Yea

Shaheen (D-NH), Yea

New Jersey:

Booker (D-NJ), Yea

Menendez (D-NJ), Yea

New Mexico:

Heinrich (D-NM), Yea

Lujan (D-NM), Yea

New York:

Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea

Schumer (D-NY), Yea

North Carolina:

Burr (R-NC), Nay

Tillis (R-NC), Nay

North Dakota:

Cramer (R-ND), Nay

Hoeven (R-ND), Nay

Ohio:

Brown (D-OH), Yea

Portman (R-OH), Nay

Oklahoma:

Inhofe (R-OK), Nay

Lankford (R-OK), Nay

Oregon:

Merkley (D-OR), Yea

Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Pennsylvania:

Casey (D-PA), Yea

Toomey (R-PA), Nay

Rhode Island:

Reed (D-RI), Yea

Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea

South Carolina:

Graham (R-SC), Nay

Scott (R-SC), Nay

South Dakota:

Rounds (R-SD), Nay

Thune (R-SD), Nay

Tennessee:

Blackburn (R-TN), Not Voting

Hagerty (R-TN), Nay

Texas:

Cornyn (R-TX), Not Voting

Cruz (R-TX), Nay

Utah:

Lee (R-UT), Nay

Romney (R-UT), Nay

Vermont:

Leahy (D-VT), Yea

Sanders (I-VT), Yea

Virginia:

Kaine (D-VA), Yea

Warner (D-VA), Yea

Washington:

Cantwell (D-WA), Yea

Murray (D-WA), Yea

West Virginia:

Capito (R-WV), Nay

Manchin (D-WV), Yea

Wisconsin:

Baldwin (D-WI), Yea

Johnson (R-WI), Nay

Wyoming:

Barrasso (R-WY), Nay

Lummis (R-WY), Nay

California Town Sees Businesses Vanish Following Minimum Wage Hike thumbnail

California Town Sees Businesses Vanish Following Minimum Wage Hike

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

A couple of years ago, I praised federalism in part because state and local governments would be less likely to adopt bad policy (such as higher minimum wages) if they understood that jobs and investment could simply migrate to jurisdictions that didn’t adopt bad policy.

But “less likely” isn’t the same as “never.” Some state and local politicians can’t resist the temptation to raise taxes, even though that means workers “vote with their feet” for places with lower tax burdens.

And some state and local politicians continue to mandate higher minimum wages (see hereherehere, and here), even though that means workers have fewer job opportunities.

Today, we’re going to look at some fresh evidence from Emeryville, California.

The local newspaper has an impressively detailed look at what’s happened to the town’s labor market.

Representatives from the Mills College Lokey School presented data from its recent ‘business conditions’ survey to our City Council on Tuesday. The study confirmed what restaurant owners warned when the ordinance was hastily passed in 2015. They are struggling, rapidly raising menu prices and increasingly looking to leave. …It’s getting harder to find small food service businesses that were around in 2015 when the MWO was passed. Emeryville institution Bucci’s, Commonwealth, Farley’s, Scarlet City … all gone. In fact, nearly all the brick & mortar businesses that comprised the short-lived Little City Emeryville small business advocacy group have moved, folded or sold. …The survey also identified that “the restaurant industry is clearly struggling.” Specifically, small, independent, non-franchise establishments are having the most difficulty.

Here are some of the survey data on the negative effect.

Here is some specific information on how restaurants have been adversely impacted.

…nearly all the new businesses that have opened have embraced the counter service model that requires fewer employees. Paradita Eatery, whose original plan was for a full service sit-down restaurant, cited Emeryville’s wage ordinance specifically for ‘pivoting’ to a counter service model. Counter service models require fewer employees to offset higher labor costs. …The only full service restaurant that has opened since the Minimum Wage was passed was 612One Asian Fusion which folded after just two years in business.

One of the reasons for the economic damage is that Emeryville has gone further and faster in the wrong direction.

The local law is more onerous than the state law and more onerous than other nearby communities.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW EAST BAY CORE MINIMUM WAGE SCHEDULE COMPARISON

But it’s not just workers who are suffering.

