Sunday morning music

 

Some of you may have heard of basso profondo singer Geoff Castellucci, who gained exposure with the group Voiceplay on NBC's series The Sing-Off some years ago.  He's since built up a free-lance solo career, with his own channel on YouTube and his own Web site.

I heard my wife playing his rendition of "God Rest Ye, Merry Gentlemen" the other day, and found it attractive;  so I thought I'd share a couple of his Christmas songs with you.

An interesting and (dare I say it?) "based" look at the season!

Peter

I can get behind Syria's new leader on this

 

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has called for all Syrian refugees to return to that country and help rebuild it.

Sounds like an excellent idea to me, both for Syria and the many countries currently carrying the burden of millions of refugees from the conflict there.  Sure, Syria's going to need aid to rebuild itself and recover from years of war, but if you look at what Syrian refugees are costing their host countries every year, that aid looks like a much more bearable burden.  Furthermore, it'll be a great example to all the other alleged "refugees" who are refusing to even consider returning to their own countries of origin, because they prefer the softer, easier life in their host countries at the expense of those taxpayers.

Rebuild Syria and reduce the burden on other countries.  What's not to like?

Peter

"A passing bomber"

 

Heard an interesting "rumor" from a friend yesterday, one of whose relatives is said to be with an unnamed outfit, from an unidentified armed force, that's doing interesting things in western Syria, sending out reconnaissance teams to keep an eye on who's who and what's what.  No names, no confirmations, and all the usual caveats.

It would appear that a reconnaissance team was sitting on top of a hill in western Syria, when what to their wondering eyes should appear but a convoy of several dozen heavy transporters, heading west as fast as they could go towards the Iraqi border.  Of even greater interest was that they'd seen this same convoy heading east, towards Lebanon, a week or so before;  and the cargoes involved were clearly large rockets or missiles, plus some other heavy weaponry.  The assumption was that these were Iranian weapons destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon.  Due to the sudden collapse of the Syrian government, it's presumed that the convoy could no longer get through, and was therefore being recalled to its source so that its cargoes could be redeployed.

It would further appear (if unsubstantiated "rumor" be correct) that said reconnaissance team called up "a passing bomber" and various and sundry other aircraft that are hammering the living daylights out of ISIS and its sympathizers.  Upon learning that an arrow-straight road leading straight to the Iraqi border, and clearly visible from the air, was now occupied by a convoy of heavy movers with "interesting" cargoes, the aircraft in question are said to have taken a sudden and very active interest in the highway.  The resulting secondary explosions were described as "tactical-nuke-size fireballs", which elicited prolonged, admiring and possibly profane comments from the hilltop observers.  Apparently a good time was had by all except the (surviving) convoy personnel.

I'm informed that it looks as if those cargoes of donations to fundamentalist Islamic terrorist solidarity will no longer be returning to sender.  Pity about that . . .

Needless to say, all this is purely the fruit of my imagination, there's no truth in the "rumor", and all the usual excuses.  Nobody involved would dream of breaching Opsec.  Not at all.  Not hardly.

Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  Yes, I mixed up directions (thanks to posting late at night while very tired).  In the above post, for "East" read "West", and vice versa.  Thanks to all the commenters who caught it.

Are our smaller towns declining, too?

 

The fertility rate in any developed nation needs to be 2.1 (meaning that every woman has to produce at least two children - more in a less developed nation with poorer medical and support infrastructure), in order to keep population size stable.  For the past few decades, fertility rates have been tumbling in all developed countries, without exception.  For some, such as South Korea, they're so low (currently 0.9) as to ensure effective depopulation within a century, unless something is done to reverse the situation.  (The US is currently at 1.7.)  Migration is supposed to help bolster the fertility rate by bringing in more people, but it seldom works that way.

Greece is currently seeing the effects of its low fertility rate in the collapse of many of its rural areas.

Greece is home to one of the lowest fertility rates in Europe: At 1.3, it is half that recorded in 1950 and well below the 2.1 required for population replacement.

Last year, the country recorded just over 71,400 births, the lowest number since records began almost a century ago, and down around 6% on 2022. Greece now has around one birth for every two deaths, and the share of the population aged over 65 is nearly twice that aged 0 to 14.

That prompted Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to warn of an “existential” threat to Greek society, with the country more disposed than most to wider demographic shifts afflicting developed nations.

“The truth is that today our people are among the most elderly in Europe,” Mitsotakis said last year, speaking at a Greek demographic conference.

It’s an issue affecting some pockets of the Greek mainland and its vast archipelago more than others.

“This population decline is not manifested equally throughout the country,” Mitsotakis continued. “It has peaks in specific areas and this means that national strategies are not sufficient and local provisions are also needed, with the overall demographic collapse literally becoming an existential bet for our future.”

That decline is most visible through the emergence of scores of ghost towns and villages — locations with none or virtually nil inhabitants, deserted as local populations leave or die out. It can be difficult to quantify the exact number of such locations, given their often remote nature, but recent estimates put the figure of entirely abandoned towns and villages close to 200.

. . .

Greece’s recent demographic decline can be largely traced back to the country’s sovereign debt crisis of 2009. Resultant bailout programs sparked years of austerity and financial woe for the country, with the economy contracting by as much as a quarter over the ensuing decade.

