Watch: Rare Footage Of Kim Jong Un Mourning Over Coffins Of DPRK Troops Killed In Ukraine War

In a surprising first, North Korea's state-run media aired footage on Monday showing leader Kim Jong-un mourning the deaths of North Korean soldiers, said to be killed while fighting in Russia's war in Ukraine as part of allied forces.

Primarily the estimated ten to fourteen thousand DPRK troops dispatched to assist Moscow fought in Russia's Kursk province, where they helped repel the over six-month Ukrainian occupation of the southern border oblast.

The broadcast, released by Korean Central Television, featured Kim solemnly placing a North Korean flag over a coffin during an emotion-laden and patriotic ceremony.

The occasion for the memorial footage was the return of the soldiers' remains from Russia, though no details were given as to the number of the deceased being remembered.

This was played before an audience attending joint cultural event hosted by North Korea and Russia in Pyongyang on Sunday. The footage was aired presumably for the first time publicly at this event.

This weekend marked the first anniversary of the signing of the two countries' "comprehensive strategic partnership" treaty. This served as the 'legal basis' on which the North Korean troop deployment to Russia happened.

According to more details of the released footage via Yonhap News agency:

These images were broadcast after photos of North Korean soldiers were shown alongside Russian troops, and of a blood-stained notebook believed to belong to a North Korean soldier retrieved from the battleground in Russia's Kursk region.

In the notebook, a message read that "The decisive moment has finally come," and "Let us bravely fight this sacred battle with the boundless love and trust bestowed upon us by our beloved Supreme Commander," which refers to Kim, according to the broadcast.

It's been reported that North Korean state media has been repeatedly airing clips of Russian Culture Minister Olga Lyubimova and other attendees wiping away tears during the event.

Watch the footage below:

How North Korea celebrates its soldiers who died fighting Ukrainians. The axis between Moscow and Pyongyang is no longer a marriage of convenience. pic.twitter.com/piNC1r2tTj

— Yaroslav Trofimov (@yarotrof) June 30, 2025

One interesting observation from the state footage of the return of the soldiers' remains is the winter clothing on Kim and other officials, which suggests that Pyongyang may have begun receiving its dead soldiers back a few months ago.

Back in April, President Putin released a statement saying, "The Russian people will never forget the heroism of the Korean special forces. We will always honor the Korean heroes who gave their lives for Russia and for our shared freedom, alongside their brothers-in-arms from the Russian Federation."

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 07:45

Too Late To Buy Gold? Not Even Close...

Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via VonGreyerz.gold,

Many are wondering if it’s too late to buy gold, that gold has peaked and they have missed their opportunity.

We hope the below series of facts, figures and common-sense reality-checks will put such fears squarely to rest, as gold’s role, price direction and days are only just beginning.

A Light House in the Fog

In a world of geopolitical tensions, can-kicking monetary fantasies, falling bombs, rising debt, discredited leadership, impotent summits, weaponized trade and a comically discredited media narrative, it’s hard to find a lighthouse in such fog.

Even with the world closest to the brink of nuclear war since the Cuban missile crisis, the markets, forever certain that a life-boat of mega liquidity is just one crisis away, churned Titanically forward with no ice berg fears.

VON GREYERZ advisor, Ronnie Stoeferle, sarcastically described the recent S&P, NASDAQ and NIVIDIA behavior as being almost like that of a Zen monk.

But there’s nothing “Zen” about these markets, times, currencies or financial systems. And there’s certainly nothing “Zen” about the once-sacred 10Y UST…

How do we know this? How have we always known this?

In short, what has been our lighthouse?

The answer is as simple as it timeless, indestructible, and honest: Gold.

The Quiet Accumulation Phase

Unlike politicians scrambling for power like donkeys fighting for hay (Chamfort) and squawking threats, promises and miracle solutions for one more X follower, vote or concession, sophisticated gold investors—from generational family offices, portfolio managers and sovereign wealth funds to eastern central banks and even the IMF and BIS—have been quietly accumulating gold at unprecedented levels.

For the last 3 years (since the US foolishly weaponized the world reserve currency), central banks have been annually accumulating over 1000 tons of gold.

Average central bank gold stacking has skyrocketed from 118 tons (pre-2022), to over 290 tons per/bank/year post weaponization.

In short, despite all the fog, squawking, speculating and debating, precious metal investors have been watching what gold does rather than listening to what failed policy makers and systems are saying.

The Unofficial Reserve Currency

Nassim Taleb bluntly said the quiet part out loud in a recent Bloomberg interview, namely that gold is effectively becoming the unofficial global reserve currency.

We have been saying the same for years, not because we fawn on every empty phrase of every empty politico or market pundit, but because we have been watching what gold does.

And let’s look at what gold has been quietly, calmly and historically doing—and SIGNALING—for years.

Signals Rather than Words

In 1971, when the USD lost its golden chaperone, money supply expansion, inflation and hence a gold price explosion followed, held in check only by Volcker’s aggressive, post-1980 rate hikes.

Even the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, in which gold ultimately out-hedged a perfect market storm, the only thing to “save” that not-so-Zen equity market was Bernanke’s money printing to the moon.

But as US public debt levels crawl toward $37T, we objectively know (and knew from day-one) that raising rates wouldn’t work for Powell as they did for Volcker, and hence Powell’s “higher-for-longer” policies were doomed from the onset by the hard math of fiscal dominance.

Or stated more simply, America was too far in debt to afford its own so-called “inflation killing” rate hikes.

We also know that QE to the moon is another useless option, and that Bernanke’s Nobel Prize for such a “temporary” solution has since devolved into a currency destroying nightmare.

In short, the Fed is Trapped. Cornered. Out of good options.

Period.

More Recent Signs of Golden Power

But there are far more current yet ignored signals from that modest pet rock, which has been quietly getting the last laugh on a global system that is loudly getting more desperate and hence more centralized.

From Day-One of the Putin sanctions, we said that trust in, and hence demand for, the dollar and UST would fall as gold slowly rose to replace this mistrust.

That, of course, is precisely what followed despite polite debates with strong-dollar proponents as the reality of de-dollarization became more than just a headline, but a global and irreversible trend.

We also carefully tracked the critically important move by the BIS to rate physical gold as a Tier-One, global reserve asset.

This was another quiet, yet media-ignored BIS signal, that gold was becoming a far more trusted and objectively superior store of value that an over-issued and increasingly weaponized/unloved UST.

We then tracked yet another obvious, yet again, media-ignored signal from the extraordinary physical gold demand/deliveries in the COMEX exchange.

This was neon-flashing evidence that nations preferred physical gold to paper money or unloved US IOUs.

The Old System Nearing Its Gettysburg Moment

Such signals from the BIS, the COMEX, and the BRICS de-dollarization policies were analogous to armies slowly preparing their financial cannons for a massive shift in a global monetary and financial system.