Consumers are adversely impacted, as well.

One commenter, who identified herself as a resident, questioned why the survey did not include consumer data noting her dining frequency was altered by the drastic price increases she’s observed. …She noted that she used to frequent her local Doyle Street Cafe 2-3 times per month but last year went only twice. …Once franchise owner noted that the price increases they’ve been forced to pass along have ironically had the biggest impact on vulnerable communities that are more price-sensitive. “Our largest decrease in guests are folks over 50. Obviously our elderly, disabled, and folks on fixed incomes are unable increase their income to compensate for the price increases.”

Let’s close with a new video from Johan Norberg, which looks at the impact of minimum wage increases in San Diego.

P.S. If local communities are allowed to mandate minimum wages higher than the state level or federal, shouldn’t they also have the freedom to allow minimum wages that are lower than the state level or federal level?

P.P.S. A number of European nations have no mandated minimum wage. As explained in this video, that’s an approach we should copy.

P.P.P.S. If you want some minimum wage-themed humor, you can enjoy cartoons herehereherehere, and here.

This article was reprinted with permission from International Liberty.

COLUMN BY

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a Washington-based economist who specializes in fiscal policy, particularly tax reform, international tax competition, and the economic burden of government spending. He also serves on the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Mitch McConnell’s Surrender In The Debt Ceiling Fight Opens The Floodgates For Dems’ $3.5 Trillion Spending Bill thumbnail

Mitch McConnell’s Surrender In The Debt Ceiling Fight Opens The Floodgates For Dems’ $3.5 Trillion Spending Bill

By Christopher Jacobs

Republicans caving on the debt ceiling paved the way for Democrats to focus the rest of the fall on their tax-and-spending spree.

In July, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pledged “a hell of a fight” to stop Democrats’ $3.5 trillion spending blowout, which “is not going to be done on a bipartisan basis.” That “fight” lasted for less than three months.

On Wednesday, McConnell began negotiating an agreement with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to raise the debt limit until some point in December. McConnell’s offer also attempted to force Democrats to use the budget reconciliation process to pass a longer-term debt limit increase, but Democrats quickly rejected that element of his proposal out of hand.

As part of this agreement, McConnell got Democrats to vote to increase the debt limit by a specific amount (i.e., authorize so many billions or trillions in new borrowing), rather than suspend it to a certain time (i.e., suspend the debt limit until December 16, 2022, as Democrats originally proposed). Some may consider this a meaningful concession, one that more readily allows for political attack ads, but in reality, anyone who votes to suspend the debt limit votes for all the debt incurred during that period of time regardless.

In exchange, McConnell 1) got no policy concessions at all; 2) gave Democrats the time and space to ram through their massive spending bill; and 3) created the reasonable expectation that Republicans will cave on the debt limit a second time when it comes up in December. (Congressional leaders will probably try to cram that debt limit increase into an omnibus spending bill totaling thousands of pages.)

Just as important, McConnell violated the letter that he and 45 other Senate Republicans signed on August 10, when they said that “We will not vote to increase the debt ceiling, whether that increase comes through a stand-alone bill, a continuing resolution, or any other vehicle.” McConnell and several of his colleagues will now have to vote to help the Democrats pass a debt limit increase, which they said two months ago they would not do.

This isn’t savvy legislating; it’s an all-out surrender, and one the Biden administration was publicly banking on all along. Generally, when both Democrats and Republicans think you caved — one GOP senator said “you could hear a pin drop” when McConnell explained his debt limit offer to his Republican colleagues — that’s exactly what you did.

Republicans Had Leverage…

It’s worth dispensing with the main McConnell talking point about the debt limit: that Democrats had all the votes they needed to raise the debt limit unilaterally. That was true at first, but Democrats surrendered that advantage more than six weeks ago when the House formally adopted Senate Democrats’ budget resolution on August 24.

Once the House and Senate agreed to a concurrent budget resolution — one that did not provide for a debt limit increase via budget reconciliation — they gave control of the issue to Republicans. For the uninitiated, the reconciliation process, which has strict parameters, allows the Senate to pass fiscal matters with a simple majority of 51 votes (in this case, 50 Democrats plus Vice President Kamala Harris), rather than the 60 votes normally needed to break a filibuster.