Young people were among the hardest hit by the downturn, with youth unemployment peaking at 59.5% in the first quarter of 2013 — more than twice the national high of around 27%.

As a result, many were unable to forge new lives outside of their family homes. Of those who did, many did so overseas, with an estimated more than 400,000 people — or 9% of the workforce — emigrating over the period. Much of the remainder relocated to Greece’s big cities, in search of better work and education.

Today, more than half (53.5%) of the Greek population lives in the capital, Athens, and the surrounding Attiki region, as well as the country’s second-largest city, Thessaloniki. Meanwhile, all other regions, including Greece’s prized islands, have recorded population decline over the past several years.

There's more at the link.

We're seeing something similar in parts of the USA, too.  Many towns have shuttered their schools, or drastically reduced them in size, because not enough children are being born to make full use of them.  Older children who leave to study at college or university aren't coming back to small towns, but are staying in larger cities where there are more jobs and amenities to be found.  In the area of North Texas where I live, that's alleviated because smaller towns often serve as dormitory communities for larger metropolitan areas, but even so, there are probably two towns in decline for every one that's holding its own, population-wise.

I'm interested to find out whether this phenomenon is affecting the USA as a whole.  Dear readers, would you please let us know in Comments whether the small towns near you are thriving, holding position, or declining?  That can apply to economics, population, or other issues.  By putting your inputs together, we can get a better picture.

Thanks!

Peter

Officials need to go to jail for this!

 

The short version, courtesy of Wall Street Apes on X (click the image for a larger view):

The inquiry:

How on earth can any immigration official expect to get away with this sort of corruption?  She was aware of this happening 3,200 times, and still turned a blind eye???

One hopes President Trump's reform of the Executive Branch will include prosecutions and jail time for those guilty of such crimes.

Peter

Heads up for gunnies: end-of-year ammo sale at SGAmmo

 

My favorite ammo supplier, SGAmmo of Oklahoma, is having an end-of-year clearance sale to reduce their inventory tax bill at the end of the year.  No, they're not compensating me in any way for spreading the word - I just like bargains, like most of us, and I share them with my friends and readers when they're particularly good.

Click here to see SGAmmo's end-of-year sale.  It's a good one.

(I just made the mistake of looking at my purchase history with SGAmmo.  I've spent a small fortune there over the many years that I've been their customer!  On the other hand, I can't complain about their prices.  I got value for my money.)

Peter

Syria's new submarine fleet...

 

... previously known as the Syrian Navy.  Click the image for a larger view.

As noted on Monday, Israel is destroying every major military facility in Syria that its warplanes can reach.  The BBC reports:

Israel has confirmed it carried out attacks on Syria's naval fleet, as part of its efforts to neutralise military assets in the country after the fall of the Assad regime.

In a statement, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said its ships struck the ports at Al-Bayda and Latakia on Monday night, where 15 vessels were docked.

The BBC has verified videos showing blasts at the port of Latakia, with footage appearing to show extensive damage to ships and parts of the port.

The IDF also said its warplanes had conducted more than 350 air strikes on targets across Syria, while moving ground forces into the demilitarised buffer zone between Syria and the occupied Golan Heights.

. . .

In a statement, Israel's Defence Minister Israel Katz said the IDF was aiming to "destroy strategic capabilities that threaten the State of Israel".

He added that the operation to destroy the Syrian fleet had been a "great success".

The IDF said a wide range of targets had been struck - including airfields, military vehicles, anti-aircraft weapons and arms production sites - in the Syrian capital, Damascus, as well as Homs, Tartus and Palmyra.

It also targeted weapon warehouses, ammunition depots and "dozens" of sea-to-sea missiles.

It added that it had done so to prevent them "from falling into the hands of extremists".

There's more at the link.

I guess that makes sense from Israel's point of view, but it's going to make it much harder for a new central government to be formed in Syria - it won't have access to the military equipment and bases it needs to end internal rivalry and conflict.

There are dozens, if not scores, of different groups in Syria, each proclaiming its religious purity and its cause's righteousness.  At the moment, in the first flush of victory, they're celebrating President Assad's ouster:  but before long they're going to start jockeying for position, trying to stake their claim to at least some of the spoils of victory, and hoping that their leaders will be able to form part of the new government (and therefore distribute largesse to their supporters).  It's going to be chaotic, shambolic, and a bloody (literally) mess.

Syria is one of those countries (like Russia) that isn't accustomed to democracy, and hasn't been for generations.  It's used to a strong-man leader who dictates policy and enforces it.  All those hoping for democracy, a freely and fairly elected government, and impartiality, are doomed to disappointment (to put it mildly).  Hopefully a better Syria will emerge from this mess . . . but it'll take years to do so, and won't be born peacefully or bloodlessly.

Also, watch the major ethnic groups in Syria.  The Kurds are virulently opposed to Turkey, and antagonistic towards Iraq, and hostile towards the fundamentalist Shi'ite government in Iran.  They'd like nothing better than to form a united Kurdistan with pieces of each of those nations - but none of the others want to surrender territory (or the oil beneath it) to them.  I think we may see genocidal warfare between Turkey and the Kurds in the not too distant future.  The Turks have demonstrated that genocide is a perfectly acceptable ethnic solution to them (think of the Armenian massacres, just for a start).  I rather suspect they're gearing up to kick six bells out of the Kurds.

(EDITED TO ADD:  Am I a prophet, or what?)