Sadly, yet objectively, this very system– unknown to most participants and trend speculators—was already reaching a clear Gettysburg Moment in which the fight to save it may continue, but the war is already lost.

The Biggest Casualty? The USD…

Today we see the desperate signs of this losing war in the desperate measures to give credit to an otherwise discredited and debased world reserve currency which even JP Morgan confesses is 15% over-valued based on long-term real exchange rates.

This year alone, the USD has lost 10% of its power and is seeing its worst first-half performance in nearly 40 years.

Meanwhile the EUR-USD is nearing 1.17 and gold is consolidating.

Too Late for Gold?

But despite all these signals of gold rising (more than 75 All-Time-Highs in 2025 alone and outperforming the S&P total return for two decades), there are those who would say gold is too volatile or that it peaked at $3500.00.

In other words, there are those who think it’s too late to catch “the gold bubble”?

Oh dear… what a complete misunderstanding of reality, markets, gold and broken financial systems such a view embodies.

Gold: No Mania, just a Sober Culmination

Gold is not in a bubble.

Gold is not to be compared to a tech stock or a speculation craze, and gold is no longer even a volatility “hedge” or “allocation.”

Rather, gold is becoming the base money for a system that is openly denying its own slow death and losing war.

In other words, gold’s exponential growth and role are not peaking, they are only just beginning.

But let’s show rather than say that, as words have become just as cheap as dollars in a system terrified of its own unravelling.

Gold is not spiking because the future of the global financial system and paper currencies is looking brighter.

Instead, and based on the string cite of signals above, gold is rising because that very debt-based, MMT-fantasy pushing addiction to mouse-clicked money and debt-based (currency-destroying) “growth” is failing.

Trust: Hard to Quantify but Easy to Own

The recent and extraordinary (but entirely inevitable) “rally” in the gold price had nothing to with its yields or earnings (it offers none), but everything to do with its trust.

But as we’ve said for years, trust is hard to quantify for those who don’t understand gold.

Or stated otherwise, Gold is not changing, but trust in the global financial and currency system is.

Gold is doing nothing other than what it has done for millennia when debt levels unmask the sins and addictions of its fiat money comptrollers: It is signaling a slow reset toward real money from paper currencies.

In such moments of dramatic global change, looming resets and embarrassing policy failures, the old correlations break down.

Strong dollar or weak dollar, low inflation or high inflation, positive real yields (2023,24 & 25) or negative real yields—gold is rising in all scenarios because gold is breaking away from a broken system that has printed, borrowed, taxed and even traded itself into debt trap.

Who Is Afraid?

Yes, gold loves chaos, but today it’s not Main Street that is running to gold, it is the very central bankers who are terrified of the chaotic system they alone created and broke which are running to this metal.

In short, it’s not the people who are scared—it’s their governments.

Even the IMF, which has recently admitted that it doesn’t fully know what is coming, at least knows that whatever (even horrific CBDC) reset arises, it will have gold (the last truly politically neutral asset in a global financial war) as its anchor rather than a hitherto chastised “pet rock.”

And so, in this backdrop of reality rather than spin, we ask again, is it too late to buy gold?

Silver Speaks

In addition to the foregoing reality checks and answers, let us not forget what silver is saying to us.

Those familiar with long-term, sophisticated precious metal investing are well aware that rising silver (and mining stocks) confirm a bull market in gold, which we argue has not yet even begun despite gold’s recent record highs.

As of this writing, the gold/silver ratio still hovers in the 100:1 area and silver ETF inflows are yawning.

In short, silver, despite its steady movements North, is still greatly lagging the gold moves of late, suggesting that gold has yet to make its true move in price, role and use.

Today silver lags, but when it moves, its move will be explosive.

For us, the current silver lag is a sign that gold is still early rather than too late in its secular direction.

Peak Distrust, Not Peak Gold

The recent gold price tops at $3500 were not a sign of mania or peak gold, but simply an early indicator (and reflection) of the rotten debt foundations beneath a global credit and currency system slowly teetering toward a massive shift.

In such a setting/shift, gold’s value today is merely a fraction of what is to come.

For those thinking beyond the next equity trend or miracle stock toward protecting and growing their wealth, they are not even close to “too late,” but rather right on time.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 07:20

The No-Win Bubble "Wealth Effect": Either Way We Lose

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

I have endeavored to explain how our economy has changed dramatically over the past 50 years beneath the surface. Nothing that's going to happen in the future will make sense unless we understand this, so refill your beverage of choice and let's go through what changed.

Wages gained ground 1945 - 1975, and lost ground 1975 - 2025. In the "glorious 30" (Trente Glorieuses) years of sustained global growth 1945 - 1975, wages' share of the economy remained around 50% of the nation's income. As the economy expanded, wages increased in step with the economy.

Since the mid-1970s, that trend has reversed. Wages have lost ground for the past 50 years. As the economy expanded, wages's share declined, meaning the economy's gains flowed to capital rather than wages. (Chart #1 below)

This wealth transfer was non-trivial: $150 trillion was siphoned from wages to owners of capital.

As the chart below shows, Federal debt as a percentage of GDP declined in the the decades of organic growth, meaning the economy expanded from increases in productivity, efficiencies and resource extraction, as opposed to the synthetic growth of using debt / financialization to boost consumption.

Financialization took off in the 1980s as unlimited credit for financiers enabled a synthetic boom of corporate takeovers and mergers. Financialization expanded into every nook and cranny of the economy in the 1990s and 2000s, so that assets such as the family home became commoditized assets that could be sold as securities to global capital.

As the Federal-debt-GDP charts illustrates, Federal debt rose faster than GDP as financialization hollowed out the US economy. The acceleration of globalization from 2001 advanced this hollowing out.

The destabilizing nature of financialization manifested in 2008 as the Global Financial Crisis, when heavily financialized subprime mortgage securities catalyzed a global meltdown.

the 2008-09 crisis and response was a critical juncture in American history , as the organic economy became subservient to the synthetic economy of debt, bubbles and "the wealth effect," the toxic harvest of hyper-financialization and hyper-globalization.

Federal debt, which has risen from 40% of GDP in the early 1980s to 60% in 2007, exploded higher to 120% as the synthetic "growth" of using debt to inflate asset bubbles that generated "the wealth effect" became the engine of consumption.

As a result of policy decisions made in 2008-2010, our economy became dependent not on wages but on "the wealth effect" for consumption: as asset valuations bubble higher, the owners of the assets feel wealthier, and are incentivized to borrow and spend more of their phantom wealth.