Guidance issued by the Senate parliamentarian earlier this spring permitted Democrats to revise that budget, to allow for a debt limit increase to pass on a party-line basis via reconciliation. But amending the budget first requires a vote in committee — and that committee process requires Republican cooperation.

Senate rules require a majority of committee members to be physically present for any committee markup. But the 50-50 divide in the Senate this Congress led party leaders to split committee assignments evenly between Republicans and Democrats, giving neither party a majority. If all Republicans boycotted a Budget Committee markup, Democrats would have no quorum necessary to report their revised budget — and therefore no ability to increase the debt limit via reconciliation.

… And Now Have Complicity

While the general public might not have understood the procedural details, McConnell’s team knew since mid-August that raising the debt limit would require Republican cooperation to smooth the reconciliation process along, if not Republican votes. And what policy concessions did McConnell request, knowing that his party would have to bear at least some of the political burden of the debt limit increase? As McConnell himself wrote to the president on Monday, “We have no list of demands.”

McConnell’s only “ask,” if one can call it that, was that Democrats use the reconciliation process to raise the debt limit, attempting to force Democrats to use a more circuitous route that involved additional Senate votes. That didn’t amount to a substantive policy request as much an attempt to play “gotcha” politics.

I wrote several weeks ago that a vote to raise the debt limit amounted to a vote for Biden’s $3.5 trillion tax-and-spend monstrosity. And Senate Republicans knew full well the link between the two issues. Here are a few examples.

Minority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., said, “A lot of our members are very uncomfortable doing anything that would make it easier” for Democrats to raise the debt limit.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who serves on the Budget Committee: “Republicans are not going to want to vote procedurally to [raise the debt limit] because then we become complicit and that’s not something we want to do.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine: “Some Republicans would vote to raise the debt limit if they knew the Democrats were going to abandon the $3.5 trillion package.”

After McConnell’s surrender, Democrats recognized the same dynamic — that Republicans caving on the debt ceiling paved the way for them to focus the rest of the fall on their tax-and-spending spree:

[Sen. Tammy] Baldwin, D-Wis., argued that the deal will allow Democrats to avoid wasting weeks of floor time on raising the debt ceiling under the reconciliation process when they would prefer to be working on a reconciliation package to implement President Biden’s $3.5 trillion Build Back Better agenda.

“I believe that Mitch McConnell is trying to steer [us] into this reconciliation process because it takes away from the main Biden Build Back Better agenda,” she said. “We intend to take this temporary victory and then try to work with the Republicans to do this on a longer-term basis.”

“McConnell caved,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., declared after the [Democratic] caucus meeting. “And now we’re going to spend our time doing child care, health care, and fighting climate change.”

So much for “a hell of a fight” to stop the spending blowout.

‘Nuclear’ Threat Prompted a Cave

McConnell’s surrender came mere hours after Biden and other Democrats signaled a willingness to re-examine the Senate filibuster if the debt limit standoff continued. Biden’s comments Tuesday represented a 180 from his position as recently as last week — a remarkably quick flip-flop, even by his standards.

Likely the McConnell camp believes that he had to pursue this tactical retreat, lest Democrats deploy this “nuclear” option to destroy the filibuster, which would open the way to other harmful legislation. But that claim belies the fact that even after Biden’s comments Tuesday, “operatives within the [Democratic] party are skeptical that senators will ultimately scrap the filibuster rules at this moment.”

Moreover, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., said on Wednesday he opposed changing the filibuster rule to resolve the debt limit standoff. Politico reports that Manchin’s public comments came after McConnell called Manchin, giving him advance notice of the former’s debt limit offer — a fact likely leaked by the McConnell office, to advance the narrative that McConnell’s offer prevented Democrats from going “nuclear.”

But given that on Monday, Manchin said that “The filibuster has nothing to do with [the] debt ceiling” and that “we have other tools [i.e., reconciliation] that we can use and if we have to use them we should use them.” Manchin seemed unlikely to cross the filibuster rubicon on this issue irrespective of McConnell’s gambit, meaning the latter surrendered both unilaterally and unnecessarily.