(The USA, of course, regards Kurds as at least fellow travelers, if not allies, but will we intervene to protect them?  Your guess is as good as mine.)

Syria - a tangled web where everyone, without exception, practices to deceive.

Peter

The "refugee" masquerade is coming unraveled

 

We've known for years (and said in these pages on frequent occasions) that most of the so-called "refugees" seeking "asylum" in the Western world are nothing more than economic migrants, seeking a better life.  They're ruthlessly manipulating the West's liberal conscience and sponging off their welfare systems.

It looks like Sweden is waking up to this reality.

The Swedish government has tasked multiple authorities with mapping instances of refugees traveling to their home countries, a practice Migration Minister Johan Forssell described as undermining the integrity of the asylum system.

The initiative, led by the Swedish Migration Agency in collaboration with the police and Swedish embassies, seeks to strengthen the enforcement of residency and protection status regulations amid concerns that many of those claiming asylum in the Scandinavian country are returning to their country of origin for holidays.

“If you have asylum because you fled a country, it is strange if you travel back to that country. It could mean there are no longer grounds for protection or that false information was given,” said Forssell.

. . .

The debate intensified after a 2022 survey by Novus, commissioned by the Bulletin online newspaper, revealed that 79 percent of refugees in Sweden had vacationed in their countries of origin.

. . .

In Sweden, there are no restrictions for refugees who have been granted a permanent residence permit to travel back to their home country. However, refugee status can be revoked if it turns out that the person no longer needs international protection.

There's more at the link.

Sweden's far from alone in facing this problem.  There are any numbers of progressive left-wing NGO's and other organizations who are actually coaching self-proclaimed "refugees" in what to say and how to say it, to ensure that they qualify as refugees.  They then benefit from becoming agencies to distribute "aid" and "assistance" to the new arrivals.  The corrupt trade in "refugees" is worth billions every year.  To note just one example in the USA, consider Catholic Charities, which collects literally billions of dollars from the US government to assist "refugees".  As far as I'm concerned, Catholic Charities should be on trial for RICO violations, and everyone aiding and abetting fake "refugees" in that organization should be in prison.

(To learn more about how NGO's are aiding and abetting the explosion in illegal migration to the USA, see a series of articles titled "The Immigration Industrial Complex".  It's eye-opening.)

I hope President Trump has some plan in mind to shut down the fake refugee traffickers, and cut off funding to the organizations claiming to "assist" them.  I also hope he'll tax the heck out of monies they send back to their families, and find some way to track their travels.  If they leave the USA, whether to visit their countries of origin or other nations, they clearly aren't worried about being refugees any more - so why allow them to return here?

Peter

Thoughts about prolonged emergencies

 

I've developed certain ideas about staying alive when the world is going to hell in a handbasket all around you.  They're based on extensive experience (which, frankly, I wish I'd never had) in the Third World, and being involved in at least three civil war/conflict situations in different countries.  I've never had to deal with medical dystopias such as an outbreak of disease that kills most of the population, but I have seen what happens when West African hemorrhagic fevers such as Ebola, Marburg or Lassa get loose in parts of that continent.  I've seen what happens when entire regional or even national populations, convinced (on the basis of bitter experience) that nobody is going to help them, decide to help themselves at everyone else's expense . . . only for all concerned to find out that what you do unto others is, indeed, what they're going to do to you - and if that happens simultaneously, the rate of survival is likely to be pretty grim.

There have been almost innumerable dystopian novels and series of books written about such scenarios.  Some are very good indeed, both from literary and "lessons learned the hard way" perspectives.  Others are so far away from reality that they're no more than nightmare fodder.  I'd like to talk about a few such books and series that I've found to be more or less true to life, and which are therefore appropriate learning material for the rest of us as we prepare for whatever life may throw at us.  I think I'll make a series of it, over the course of several weeks.

There are a few things that none of the novels get right - possibly because if they did, the novel would come to a grinding halt after only a few pages!  Nevertheless, cold hard reality has taught its lessons time and time again, and we ignore them at our mortal peril.  Here are a few considerations.