The top 10% of US households now account for 49.7% of all US consumer spending: The U.S. Economy Depends More Than Ever on Rich People: The highest-earning 10% of Americans have increased their spending far beyond inflation. Everyone else hasn't. (WSJ.com)

The problem is that unlike wages, which are broadly distributed, asset ownership is concentrated in the top 10% of households, so "the wealth effect" dramatically boosted wealth and income inequality. So all the synthetic "growth" since 2009 has flowed to the top tier of households as wages' share of the nation's income continued losing ground.

This sets up a can't win scenario: if the Everything Bubble that drives "the wealth effect" continues inflating, wealth inequality will crack our society wide open. If the bubble pops, consumption implodes, jobs will be lost and the Great Recession that was pushed forward in 2009 will kick in with a vengeance.

Beneath the superficial surface of rising GDP, the policies of inflating debt-bubbles to drive "the wealth effect" have hollowed out not just the economy but society. Courtesy of @econimica (X/Twitter), these charts show the pernicious consequences of relying on debt for consumption and channeling gains to the owners of assets.

The net effect was to load younger generations with debt while funneling the majority of Federal spending to the older generations who also happen to own most of the assets. Since younger workers couldn't buy assets when they were cheap, few have gained from "the wealth effect."

By effectively impoverishing the nation's younger generations, we've chosen a demographic doom-loop as marriage and birth rates have collapsed from 2007. Guess what happens when you make starting a family and buying a house unaffordable to younger generations? They no longer start families and have children.

As the Boomer generation retires, the legacy of retirement programs designed in the 1930s (Social Security) and the 1960s (Medicare) is fiscal bankruptcy as these programs are driving the expansion of federal spending and borrowing.

It's called a Doom Loop, with no exit, for all speculative asst bubbles pop. Once "the wealth effect" reverses, assets get sold off to raise cash and since only the wealthy can afford to buy them, there's no buyers left, so valuations crash.

It didn't have to be this way, but our leadership chose poorly, and the consequences will fall on us. Let's go through the charts supporting this grim reality.

Wages share of the national income has declined for 50 years.

As a percentage of GDP, Federal debt has tripled from 40% of GDP to 120% of GDP as synthetic "growth" replaced organic growth:

Thanks to the policy decision to reply on "the wealth effect" for consumption, wealth inequality has soared: the net worth of the top 10% (34 million Americans) is 2X the net worth of the bottom 90% (306 million Americans) and 27X the net worth of the bottom 50%--170 million Americans.

Most of the future expansion of Federal spending and debt is in programs for the older generations and rising interest payments on the expanding debt to pay for these programs.

Here are Econimica's explanatory comments on his three charts reprinted below:

"Federal Reserve policies have far-reaching consequences, well beyond interest rates and economics / finance. Given the Fed is a non-democratically elected entity making policy that is ultimately deciding the winners and losers or our modern-day society...perhaps it's time for a rethink of the power that has been handed to them?

Consider since 2007 (when ZIRP & QE were implemented):

---US births (blue columns) have declined by -0.7 million/yr (-16%...or 12 million fewer births than Census projected since '07 w/ the delta only continuing to grow)
---US female childbearing population (red line) +4.2 million (+11%)
---US 65+yr/old pop (white line) increased +27 million (+72%)

Think of who the economic / financial policies implemented since '07 favor (elderly/institutions holding the bulk of assets) and who they punish (young adults w/ little to no assets to shield them). Young adults have made the logical choice to have fewer or avoid children altogether. Unless something dramatic changes, suggest births/families will continue moving significantly lower and the future of the US working class is likewise deteriorating.

2007 was also the interest rate driven explosion in student loan debt and consumer debt (vehicles, credit cards, etc.) to allow a flat consumer population to continue consuming more."

Note how debt serviced by younger generations exploded higher from 2008 while the population and workforce made only marginal gains.

GDP minus federal debt was positive until 2008-09, and has since crashed into deeply negative territory. It's called eating our seed corn, spending money borrowed from future productivity and generations to fund unsustainable consumption today. Spoiler alert: this ends badly.

Regardless of assurances that this bubble will never pop, all bubbles pop, and they do so with remarkable symmetry, returning to their starting point.

Either way, we lose: if the Federal Reserve manages to keep the Everything Bubble inflated, we decimate the nation's younger generations, fatally destabilizing our society. If the bubble finally pops, all the phantom wealth that's been propping up consumption goes to Money Heaven, gone for good.

We will collectively bear the burdens of catastrophically short-sighted / self-serving policies of 2009-2025 for decades to come. Beneath the easily gamed statistical veneer, our economy and society have been hollowed out to the benefit of the few at the expense of the many.

These are real-world problems, not monetary problems. Unfortunately, playing around with "money" doesn't make all this go away: stablecoins, Universal Basic Income (UBI) and Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) are all disconnected from the real world: what ultimately matters is resources extracted, productivity and efficiency, and how the gains and losses of these real world factors are distributed.

"Money" in all its manifestations is simply the unit/medium used to instantiate the distribution.

*  *  *

Check out my new book Ultra-Processed Life and my new fiction/novels page.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 06:30

Winding Up For A Comeback: UBS Eyes Rolex Recovery Cycle 

A team of UBS analysts led by Zuzanna Pusz pointed to new June data from the KOF Swiss Economic Institute showing deteriorating sentiment across Swiss watchmakers, further validating their cautious stance on the global luxury market.

June readings from the KOF Swiss Economic Institute (monthly survey of Swiss watch producers) show that expectations of production plans over the next three months decelerated m/m to -7.3 (restated May -5.5). Additionally, sentiment on expected orders over the next three months also decreased to -14.8 (May -10.7), the second lowest point in 2025ytd. -Pusz

The survey revealed declines in both production expectations and order outlooks, suggesting that a meaningful recovery in the global global luxury market might not occur until 2027.

The Jun readings show a sequentially more negative picture regarding sentiment in the industry vs. May, supporting our cautious view about the potential recovery in the global luxury market in 2025, as we believe it may take until 2027 for the sector's momentum to meaningfully re-accelerate.-Pusz

With secondary market prices for timepieces having already fallen sharply in recent years, as per Bloomberg Sundial data below, perhaps conditions may soon be ripe for contrarian investors to begin bottom-fishing Rolexes. 

Used Rolex prices are unlikely to rebound meaningfully until the Federal Reserve initiates an interest rate-cutting cycle (and price rebound could occur in the form of a lag).

According to Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson, that easing cycle could begin as early as next year, with the potential for at least seven rate cuts.

If realized, this shift in monetary policy could provide a supportive backdrop for risk assets—including stocks and also luxury watches—heading into the second half of 2025.