Regardless, McConnell knew or should have expected earlier this summer that a debt limit standoff could precipitate a further showdown regarding the filibuster. If he didn’t want to fight that battle, he shouldn’t have started it in the first place. But he did, and he caved. Now, Democrats will have every reason to expect him to cave again come December.

Ordinary citizens hate Washington politicians because they talk a big game and rarely if ever deliver. That’s exactly what conservatives expecting an actual fight from Mitch McConnell over the spending binge got: another “all hat and no cattle” moment. If Democrats do end up passing their tax-and-spend legislation later this year, conservatives should remember that this moment and Mitch McConnell helped bring it about.

*****

This article was published on October 8, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from The Federalist.

“Shortages” Aren’t Causing Inflation. Money Creation Is thumbnail

“Shortages” Aren’t Causing Inflation. Money Creation Is

By Mihai Macovei

For central bankers and mainstream analysts, the recent inflation outburst is only a transitory phenomenon that has nothing or very little to do with the massive monetary and fiscal stimuli unleashed during the pandemic. Although the Fed has recently conceded that price pressures are persisting longer than expected, the surge of inflation is allegedly due to supply bottlenecks caused by the pandemic. This superficial diagnosis serves as a convenient excuse for politicians to keep in place damaging growth stimuli and draconian public health measures.

Inflation Is Not Driven by a Shortage of Supply

Mainstream economists define inflation as an increase in consumer prices which occurs when the growth of money supply outpaces economic growth.1 In other words, too much money is chasing too few goods. If the recent surge in inflation were driven by a shortage of goods rather than an increase in the money supply, then aggregate output would be shrinking. But this is not the case, because global economic output is projected by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to grow by 5.7 percent in 2021 after having dropped by 3.4 percent in 2020. This year, the output lost during the pandemic is expected to be recovered in both advanced and emerging economies, including in the US (graph 1). As a matter of fact, inflation was accelerating this year at the same time that industrial production was recovering to prepandemic levels in both the US and the EU (graph 2). The alleged shortage of supply at an aggregate level appears to be a myth.

Graph 1: Real GDP growth

Source: IMF World Economic Outlook.

Graph 2: Inflation and industrial production

Source: FRED and Eurostat.

The invoked shortage of supply is primarily based on anecdotal evidence about unmet demand and rising prices in specific economic sectors, such as semiconductors, cars, furniture, and energy. But those who claim that supply is insufficient do not bother to analyze whether the squeeze of supply chains is due to chronic shortage of production or to excess demand. Moreover, even if supply were short for certain goods due to production lockdowns, changes in consumer schedules, or environmental greening policies, a surge in the aggregate price level would not take place if the money supply and aggregate demand remained broadly unchanged. The squeeze on some individual supply chains would be compensated for by lower demand for other goods and services, and only relative prices would change in the economy.

Let us have a closer look at specific cases of widely perceived supply bottlenecks. The shortage of shipping containers and logistic problems at several ports in the US and Asian countries seems central to many other supply chain bottlenecks. Shipping costs have soared indeed, but shipped volumes have increased as well (graph 3).2 This does not indicate a lack of supply, but rather buoyant demand for international transport. Experts from leading shipping groups report that major US ports, container groups, and logistics companies can barely handle the surge in international trade. This is not surprising given that both US imports and its trade deficit surged by more than 20 percent year on year in the first seven months of 2021, as consumers rushed to spend their stimulus checks. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development experts claim that the global demand for manufactured consumer goods increased throughout the pandemic, boosting the demand for container shipping and raising transportation costs. The surge in global demand has not only rearranged international trade flows to the advantage of China and other Asian economies, but has also pushed international trade volumes to new highs (graph 4).

Graph 3: Global TEU shipping volume and price index

Source: Container Trades Statistics.

Graph 4: Global volume of trade

Source: World Trade Organization.