1. In extreme, prolonged dystopia (e.g. post-nuclear war, massive outbreak of disease, the "zombie apocalypse", etc.) it's very, very unlikely that more than a few people would survive and thrive.  Bare survival - if they're very lucky and well equipped, yes.  More than that - no.  With all the other survivors trying to keep body and soul together, there's unlikely to be much cooperation and mutual assistance going on.  In communities that lived that way before the apocalypse - religious and cultural groups like the Amish or the Mormons, military units that lived on-base with most of their families, that sort of thing - it's certainly possible, but for most of us . . . no.  We live too independently, even in city suburbs, to put much trust in those around us.
2. Competition for resources would rapidly descend into "devil take the hindmost".  Unless a family was numerous enough and well-equipped enough and well-trained enough and living in a defensible home, there's no way it would be able to defend its "home base" against multiple onslaughts by desperate people.  I'd expect massive looting, fires, etc. to erupt in most urban areas as gang-bangers and welfare kings and queens express their frustration by destroying anything and anyone that looks better off than they are.  (Witness New York in 1977, Los Angeles in 1965 and 1992, and many other examples - and those were of relatively short duration.  What if they'd continued for months?)  What's more, local cops, firefighters and emergency medical personnel are very likely to walk away from their jobs to try to safeguard their own families.  I can't blame them.  In their shoes, I'd probably do the same - but that means nobody will be coming to help you.  You'll be on your own.
3. Most local and state governments already have ordinances in place allowing them to declare local states of emergency, during which they can commandeer (i.e. confiscate or steal) anything and everything they want to meet the emergency.  Your reserve supplies are almost certain to be among them, particularly if it's known that you're a "prepper" or "survivalist".  You can expect anyone with that mindset to be re-labeled a "hoarder" or "black market profiteer", even though those labels would be completely untrue.  Don't forget, the bureaucrats and officers pounding on your door, demanding to search your home for such supplies and confiscating them, know full well that their own and their families' survival depends on taking what they need from others - so they won't be very sympathetic to your claims about civil rights, and may get violent at the drop of a hat.  (See my comments post-Hurricane Katrina in 2005 for examples.)
4. Mobility after a major disaster is likely to be almost impossible.  Gasoline and diesel supplies will no longer be distributed;  the authorities will hold onto whatever they can get for their own use.  Roads will be blocked by vehicles that have run out of fuel, or accidents caused by panicked motorists, or gang-bangers deliberately trying to disrupt traffic so they can steal from stopped cars and trucks.  If you can get out into open country, it'll be better there, but there still won't be much in the way of fuel supplies, and locals will probably regard those passing through as a source of supplies they need, rather than people they should help.
5. Even if you're wealthy enough, as an individual or family or community, to hire your own security personnel, that may not help when things come to a head.  Risking one's life for one's own family is one thing;  risking it to defend another family, when your own people are simultaneously at risk, is entirely another.  Besides, if you have equipment, supplies, shelter and transport when nobody else does, won't your security people want to have some of that for themselves, too?  They wouldn't be human if they didn't.  Only the best and most trustworthy security (and therefore the most expensive) will put their bosses ahead of their own needs;  and when the money runs out, they'll likely follow it.  (You'll have to pay them in something of tangible value, too.  Checks, electronic transfers and even cash won't do when they can't use them to buy what they and their families need.)
6. Cities and towns are likely to turn into death traps in a prolonged dystopian emergency.  There are simply too many people living on top of each other, with few if any local supplies to sustain them except what's brought in from outside every day.  When power goes out, so do lights, electric appliances, water and sewer pumps and treatment plants, etc.  Most of us live in cities or larger towns.  If we do, that's an automatic black mark against us in such an emergency.  We're starting the survival process at a significant disadvantage just because of where we live.  The first time I flew into greater Los Angeles, I remember looking down from the airplane at the miles upon miles of urban sprawl (2,281 square miles of contiguous urban area), and thinking "If I were in the middle of that when the Big One hit, I'd never get out.  I'd be trapped in the middle of millions of panicking people, all putting themselves ahead of everyone else."  That's one of the reasons why I don't live in a big city any more.

Those are just a few basic realities about staying alive in a prolonged disaster situation.  Over the next few weeks, I'll mention a few books and series that describe such things, and what their authors got right - and wrong.  We can and should learn from such books, but let's learn the right lessons!

Peter

Say it ain't so!!!

 

I was amused to read that Britain's love for tea may be "cooling off".

Last week, one of Britain’s oldest tea firms, Typhoo Tea, collapsed after a drop in sales.

. . .

Tea sales volumes have fallen by 4.3% compared with two years ago, according to analysts at NielsenIQ.

And a recent survey by Mintel suggested less than half the nation, 48%, now drink tea at least once a day.

. . .

Polina Jones from NielsenIQ says while people "are not falling out of love with tea per se", the landscape is changing with huge offerings from bubble tea, herbal teas, kombuchas and energy drinks attracting the younger generation.

. . .

In 1974, the average family purchased 68g - about 30 tea bags - of tea per person, per week. By 2023, that had gone down to 19g - about 10 tea bags – per person, according to government figures.

There's more at the link.

I have to laugh at the weekly purchase rate of teabags per person in the UK.  My wife and I are both tea addicts, and order our supplies in bulk (we prefer Ahmad Tea, which has many blends that suit our tastes).  The last order I made, in April this year, was for eight hundred tea bags, and I'm about to put in another because we're down to only a couple of hundred on hand!  We usually order from them once a year, and enjoy the arrival of a large box filled with tea scents and goodness.  (Our daily tipple is their English Tea No. 1;  I have a mug of it next to me as I write these words.  We also enjoy their decaf, Darjeeling and some herbal teas.)

I've never been able to get used to iced tea.  I know that in the USA, probably more iced tea is consumed than hot tea, particularly in the south;  but I grew up with hot tea, even in the hottest climates in Africa, and I'm afraid I'm set in my tea ways.  My wife, on the other hand, while enjoying hot tea, also drinks lots of the cold variety.

Oh, well.  Time to put in my next order with Ahmad, and restore balance to the tea-drinking universe!

Peter

The Syrian mess

 

The situation in Syria, after the fall of the Assad government, is so murky as to defy quick analysis.  There are wheels within wheels, currents and counter-currents, and so many twists that following them appears to defy possibility.

The biggest single problem is that so many factions are jockeying for position - and few, if any, of them are trustworthy.