Still, UBS's Zuzanna Pusz emphasized that both the watch segment and the broader luxury market remain on shaky ground, reiterating that any "momentum to meaningfully re-accelerate" is unlikely before 2027.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 05:45

How The IMF Prevents Global Bitcoin Adoption (And Why They Do It)

Authored by Daniel Batten via BitcoinMagazine.com,

The Global Pattern

In recent years the IMF has:

• Successfully pressured El Salvador to (de facto) drop Bitcoin as legal tender, and rollback other Bitcoin policies

• Successfully pressured CAR’s 2023 Bitcoin repeal through regional banking bodies

• Been responsible for the lack of follow through from Bitcoin campaign rhetoric to action from Milei in Argentina.

• Cited “serious concerns” with Pakistan’s Bitcoin plans

• Consistently framed crypto as a “risk” in loan negotiations

Here’s a summary

 

As we can see, the only nations that were able to resist IMF pressure were El Salvador, prior to gaining an IMF loan, and Bhutan which does not have an IMF loan. 

Each country with an IMF loan who has adopted, or attempted to adopt Bitcoin at a nation-state level has been successfully thwarted, or largely thwarted by the IMF. 

How is it that the IMF has been so successful in preventing global nation state adoption, with the exception of Bhutan, and why do they aggressively move to prevent it?

In this detailed report we do a deep-dive into each of the three nations where the IMF has successfully pushed back against Bitcoin adoption, and the signs that it is likely to be successful achieving the same result with Pakistan. 

In the last section of this report, we look at the IMFs five reasons to fear Bitcoin, and how Bitcoin is still thriving from a grassroots level despite top-down Bitcoin abandonment, or partial abandonment, by various nation states.

1. Central African Republic: When Colonial Money Met Digital Hope

The Central African Republic (CAR) uses the CFA franc. The CFA isn’t just currency—it’s a geopolitical chain, backed by France and governed by the Bank of Central African States (BEAC). Of its 14 member nations, the 6 Central African nations (including CAR) must still deposit 50% of foreign reserves in Paris.

This control over reserves fosters economic dependency, while establishing export markets for French goods at favorable terms. In 1994 for example, the CFA was devalued by half, a policy that was influenced by Western pressure, particularly from the IMF. This caused the cost of imports to leap, leading to exporters (mainly EU based) being able to procure resources from CFA nations at half the cost. Locally the impact was devastating, leading to wage freezes, layoffs, and widespread social unrest across CFA countries.

When the Central African Republic (CAR) announced in 2022 it was adopting Bitcoin as legal tender, BEAC and its regulatory arm COBAC immediately voided the law, citing violations of the CEMAC Treaty; The treaty which established the economic and monetary community of Central Africa. This wasn’t bureaucracy—it was a warning shot from the monetary guardians of la Françafrique.

Why it mattered: To this day, CAR’s economy relies heavily on IMF bailouts. With $1.7Billion in external debt (61% of GDP), defying BEAC meant risking financial isolation.

The IMF’s Silent Campaign

The IMF moved fast. Within two weeks (May 4, 2022), it publicly condemned CAR’s “risky experiment,” citing legal contradictions with CEMAC’s crypto ban. The move raised “major legal, transparency, and economic policy challenges,” the IMF said, that were similar to the concerns the IMF raised about El Salvador’s Bitcoin adoption: risks to financial stability, consumer protection, and fiscal liabilities. (For context, none of those risks materialized in El Salvador).

But their real weapon was leverage. As CAR’s largest creditor, the IMF tied its new Extended Credit Facility (ECF)—a $191M lifeline—to policy compliance.

The Timeline That Tells All

This table traces the IMF’s shadow campaign:

Key to scuttling CAR’s Bitcoin ambitions was ensuring that the Sango project — a blockchain-hub initiative from the CAR government to sell “e-residency” and citizenship for $60K in Bitcoin — did not proceed.

The Sango Project – coincidence or collusion?

In July 2022, CAR launched the Sango Project. It aimed to raise $2.5B (100% of GDP).

It failed catastrophically. By January 2023, only $2M (0.2% of target) was raised. While IMF reports cite “Technical obstacles with 10% internet penetration” as the reason for the failure, our analysis shows a different picture. Two factors scuttled the project.

1. Investor flight
2. A CAR Supreme Court ruling formally blocked the Sango project

However, on closer examination, both of these factors hint at IMF involvement.

Let’s take a closer look at the evidence.

Investor Flight

The IMF’s role in this investor flight is circumstantial but compelling. On May 4, 2022, the IMF expressed concerns about CAR’s bitcoin adoption, stating it raised major legal, transparency, and economic policy challenges. This statement, made before the Sango Project launch, highlighted risks to financial stability and regional economic integration, potentially deterring investors. Further, in July 2022, during a staff visit for the Staff-Monitored Program (SMP) review, the IMF noted “economic downturns due to rising food and fuel prices”, which could have compounded investor caution. Reports also mention that the IMF and COBAC warned of inherent risks in CAR’s crypto move, adding to the skepticism.

The timing of these IMF statements aligns with the observed investor flight, suggesting that their cautionary stance may have influenced perceptions. While circumstantial, the sequence of events suggests IMF influence as a respected financial institution in the investor community likely played a role in investor flight.

Supreme Court Ruling

On the surface, the Supreme Court ruling looks like an independent event, until we dig beneath the surface and find big question-marks over the independence of CAR’s judiciary, a country that itself ranks 149/180 on its Corruption Perception Index (extremely low).

As mentioned, one week after CAR announced its Bitcoin strategy, the IMF reported “concerns”, including risks to financial stability, transparency, anti-money laundering efforts, and challenges in managing macroeconomic policies due to the volatility. (Bloomberg, 4 May, 2022)

On 29 Aug 2022, 117 days later, the Supreme Court of CAR ruled that the Sango project was illegal. For context, the Supreme Court which forms part of CAR’s judiciary is described by international transparency bodies such as Gan Integrity as one of the most corrupt institutions in the country, with evidence pointing to inefficiency, political interference, and likely influence from bribes or political pressure.

The Sango project’s collapse became the IMF’s Exhibit A: “Proof Bitcoin can’t work in fragile economies.” But the reality was, the IMF’s consistent expression of “concerns” created the environment where the project was structurally undermined in advance, so that this conclusion became possible.

5,200 miles away, in the small nation of Bhutan we see the stark contrast of the successful Bitcoin rollout that was possible without IMF’s “involvement”.

The Unspoken Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Resilience Beyond Borders

CAR’s reversal wasn’t about Bitcoin’s viability. It was about raw power. The IMF weaponized regional banking unions (CEMAC), starved CAR of capital, and leveraged a $191M loan to extinguish the threat of financial sovereignty. When the Sango Project struggled—the trap snapped shut.

Yet this defeat reveals Bitcoin’s enduring power. Notice what the IMF didn’t destroy:

• Nigeria’s Bitcoin remittances still bypass dollar corridors, saving millions in fees.

• Kenya’s BTC-powered trade flourishes without IMF approval.