The shortage of semiconductors, which affects car production, is also blamed on the inability of chip manufacturers to deal with an order backlog swollen by covid-19 and shipping disruptions. But the global semiconductor market expanded by 7 percent in 2020 and is projected to grow by another 20 percent this year (graph 5) and almost double in size by 2028. So, again, the shortage is being caused by a relatively rigid supply which cannot accommodate buoyant demand. The latter has increased not only from the automotive sector, in particular as electric vehicles use more chips, but also from manufacturers of computers and other consumer electronics, the consumption of which has surged during the pandemic.

Graph 5: Global market for semiconductors

Source: Statista 2021.

The recent rally in energy prices, with coal and European gas hitting record highs and crude oil pushing above $80 a barrel, is also attributed to a constrained supply and perceived as a threat to the economic recovery. But the global supply has not shrunk; on the contrary, the world production of energy has been on a steady upward trend (graph 6). After growing by about 2.4 percent per year for the past three years, energy production fell by 3.5 percent in 2020 due to the lockdowns, but is expected to rebound by 4.1 percent in 2021.

Graph 6: World energy production

Source: Enerdata.

The global energy supply would have been much higher and better balanced among sources and across regions had it not been for government-mandated green policies and carbon emission targets. In Europe, coal plants have been gradually phased out, as have nuclear power plants in Germany. They have been replaced by wind turbines and other renewable energy sources which underperformed recently due to adverse weather conditions. Together with lower gas deliveries from Russia, this has created a perfect storm in the European energy market. At the same time, China’s strict emissions targets and rising coal prices have also generated a power crunch, disrupting factory activity.

In the same way that green government policies have undermined the production of energy, the lockdowns and stimulus paychecks generously handed out during the pandemic have created an artificial shortage of labor that is likely to exacerbate further inflationary pressures. Due to forced business closures, the US economy lost about 20 million jobs by April of last year. Despite the economic recovery, some 5 million jobs have not yet been filled, as millions of Americans have been paid to stay home or have left the labor force altogether. In Europe, trade unions are already asking for pay increases while surveys show that inflation expectations are rising.

Excessive Demand Stimulus and Money Creation Are the Real Culprit

The growth stimuli applied during the pandemic have been truly unprecedented in size and outreach. Massive government support and budget deficits monetized by central banks have been poured over economies weakened by recurrent lockdowns. Despite the loss of jobs and market incomes, US household wealth has increased by a staggering $32 trillion since the beginning of the pandemic, fueling consumer spending and aggregate demand. Together with an increase in the broad money supply by more than a third over the same period (graph 7), this indicates that the inflation is actually driven by too much money rather than too few goods.

Graph 7: Money supply

Source: FRED.

The rapid rise in inflation is also raising inflation expectations.3 Inflation depends not only on the mechanical outcome of changes in the supplies of money and goods, but also on the demand for money. If the public realizes that its cash holdings are being eaten away by significant price increases, it will move away from cash. In this case, inflation would accelerate beyond the pace of money creation, which is obviously the nightmare of all central bankers.

Conclusions

The current surge in inflation is neither due to a shortage of supply nor transitory, as central banks want us to believe. It is primarily due to soaring consumer demand fueled by excessive growth stimuli and monetary creation. Government-imposed lockdowns and clean energy policies constraining output have exacerbated price increases. We are witnessing a consumption boom and persistent distortions in the structure of production, all bearing a striking resemblance to the boom that preceded the Great Recession.

1.This definition is disputed by Austrian economists because price inflation lumps together monetary and nonmonetary causal factors, which have different consequences for the structure of production, incomes, and individual wealth. Therefore, Austrian economists define inflation as an increase in the supply of money beyond an increase in specie, i.e., commodity money such as gold or silver.

2.According to the Financial Times, it costs more than $20,000 to ship a standard container from China to the East Coast of the US today, up from less than $3,000 two years ago.

3.In the US, Consumer Price Index inflation advanced by 5.3 percent in August, housing prices grew by almost 20 percent year on year as of July, and the S&P 500 Index was up by almost 29 percent year on year at the end of September.

*****

This article was published on October 7, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from the Ludwig von Mises Institute.