• The "Islamic rebels" who've just overthrown Assad are largely Al Qaeda sympathizers, with more than a few ISIS sympathizers tucked in among them.  Expect them to splinter into their factions before too long.
• The Iranians have long backed the Assad regime, including importing literally tens of thousands of Hezbollah fighters to bolster the lackluster (and now disintegrated) Syrian Arab Army.  Iran is widely hated in Syria for supporting the dictatorship that's killed so many of its own people.  The fall of Assad is a very significant geopolitical defeat for Iran, as well as an ideological slap in the face.
• Hezbollah is facing the slaughter of most of its operatives that were in Syria, supporting Assad.  I'm sure most of them are trying to get back to Lebanon - but Israel (and, to a lesser extent, Syrian Arabs) wants to kill most of them on the way back.  They'll probably succeed in that objective.  Expect Hezbollah in Lebanon to be severely diminished in every way over the next few months, particularly because their support from Iran - cash and weapons - has likely dried up already.
• Israel will make hay while the sun shines.  I understand it's occupied the entire demilitarized zone along the border with Syria, after the Syrian troops there vanished like snow on a hot rock.  The Israeli Air Force is busy destroying every major military facility within its reach, and the US Air Force is doing likewise in central and eastern Syria.  I suspect the objective is to ensure that Syria is left with only small arms to fight any battles in the short term, plus a few ratty old tanks.  Artillery, missiles, electronics, chemical weapons and the like will be smashed before the new government in Syria can do anything to protect them.
• Russia has taken a diplomatic beating with the defeat of its surrogate, Assad.  It has two very sophisticated (and very expensive) bases in Syria.  It'll probably try to hold on to them, citing agreements with the previous government;  but I'm sure the new one will want them back - and Russia is focused on its war in Ukraine at present, and may not be able to dedicate enough troops and military assets to hold on to its Syrian enclaves.
• Turkey is a huge winner.  It's mobilized, trained and supported many different Islamic fundamentalist movements, and has now unleashed them on the Assad regime with spectacular success.  It will almost certainly send back to Syria the three million-odd refugees it took in, and probably try to attack Turkish Kurdish rebels that took refuge in Syria.  We might even see Turkey annex some parts of western Syria as a buffer zone against future Kurdish incursions.  Right now, who's to stop them?
• Every Arab and Muslim country in the region is going to be watching Syria very carefully to see which factions come out on top there, and for how long.  I expect diplomatic ripples to spread throughout the Persian Gulf, through the Stans in the former Soviet Union, and into Afghanistan.  Iran will bluff and bluster and bloviate, but its standing in the Middle East has taken a pounding, and won't recover quickly.  I suspect the big winner will be Saudi Arabia, which is far enough from Syria that it won't be directly affected by the turmoil there, but rich enough to subsidize its favorites in that country and give them an edge in the jockeying for position that's already begun.  Besides, if the Saudis can move into diplomatic territory formerly dominated by Iran, it'll pay dividends in the long run.  This is going to be a very complex mess.

I entirely agree with President Trump that the United States should stay out of direct involvement in the Syrian mess.  Our allies will be involved, and may need our support, but let's provide that at second or third hand, rather than up front.  We should certainly pull our troops out of Syria altogether.  On the other hand, the Kurdish groups in Syria, Iraq and Iran might need direct US help to survive an onslaught against them from Iran and/or Turkey.  That remains to be seen.

There's also the interesting question of Ukrainian involvement in Syria.  As we mentioned last week:

According to a Syrian special services source, talking to RIA Novosti, Ukrainian advisers played the key role in the capture of Aleppo – providing drones and American satellite navigation and electronic warfare systems, and teaching Syrian collaborators and Islamic Party of Turkestan operatives how to use them.

If that report is true, might Ukraine be expecting, as a quid pro quo, some of those Islamic fundamentalists to turn against Russia (which had supported President Assad against them), and mount terrorist operations inside Russia to help the Ukrainians fight their invader?  Wouldn't that open a can of worms?

Right now, nobody knows anything for sure, except that Assad is gone.  This could settle down quickly, or it could blow up into a Middle East holocaust.  Nobody knows - and if anyone tells you they do, they're either guessing or lying.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 239

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

I'm not big on the secular celebration of Christmas.  To me it's a season of grace, of faith, of belief.  Nevertheless, there are aspects of the secular Christmas that make me laugh - like this one.

Peter

Seaweed underwear???

 

This report from the BBC raised my eyebrows.

It sounded too good to be true, and a manufacturer's Web site is even more so.  I fail to understand how seaweed can continue to provide "natural" benefits after being so unnaturally processed, pulled, poked, prodded and shredded into something it was never designed to be.  However . . . what do I know?

If this trend continues, I can see all sorts of locavore-style clothing options.  Live in the south-eastern US?  How about kudzu underwear?  In Texas, how about mesquite unmentionables?  In the southwestern US, how about cholla?  (Minus the prickles, of course!)

Any other suggestions, readers?

Peter

The real danger of a meltdown in fiat currencies

 

I've said a lot over the years about the perils of fiat currency, the danger of the immense debt "overhang" to the US economy, and similar issues.  I'm hardly alone in that:  we've read a great deal from other commentators in these pages, saying much the same thing.  However, the inflation of the past few years has reinforced and re-emphasized the message, and highlighted the real danger to the world economy at this point.

Mark Jeftovic puts it in context.

We are witnessing a flight out of fiat, accompanied by a distinct twinge of “financial nihilism”, a phrase once coined by podcaster Demetri Kofinas.