• El Salvador keeps stacking BTC despite 221 mentions of Bitcoin in loan conditions

The pattern is clear: Where grassroots adoption takes root—Bitcoin survives. But for countries announcing top-down Bitcoin manifestos who have large IMF loans, all 4 have met with crushing levels of resistance: El Salvador, CAR, Argentina and now Pakistan.

CAR’s outstanding $115.1 million IMF loan balance made it vulnerable to heavy IMF pressure. In nations without IMF loans such as Bhutan, Bitcoin slips through the IMF’s grip. Every peer-to-peer payment, every Lightning transaction, erodes the old system’s foundations.

The IMF won the CAR round. But the global fight for financial sovereignty is just beginning.

2. Argentina’s $45 Billion Bitcoin Adoption Roadblock

If CAR was thwarted in its Bitcoin plans, Argentina never made it to the start line. Precampaign rhetoric from President Milei suggested big things were in store for Bitcoin. Yet nothing materialized. Was this just a politician’s rhetoric fizzling out post-election, or was something else at play? This section pulls back the lid on what really happened to Argentina’s aborted Bitcoin aspirations.

Understanding how Bitcoin adoption is going, is like assessing whether a rocket is going to reach escape velocity: we must look at both the thrust and drag factors.

I’m an optimist: I believe Bitcoin will win: it is so clearly a better solution to the broken money legacy system we currently have. But I’m also a realist: I think most people underestimate the strength of entrenched forces which oppose Bitcoin.

When I was running my tech company, we encountered the same thing. Our technology was 10x better, faster and more cost effective than the legacy system we eventually replaced. But they didn’t relinquish their incumbent monopoly easily!

What happened in Argentina?

When libertarian Javier Milei was elected Argentina’s president in November 2023, many Bitcoin advocates cheered. Here was a leader who called central bankers “scammers,” vowed to abolish Argentina’s central bank (BCRA), and praised Bitcoin as “the natural reaction against Central Bank scammers.” The case became a litmus test for whether Bitcoin could gain mainstream acceptance through government adoption rather than grassroots growth.

Source: Coinsprout. 14 Aug 2023

Yet eighteen months into his presidency, Milei’s Bitcoin vision remains unfulfilled. The reason? A $45 billion leash held by the International Monetary Fund.

The IMF’s Bitcoin Veto in Argentina

The constraints had already been put in place by the time of Milei’s election. On 3 March, 2022, Argentina’s previous government signed a $45 billion IMF bailout agreement. In the weeks following, details emerged that the agreement had contained an unusual clause: a requirement to “discourage cryptocurrency use.” This wasn’t a suggestion—it was a loan condition documented in the IMF’s Letter of Intent, citing concerns about “financial disintermediation.”

The immediate effect:

• Argentina’s central bank banned financial institutions from crypto transactions (BCRA Communication A 7506, May 2022)

• The policy remains enforced under Milei, despite his pro-Bitcoin rhetoric

Milei’s Pivot

After taking office, Milei:

✔ Slashed inflation from 25% monthly to under 5% (May 2024)
✔ Lifted currency controls (April 2025)
✔ Secured a new $20 billion IMF deal (April 2025)

But his manifesto’s flagship proposals—Bitcoin adoption and abolition of BCRA (Argentina’s Central Bank) — are conspicuously absent. The math explains why: Argentina owes the IMF more than any other nation, giving the Fund unparalleled leverage.

Yet there’s irony in Argentina’s case: while the IMF blocks official Bitcoin adoption, Argentinians are embracing Bitcoin anyway. Cryptocurrency ownership grew by 116.5% between 2023-2024 in South America.

Across the region, Argentina has the highest ownership rates, at 18.9%, a figure almost 3 times the global average, and which has surged as citizens hedge against high annual inflation of 47.3% (April 2025) — a quiet rebellion the IMF can’t control.

.

What Comes Next?

All eyes are on the October 2025 mid-term elections. If Milei gains legislative support, he may test the IMF’s red lines. But for now, the lesson is clear: when nations borrow from the IMF, their monetary sovereignty comes with strings attached.

Key Takeaways

• The IMF’s 2022 loan explicitly tied Argentina’s bailout to anti-crypto policies

• Milei has prioritized economic stabilization over Bitcoin advocacy, to maintain IMF support

• Parallels exist in El Salvador, CAR and now Pakistan revealing a consistent IMF playbook

• Argentinians are circumventing restrictions through grassroots Bitcoin adoption

3. El Salvador: A partial IMF-victory

When El Salvador made Bitcoin legal tender in 2021, it wasn’t just adopting a cryptocurrency—it was declaring financial independence. President Nayib Bukele framed it as a rebellion against dollar dominance and a lifeline for the unbanked. Three years later, that rebellion hit a $1.4 billion roadblock: the IMF.

The Price of the Bailout

To secure its 2024 loan, El Salvador agreed to dismantle key pillars of its Bitcoin policy. The conditions reveal a systematic unwinding:

1. Voluntary Acceptance Only
   Businesses are no longer required to accept Bitcoin (2021 mandate repealed). source

2. Public Sector Ban
   Government entities prohibited from Bitcoin transactions or debt issuance. This includes bans on tokenized instruments tied to Bitcoin. source

3. Bitcoin Accumulation Freeze
   All government purchases halted (6,000+ BTC reserve now frozen)
   Full audit of holdings (Chivo wallet, Bitcoin Office) by March 2025. source

4. Trust Fund Liquidation
   Fidebitcoin (conversion fund) to be dissolved with audited transparency. source

5. Chivo Wallet Phaseout
   The $30 incentive program winds down after surveys showed most users traded BTC for USD. source

6. Tax Payment Rollback
   USD becomes the sole option for taxes, eliminating Bitcoin’s utility as sovereign payment. source

Bukele’s Calculated Retreat

El Salvador’s compliance makes fiscal sense:

• The loan stabilizes debt (84% of GDP) as bond payments loom
• Dollarization remains intact (USD still primary currency)

Yet the backtrack is striking given Bukele’s 2021 rhetoric. The Chivo wallet’s low uptake  likely made concessions easier.

What’s Left of the Experiment?

The IMF hasn’t killed Bitcoin in El Salvador—just official adoption. Grassroots use persists:

• Bitcoin Beach (local circular economy) still operates, in fact thrives
• Tourism draws increasing numbers of Bitcoin enthusiasts

But without state support, Bitcoin’s role potentially shrinks to a niche tool rather than a monetary revolution, at least in the short term.

The Road Ahead

Two scenarios emerge:

1. Slow Fade: Bitcoin becomes a tourist curiosity as IMF conditions take full effect
2. Shadow Revival: Private sector keeps it alive despite government retreat

One thing’s clear: when the IMF writes the checks, it also writes the rules.

Key Takeaways

• IMF loan forced El Salvador to reverse 6 key Bitcoin policies
• Precedent set for other nations seeking IMF support
• Grassroots Bitcoin use may outlast government involvement

El Salvador made a lot of Bitcoin concessions. While arguably this doesn’t hurt El Salvador much, it sends a strong message to other LATAM nations such as Ecuador and Guatemala who were watching El Salvador and thinking of copying their playbook (until they checked the size of the IMF loan they had). So on net balance it was a partial IMF win, a partial El Salvador win. 

4. Bhutan: the IMF-free success story

We are now 2 years into Bhutan’s Bitcoin experiment. 

That means we now have some good data on how it has affected the economy. 

The IMF warned that nations embracing Bitcoin would destabilize their economy, be less effective at attracting foreign direct investment, and endanger their decarbonizing and environmental initiatives. It specifically voiced concerns over Bhutan’s “lack of transparency” with crypto-adoption.

What does the data say?

1. The bitcoin reserves have directly addressed pressing fiscal needs. “In June 2023, Bhutan allocated $72 million from its holdings to finance a 50% salary increase for civil servants”

2. Bhutan was able to “use Bitcoin reserves to avert a crisis as foreign currency reserves dwindled to $689 million”

3. Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay in an interview said that bitcoin also “supports free healthcare and environmental projects”

4. Tobgay also said their Bitcoin reserves helped in “stabilizing [the nation’s] $3.5 billion economy”

5. Independent analysts have now said that “this model could attract foreign investment, particularly for nations with untapped renewable resources”

Considering how the IMF analysis was not just wrong, but roughly 180° off target, it begs the question, were the IMF’s predictions ever based on data? 

5. Five reasons the IMF may fear Bitcoin

“Get all your friends, libertarians, democrats, republicans, get everyone to buy Bitcoin – and then it becomes democratized.” encouraged John Perkins ~ Bitcoin 2025

What if the IMF’s greatest fear isn’t inflation… but Bitcoin, and can Bitcoin Break the IMF/World Bank Debt Grip?

During my recent conversation with John Perkins (Confessions of an Economic Hit Man), something clicked. Alex Gladstein previously and brutally exposed how IMF “structural adjustments” did not eliminate poverty, but in fact enriched creditor nations. Perkins layered this with his own first-hand accounts. 

Perkins laid bare to me how the Global South is trapped in a cycle of debt—one designed to keep wealth flowing West. But here’s the twist: Bitcoin is already dismantling the playbook in five key ways.

1. Reducing Remittance Costs to Loosen the Debt Noose

Chris Collins’ Sculpture symbolically captures the debt noose

Remittances—money sent home by migrant workers—often make up a significant part of developing nations’ GDP. Traditional intermediaries such as Western Union charge fees as high as 5–10%. This acts as a hidden tax that drains foreign reserves. For countries like El Salvador or Nigeria, every remittance dollar that doesn’t flow into the country is a dollar their central bank must store to stabilize their currencies. Often this store of US dollars is provided by the IMF.

Bitcoin Changes the Game

With Lightning, fees drop to almost zero, and transactions settle in seconds. In 2021, El Salvador’s president Bukele optimistically predicted that bitcoin could save $400 Million in remittance payments. The reality has been there’s little evidence remittance payments using bitcoin have reached anywhere near that threshold. However the potential is clear: more remittances in bitcoin leads to higher dollar reserves, which leads to less need for IMF loans.

Little wonder the IMF mentioned Bitcoin 221 times in their 2025 loan conditions for El Salvador. They’d like to remain a relevant lender.

Bitcoin isn’t just cheaper for remittances—it bypasses the dollar system entirely. In Nigeria, where the naira struggles, families now hold BTC as a harder asset than local currency. No need for central banks to burn through dollar reserves. No desperate IMF bailouts.

The numbers speak for themselves:

• Pakistan loses $1.8 billion yearly on remittance fees—Bitcoin could save most of that
• El Salvador already saves $4M+ annually with just 1.1% Bitcoin remittance adoption

Adoption isn’t universal yet—only 12% of Salvadorans use Bitcoin regularly, while over 5% of Nigeria’s remittances flow through crypto. But the trend is clear: every Bitcoin transfer weakens the debt dependency cycle.

The IMF sees the threat. The question is: how fast will this silent revolution spread?”

Remittances totaled almost $21 billion in 2024, representing over 4% of Nigeria’s GDP

2. Evading Sanctions and Trade Barriers

Oil-rich Iran, Venezuela and Russia have had restricted USD access due to US sanctions in 1979, 2017 and 2022 respectively, resulting in the export of vastly fewer barrels per day of oil in each case.

Whether we agree with the ideologies of these nations or not, Bitcoin breaks this cycle. Iran already evades sanctions by using Bitcoin as a way to effectively “export oil”, whereas Venezuela has used Bitcoin to pay for imports, evading sanctions.

Iran is also able to bypass sanctions by monetizing its energy exports through mining. This avoids the IMF’s “reform-for-cash” ultimatums while keeping economies running.

The petrodollar’s grip weakens as Russia and Iran pioneer Bitcoin oil deals.

Another nation that has used Bitcoin to avoid the economic hardship caused by sanctions is Afghanistan, where humanitarian aid flows through using Bitcoin. NGOs like Code to Inspire bypassed Taliban banking freezes, and Digital Citizen Fund have used Bitcoin to deliver aid post-Taliban takeover, preventing families from starving.

Afghanistan’s “Code to Inspire” NGO uses Bitcoin donations, which cannot be intercepted by the Taliban, to train women to write software.

Though Bitcoin’s share of sanctioned trade is small—under 2% for Iran and Venezuela’s oil exports—the trend is growing.

Sanctions are a critical tool for geopolitical leverage, often supported by the IMF and World Bank through their alignment with major economies like the U.S. Sanctioned nations using Bitcoin reduces IMF control over financial flows while simultaneously threatening U.S. dollar dominance.

3. Using Bitcoin as a Nation State Inflation Shield

When nations like Argentina face hyperinflation, they borrow USD from the IMF to bolster currency reserves and stabilize their currency, only to face austerity or the enforced sale of strategic assets at a low price when repayments falter. Bitcoin offers a way out by acting as a global, non-inflatable currency that operates independently of government oversight, and which appreciates in value.

El Salvador’s experiment shows how Bitcoin can reduce dollar dependency. By holding BTC, nations can hedge against currency collapse without IMF loans. If Argentina had allocated just 1% of its reserves to Bitcoin in 2018, it could’ve offset the peso’s 90%+ devaluation that year, sidestepping an IMF bailout. Bitcoin’s neutrality also means no single entity can impose conditions, unlike IMF loans that demand privatization or unpopular reforms.

Bitcoin doesn’t have debt-leverage or a long history of the IMF to draw on when encouraging adoption. However, due to the Lindy Effect (see chart below), each passing year Bitcoin becomes a more viable alternative.