While there may be no name for the global monetary system on which the world runs today, Russell Napier’s “Non-System” if you will, there is a term for the terminal phase we are in, and the entire world is in it.

Once again, it comes from the Germans – who gave us “Notgeld” (“emergency money”), from the Weimar chapter in history when cities and towns issued their own scrip in an effort to escape the ravages of hyper-inflation; this one is “Katastrophenhausse” – literally “Catastrophic boom”.

It was introduced into the lexicon by Ludwig Von Mises and has been popularized as “crack-up boom”.

The key characteristic of a crack-up boom is that people lose faith in money itself and scramble to convert their money into alternative assets – not because they need those assets, but because they want to get out of the currency.

This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where the increased spending drives prices higher, which causes more people to spend their money faster, driving prices even higher.

You may remember my (horrific) thought experiment analogy of the “burning balloon”:

A group of tourists embark for a hot air balloon tour in India (as I originally heard the story); just after the mooring ropes are released, the pilot sees that the canopy has caught fire and he, realizing the stakes, immediately jumps out of the gondola to safety.

However, this reduces the weight of the balloon, so its rise accelerates. The passengers who grasp what has just happened immediately follow the pilot, deftly jumping overboard while the balloon is still close enough to the ground to do so… however, that reinforces the feedback loop: the even lighter ballon is now rising faster – the lucky laggards who are next to figure it out abandon ship while they still can, which further accelerates the ascent of the fireball; however soon it will be too high to safely jump, and doom is assured for all those left aboard who did not act quickly enough.

Those are the dynamics of a hyperinflation.

Mises described it as a situation where the “masses wake up” to realize inflation isn’t temporary but rather that the currency is doomed to keep losing value. At that point there’s a rush to convert money into goods, any goods – what he called a “flight into real values.”

There's more at the link.

At present the rest of the world regards the US dollar as the best of the bad options available to them.  If they can't get gold, they get dollars.  Note that very few people trying to protect their assets rely on cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, because it's too volatile and unpredictable.  They want something they can be sure will hold its value, like gold, which has proven its worth over literally millennia.  If they can't get gold or other reliable hard assets, they go for whatever second-best option is available - and at this time, that's the US dollar.  Forget those who predict that Russian or Chinese money will be a safe haven.  How many people are falling over themselves to buy their currency?  Precious few . . .

So, the dollar's current strength is artificial, propped up by the lack of any better alternative.  However, what happens if the immense debt overhang suddenly comes crashing down?  The numbers are catastrophic in their implications.  Consider this graphic in a social media post from Mr. Jeftovic (click the image for a larger view):

In that post, he says, referring to the above image:

This is all about the denominator and it's about what we're using to denominate everything: fiat money.

Change your perspective to logarithmic mode and then look at the Y axis.

Now you're looking at the important part.

We've seen this movie before: in Zimbabwe, in Venezuela, in Yugoslavia and in Weimar Germany...

This is why "There is no top" isn't hopeium, it's a visceral understanding that our denominators - all fiat currencies - are breaking down at the same time .

Again, more at the link, and well worth reading in full.

This is my biggest worry about the current state of geopolitics.  We hear a lot of talk about how dangerous things are, that we may be closer to nuclear war than we've ever been . . . but that danger is actually secondary to what may happen if the world's fiat currencies melt down.  If world politics go to hell in a handbasket, they're going to follow.  It's as simple as that.

We live in perilous times.

Peter

The Ukraine war spills over into Syria - and perhaps further?

 

News from Syria of a sudden, unheralded onslaught by fundamentalist Islamic terrorist movements, driving the Syrian armed forces out of Aleppo and expanding south and east towards Damascus and the Mediterranean coast, is provoking a great deal of head-scratching among the cognoscenti.  Where could this lead?  How about to a full-blown regional war?

There are two very interesting articles analyzing what's going on (as far as anyone can, given the paucity of information currently available).  The first is headlined "The Syria Riddle: How It May Turn Into the First BRICS War".  In it, I found this snippet:

According to a Syrian special services source, talking to RIA Novosti, Ukrainian advisers played the key role in the capture of Aleppo – providing drones and American satellite navigation and electronic warfare systems, and teaching Syrian collaborators and Islamic Party of Turkestan operatives how to use them.

Syrian Arab Army (SAA) communications were completely jammed by these electronic warfare systems: “The assault groups and drones were equipped with encrypted GPS devices and extensive use of AI, so that the use and navigation of attack UAVs and kamikaze drones took place from a long distance.”

The mechanism was set in place months ago. Kiev made a straightforward deal with Salafi-jihadis: drones in exchange for batches of takfiris to be weaponized against Russia in the US/NATO proxy war in Ukraine.

There's more at the link, including analysis of what Turkey may be up to, and how this affects Russian involvement in the region.  The article concludes:

BRICS members Russia and Iran have no other choice: they need to fix, by whatever means necessary, the incompetence displayed by Damascus and the SAA, so they may maintain their access to the Eastern Mediterranean, Lebanon, Iraq and beyond. That implies a very serious move: Russia deviating key assets from the battle in Novorossiya to preserve a relatively sovereign Syria.

Food for thought indeed.  For example, will Russia's cannon-fodder North Korean infantry be diverted to fight fundamentalist Islamic terrorists in Syria, rather than Ukrainians?

The next article is from Cdr. Salamander, whose maritime and military analytical skills are well known.  In an article titled "Syria's Jenga Tower", he writes:

Syria isn’t really just a civil war. It is more than a proxy war. It has major external players on the world stage with active military participation. The United States, Russia, Turkey, and Israel all are actively involved, the first three on the ground. Other nations such as the United Kingdom and France will make an appearance now and then. Jordan and Iraq have their fingers in the pie.

The major external powers have even come into direct conflict with each other; USA on Russia, Turkey on Russia…and probably more that have not made it in to open source. To say it is a complicated mess, waiting for mistakes to happen, is an understatement.

If you are looking for the good guys, you will need to squint.

. . .

Russia’s capabilities are but a shadow ... As opposed to the last period of significant fighting, Russia cannot bring to bear (pun intended) what the Assad government needs. Russia is distracted with larger problems in Ukraine and has African adventures that are not an easy walk.

Again, more at the link.

If readers are unfamiliar with Jenga, a detailed description may be found here.  Briefly, players construct a tower of wood bricks, then try to remove and reposition a brick at a time without collapsing the tower.  Describing Syria as a "Jenga tower" of participants and positions is actually a pretty good metaphor, IMHO.  Expanding that to cover Ukraine, Syria, every nation in the area, their relationships with each other, their use of proxy (a.k.a. terrorist) forces against each other, etc., and you've got a great big international dog's breakfast of the whole malarkey.

What effect this will have on the war in Ukraine is unknown as yet, but Russia dare not allow matters in Syria to get out of hand.  It has two major bases there, one naval, one air, that allow it to dictate policy in the entire Middle East and north and central Africa.  If they're threatened or closed by military activity, that will have a direct and immediate effect on Russian foreign policy and economic influence over tens of thousands of square miles.  Therefore, one might expect Russia to do one of three things:

1. Attack all-out in Ukraine so as to bring the fighting there to the quickest possible conclusion, regardless of losses, thus freeing Russian forces to turn to the Middle East;
2. Keep up existing pressure in Ukraine as far as possible, but siphon off reserve forces and supplies to divert them to the Syrian conflict;
3. Reduce pressure on Ukraine, diverting major combat forces and equipment to Syria, hoping that it can resolve the situation there within a few weeks so that it can get its forces back into operation against Ukraine before too much damage is done.

Which of these options it might choose (or another option I haven't considered) is unknown, but the status quo won't solve anything.  Something, somewhere, has to give.

What was that ancient Chinese curse about living in interesting times?

Peter

Well, isn't this special?

 

I was astonished to read this news from the American Society of Anesthesiologists.

In an unprecedented move, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield plans representing Connecticut, New York and Missouri have unilaterally declared it will no longer pay for anesthesia care if the surgery or procedure goes beyond an arbitrary time limit, regardless of how long the surgical procedure takes. The American Society of Anesthesiologists calls on Anthem to reverse this proposal immediately.

. . .

Payment for anesthesia services is based on several factors, including the exact amount of time for anesthesiologists to deliver care preoperatively, during the operation, and when transitioning the patient to the recovery unit afterwards. With this new policy, Anthem will arbitrarily pre-determine the time allowed for anesthesia care during a surgery or procedure. If an anesthesiologist submits a bill where the actual time of care is longer than Anthem's limit, Anthem will deny payment for the anesthesiologist’s care. With this new policy, Anthem will not pay anesthesiologists for delivering safe and effective anesthesia care to patients who may need extra attention because their surgery is difficult, unusual or because a complication arises.

There's more at the link.

Sure, one can argue that anesthetists are trying to protect their income stream, but there's a whole lot more to this than money.  I'll use myself as an example.  I've had multiple heart attacks, and have lived for over two decades with a partially disabling spinal injury involving 24/7/365 pain that can never be fully controlled, and consequently have limitations on movement and flexibility (and I'm carrying too much weight, because exercise is largely a memory).  Dealing with those factors from an anesthetist's point of view includes allowing for my higher pain tolerance and medication resistance (because I take multiple medications every day, some of them fairly potent), and adjusting "normal" anesthetic protocols and dosages accordingly.  I'm sure I fall outside the parameters that might govern a young, fit football player - but Anthem BCBS apparently doesn't care about that.  If my time under anesthesia is longer than that needed by the football player, they won't pay for it, and they don't care that I'm a very different medical problem to the anesthetist than the athlete.

I think this absolutely sucks.  All I can suggest is that you look closely at your own medical insurance, and ask pointed questions when it comes to the fine print.  Medical insurers, of course, will cloak such limitations and restrictions in legalese and almost impenetrable linguistic obfuscation, so you'll have to read closely (and between the lines) to figure out what they mean - but if you don't, you might find your medical bills a lot higher than you'd planned for.

Sheesh!

Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  Earlier today Anthem BCBS canceled its proposed policy change.  One wonders how the murder, yesterday, of a top medical insurance professional factored into that . . .

Yes, I've got 'em, too...

 

For people who avoid making mountains out of molehills, from Stephan Pastis.  Click the image to be taken to a larger view at the "Pearls Before Swine" Web page.

My problem is that I've got so many problitos, I can't afford to concentrate on any one of them long enough to make a mountain out of that particular molehill.  I've got problitos popping up all over the place!

Oh, well . . .