Lindy Effect: The longer something has been successful, the more likely it is to continue being successful. Bitcoin’s longevity strengthens its potential to disrupt

4. Bitcoin Mining: Turning Energy into Debt-Free Wealth

Many developing nations are energy-rich but debt-poor, trapped by IMF loans for infrastructure like dams or power plants. These loans demand cheap energy exports or resource concessions when defaults hit. Bitcoin mining flips this script by turning stranded energy—like flared gas or overflow hydro—into liquid wealth without middlemen or transport costs.

Paraguay’s earning $50 million yearly from hydro-powered mining, covering 5% of its trade deficit. Ethiopia made $55 million in 10 months. Bhutan’s the standout: with 1.1 billion in Bitcoin (36% of its $3.02 billion GDP), its hydro-powered mining could produce $1.25 billion annually by mid-2025, servicing its $403 million World Bank and $527 million ADB debts without austerity or privatization. Unlike IMF loans, mined Bitcoin appreciates in value and can be used as collateral for non-IMF borrowing. This model—monetizing energy without surrendering assets—scares the IMF, as it cuts their leverage over the energy sector.

Bhutan’s Prime Minister, Tshering Tobgay, calls Bitcoin a “strategic choice to prevent brain drain”

5. Grassroots Bitcoin Economies: Power from the Ground Up

Bitcoin is not just for nations—it’s for communities. In places like El Salvador’s Bitcoin Beach or South Africa’s Bitcoin Ekasi, locals already use BTC for daily transactions, savings, and community projects like schools or clinics. These circular economies, often sparked by philanthropy, aim for self-sufficiency. In Argentina, where inflation often tops 100%, 21% of people used crypto by 2021 to protect wealth. If scaled up, these models could reduce reliance on national debt-funded programs, which is of course the last thing the IMF want.

Hermann Vivier, founder of Bitcoin Ekasi, says his community was inspired by El Salvador’s Bitcoin Beach to replicate their Bitcoin circular economy in S.Africa

Conclusion 

By fostering local resilience, Bitcoin undermines the IMF’s “crisis leverage”. Thriving communities don’t need bailouts, so the IMF can’t demand privatization in exchange for loans. In Africa, projects like Gridless Energy’s – which has already brought 28,000 rural Africans out of energy poverty using renewable microgrids tied to Bitcoin mining – cut the need for IMF-backed mega-projects. If thousands of towns adopt this, dollar shortages would matter less, and trade could bypass USD systems. 

While the IMF occasionally engages in spreading misinformation about Bitcoin energy consumption and environmental impact as a way to obstruct adoption, its preferred and much more powerful tool is simply to use the financial leverage it has over IMF-indebted nations to “strongly encourage” compliance with its Bitcoinless vision of the future. 

The IMF fought Bitcoin adoption in El Salvador, CAR, and Argentina. Now they are fighting Pakistan’s intention to mine Bitcoin as a Nation State. Scaling these grassroots efforts is likely to force the IMF’s hand to crack down more and more transparently.

Above: Children from South Africa’s poorest villages learn to surf via the Bitcoin Ekasi township project

Grassroots Bitcoin economies empower communities to thrive without IMF bailouts. And people-power is needed to find new innovative ways to overcome the IMF’s counterpunch. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 05:00

British MPs Invite Deposed Shah's Son To Promote Iran Regime Change In Parliament

Via Middle East Eye

The son of Iran's ousted shah is giving an address to British MPs in the UK parliament on Monday, numerous sources within parliament and the Labor Party have told Middle East Eye. 

According to an invitation to the event seen by MEE, Pahlavi is set to brief MPs and peers on "the ongoing situation in Iran and his plan for the collapse of the current regime and for a stable transition to a secular democracy".

AFP: Reza Pahlavi, son of Iran’s deposed last shah, speaks at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California, on 22 October 2024

The event was set for 5pm in a committee room in parliament and is co-hosted by Labour MP Luke Akehurst and Conservative MP Aphra Brandreth.

Akehurst told MEE: "It is for the Iranian people to decide what type of government they want, but clearly MPs are going to be interested in hearing what different opposition voices have got to say about the future of such an important country." MEE also contacted Brandreth for comment.

Referred to among his supporters as a "king in exile", Reza Pahlavi, 64, is the eldest son of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the late shah of Iran, who was toppled during the 1977-1979 popular uprising that led to the establishment of the Islamic Republic as we now know it. 

Ali Milani, chair of the Labor Muslim Network, told MEE that the planned event in the UK parliament is a "slap in the face of every Iranian fighting for freedom and justice".

Milani said that Pahlavi "has spent an entire career in exile refusing to condemn his father's oppressive regime."

He added: "Countless Iranians were disappeared, tortured and murdered at the hands of his father's secret police, which he has never properly acknowledged. "Leadership for the people of Iran must come from Iranians themselves on the ground. They deserve real freedom and prosperity."

As a staunch defender of a US-backed monarchy that he hopes to bring back to Iran, Pahlavi has made several visits to Israel, taken photographs with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and cast himself as the only viable leader of a modern Iran if the Islamic Republic collapses.

On June 16, during the recent hostilities between Israel and Iran, Pahlavi said that "the root cause of the problem has been the regime and its nature, and the only solution, ultimately, that will benefit both the Iranian people as well as the free world is for this regime to no longer be there".

Responding to Pahlavi's comments, Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif made headlines by calling the shah's son a "bloody parasitical imperial whore".

The last Shah of Iran

"If Iranian people are energized and motivated according to you," Asif said in a post on social media platform X, "show some balls and go back and lead them and remove the regime."

'Important message from Reza Pahlavi'

Labor MP Akehurst, who was first elected last July, described a June 14 video address by Pahlavi calling for regime change as an "important message from Reza Pahlavi about backing the Iranian people".

In 2021, Akehurst was asked if he regarded the UN as antisemitic because the Security Council, of which Britain is a member, ruled that "Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity". Akehurst answered: "Yes."

In November 2023, he said that the "major West Bank settlement blocks" should become part of Israel as part of a land exchange with Palestine, adding that he wants the Golan Heights "to remain part of Israel". 

The establishment and expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, according to a recent UN report, amount to a war crime. Before becoming an MP, Akehurst was also once photographed wearing a T-shirt describing himself as a "Zionist shitlord".

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/01/2025 - 02:00

The Future Of Strategic Arms Control Is Dim Due To The Ukrainian Conflict & The Golden Dome

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

There’ll likely be a much greater potential for future conflict, including between Great Powers by proxy...

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov shared some insight into his country’s thinking the future of strategic arms control in an interview with TASS in early June. He began by clarifying that Ukraine’s strategic drone strikes in early June didn’t destroy any planes, it only damaged them, and they’ll all be restored. He then revealed that the Americans were asked “why do you allow yourself to provide the criminals with the relevant data, without which nothing like this could have happened”?