Peter

Abolishing the IRS and income tax - a racial as well as a financial question?

 

Millions of Americans receive what's known as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) every year.  This means that, even if they paid no income tax at all, they receive money from the IRS, credited to them as if they'd overpaid taxes and were receiving a refund.  (The small print in IRS definitions doesn't put it that way, but that's what it amounts to, IMHO.)

The sums involved are huge.  In 1999, 19.3 million Americans received a total of $31.9 billion in EITC payments, for an average of about $1,693 per recipient.  In 2022, the latest year for which figures are available, 23 million Americans received a total of $57 billion in EITC funds, for an average of $2,478 per recipient.

If, as President Trump has suggested, the Internal Revenue Service is to be abolished, along with income tax as we know it today, who would calculate and pay out EITC every year?

I've seen many arguments that the EITC appears to be nothing more or less than a (thinly disguised) attempt to implement "reparations for slavery" by tying them to a complex financial calculation that just happens to benefit a very large proportion of black Americans, while leaving most taxpayers from other racial groups out in the cold.  (The IRS isn't very helpful in providing a racial breakdown of who gets what, and who is denied what, so that's a speculative analysis based on what information is available.)  If anyone disagrees with the purported link between the EITC and reparations, please share your thoughts with us in Comments.  I'm sure the topic will be controversial.

My position on reparations for slavery, a topic beloved of left-wing and progressive politicians, is that I'll support them for two groups of persons only:

• Those who were themselves slaves, and are now free;
• Those who were born with living ancestors (parents, grandparents, whatever) who were or had been slaves, and who can thus claim that their immediate family was affected by slavery.

If someone was never a slave, and never had a living ancestor who was a slave, then in my opinion they have not earned, and should not get, reparations for slavery.  Fuzzy generational boundaries serve only to confuse and obfuscate the issue.  After all, if we're going to allow generations-old long-deceased relatives to qualify their currently living descendants for "reparations", what about the hundreds of thousands of Union troops who died during the US Civil War to free the slaves?  Surely they, and all of their relatives and descendants down to the present generation, should also qualify for such reparations, for being the instruments of the freedom that former slaves and their descendants attained through their sacrifice?

At any rate, if there is a link between reparations and the EITC, and the former is off the table, then I see no reason for the EITC (as currently constituted and calculated) to continue.  Let it be abolished, along with the IRS and income tax in general.

What say you, readers?

Peter

A duel with a weird result and a happy ending (sort of)

 

As part of my research for a forthcoming book, I've been reading up about the history of dueling in New Orleans during the 18th and 19th centuries.  I came across this very unusual account.

M. Augustin ... who afterward became a district judge and general of the Louisiana Legion, was the victor in several ... encounters in which the temper of the period caused him to be engaged. One in particular is noteworthy on account of the part it played in an extraordinary freak of fortune.  Alexander Grailhe was the offending party, though the insult (or rather provocation, for gentlemen seldom insulted) would in this day be of scant concern. But some cause of action was present, and each was sure that a deadly meeting would certainly follow. They rode together in a carriage with ladies, who, after the duel, commented on their mutual affability during the entire trip, which only serves to show how delicately adjusted was the code of etiquette—especially in the presence of ladies.

They fought at The Oaks, and as soon as the weapons had been crossed and the impressive “Allez, Messieurs,” pronounced, Grailhe, who was high-strung and hot-blooded—doubly so under the stress of what he regarded as a grievous provocation—lost his temper and furiously charged his antagonist.  Augustin, on the contrary, was cool, collected, and agile, parrying each savage thrust, until by a temps d’arrêt (sudden pause), judiciously interpolated into a vicious lunge of Grailhe’s, he pierced him through the chest.  Grailhe, with one of his lungs perforated, remained for a long time hovering between life and death, and when at last he did come out of his room, he was bowed like an octogenarian.

It was now only a question of time for the wounded man, as an internal abscess had formed where it could not be reached, —surgery then was not what it is now,— and the doctors despaired of saving him. Some time after he had been up and about, a quarrel with Col. Mandeville de Marigny resulted in his challenging that distinguished citizen.  This duel was also fought at The Oaks, but as Grailhe was too weak to do himself justice with a sword, the weapons chosen were pistols at fifteen paces, each to have two shots, advance five paces, and fire at will. At the first shot, fired simultaneously, the unfortunate man fell forward, pierced by his adversary’s bullet, which had entered the exact place of his former and yet unhealed wound.  Marigny, with pistol in hand and as placid as a marble statue, advanced to the utmost limit marked out, when Grailhe, who was suffering greatly, exclaimed: “Fire again; you have another shot.”

With grave dignity Marigny raised his pistol above his head and fired into the air, saying with frigid politeness: “I never strike a fallen foe.”

More dead than alive, the stricken duelist was carried home by his friends and consigned to the care of his physician; but instead of sinking rapidly, as was expected, he really began to mend, and by the following morning was much improved.  The ball had penetrated to the abscess which had threatened his life, and made an exit for its poisonous accumulations. Some time afterward he walked out of his room as erect as ever, and soon regained his health and stately bearing.

There's more at the link about the extensive history of New Orleans dueling.

That's one of the most remarkably fortuitous injuries I've ever encountered.  A wound that saved the life of the injured man?  I can't help but wonder how many - or, rather, how few - times in history that's happened!

Peter