Rybakov didn’t share the answer that they gave his side, but he soon thereafter claimed that “Brussels ‘strategists’ are not giving up their attempts to convince US President Donald Trump to return to the policy pursued by his predecessor. And that policy implied unconditional support for Ukraine and further escalation.” This suggests Russian suspicion that the Trump Administration might be partially influenced by their pressure campaign, and that could account for why it gave Ukraine the data for those attacks.

He was very careful not to accuse Trump himself of any foul play, instead reaffirming that his position towards the Ukrainian Conflict “has become a reason for cautious optimism”, so Russia might have concluded or been convinced by the US that Biden-era officials are to blame for that provocation. In any case, without a normalization of their relations, which requires ending NATO expansion and resolving the aforesaid conflict in a way that resolves its root issues, strategic arms control talks can’t be resumed.

Additionally, Trump’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative (previously known as the Iron Dome just like Israel’s) greatly complicates any such talks even in the unlikely event that they’re resumed, which is due to it militarizing space and turning it into an arena of armed confrontation in Ryabkov’s words. The joint Sino-Russo “Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space” (PAROS) draft treaty could help manage these risks, but the US isn’t interested in discussing it, which could make a new space race inevitable.

Ryabkov elaborated that the Trump Administration denies the interrelationship between strategic offensive and strategic defense weapons while also refusing to return to the New START’s fundamental concept of equal and indivisible security. Accordingly, “There are no grounds for a full-scale resumption of the New START Treaty in the current circumstances. And given that the treaty ends its life cycle in about 8 months, talking about the feasibility of such a scenario is increasingly losing its meaning.”

He declined to speculate on what might replace it or what the world would look like without strategic arms control between its top two nuclear powers, but the overall mood of his interview is morose, with him lamenting the future that might soon unfold upon the New START’s expiry next February. As an old-school diplomat who’s invested considerable time in strategic arms negotiations with the US since entering into his position almost 17 years ago, it clearly pains him to see the end of this era.

Looking forward, Russia will ensure its national security interests, but the rapid evolution of military technologies such as first-person view drones, increasingly audacious attacks like Kiev’s recent ones, and Trump’s Golden Dome is transforming this sphere.

That’s not to say that strategic arms control is useless, but just that even the best agreements are no longer as relevant as before for maintaining international stability, which raises the potential for future conflict, including between Great Powers by proxy.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 23:25

Ultra-Processed Foods Linked To Brain Changes That Drive Overeating

Authored by George Citroner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Ultra-processed foods (UPF) may be literally rewiring your brain to make you overeat, according to research that examined brain scans from nearly 30,000 middle-aged adults and found structural changes in regions that control hunger and food cravings.

beauty-box/Shutterstock

“We present evidence that eating UPFs increases several nutrient and metabolic markers of disease and is associated with structural brain changes in areas that regulate eating behavior,” the study authors wrote.

Key Brain Changes Identified

The research, recently published in Nature, found that people who consumed more UPFs showed measurable differences in brain areas involved in feeding behavior, emotion, and motivation.

Higher UPF intake was linked to increased thickness in the bilateral lateral occipital cortex—a brain region crucial for visual object recognition and processing shapes. This finding suggests changes in how the brain processes visual food cues.

“Our findings indicate that a high consumption of ultra-processed foods is associated with structural changes in brain regions regulating eating behaviour, such as the hypothalamus, amygdala and right nucleus accumbens. This may lead to a cycle of overeating,” Arsène Kanyamibwa, the study’s first author and doctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki, said in a press statement.

The study also uncovered a potential biological mechanism behind these brain changes. Researchers found that increased UPF intake was associated with higher levels of systemic inflammation and risky metabolic markers in the blood, including C-reactive protein (CRP), an indicator of inflammation; triglycerides; and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). High levels of CRP, triglycerides, and HbA1c are often considered concerning indicators of potential health issues.

Unsurprising Findings, Expert Says

The findings “don’t surprise me one bit,” said Dr. Joseph Mercola, a board-certified family physician and author of “Your Guide to Cellular Health,” who was not involved in the study.

He pointed to previous research showing that just five days of eating ultra-processed foods can “short-circuit” insulin signaling in the brain. This matters because insulin isn’t only a blood sugar hormone, he noted. “It’s literally the delivery service that shuttles glucose, your cells’ preferred fuel, to where it’s needed most—your brain.”

The brain needs insulin for energy—it uses 20 percent of the body’s energy despite making up just 2 percent of its weight—so when insulin can’t do its job, the brain’s appetite control centers run on fumes, Mercola said.

UPFs are designed to be “hyper-palatable“ with combinations of sugar, fat, and salt that rapidly stimulate dopamine-driven reward pathways, encouraging repeated consumption.

Mercola added that this breakdown wrecks our ability to feel full, curb cravings, and make solid dietary decisions. “On top of that, ultra-processed foods light up dopamine pathways much like addictive drugs, creating powerful ‘eat more’ signals.”

Direct Brain Effects

The researchers noted that UPFs, which contain chemically modified ingredients and additives like emulsifiers, might change the brain through pathways independent of obesity. Emulsifiers may affect the brain by disrupting neurotransmitters, causing neuroinflammation, and altering gut microbiota.

The study controlled for factors including nutrient content, socioeconomic status, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol use.

The finding challenges the idea that obesity is just about eating too many calories, Avery Zenker, a registered dietitian at MyHealthTeam and EverFlex Fitness who holds a master’s degree in nutrition and was not involved in the study, told The Epoch Times. The study highlights how additives and food processing affect the brain in a way that promotes overeating.

“A calorie is a calorie, but the type of food it’s sourced from plays a significant role in how we eat and how much we eat,” Zenker said. “I think it’s also validating for people to hear that, if they feel out of control around ultra-processed foods, there’s nothing wrong with them.”

Ultra-processed foods are defined by the NOVA classification system as industrial formulations containing ingredients not typically used in home cooking, such as high-fructose corn syrup, oils, salt, stabilizers, antioxidants, and various chemical additives.

Growing Body of Evidence

The researchers note that their findings, in addition to previous studies, suggest it’s time for regulatory action.

One of these studies, involving more than 114,000 American adults and published last year in The BMJ, found UPF consumption—specifically processed meats, sugary breakfast foods, and sugar or artificially sweetened beverages—was linked to a 4 percent higher risk of all-cause mortality and an 8 percent higher risk of death from neurodegenerative diseases.

“Given the growing body of evidence, reducing ultra-processed food intake and strengthening regulatory standards in food manufacturing may be crucial steps toward ensuring better public health outcomes,” Kanyamibwa said.

Zenker said the new study is consistent with much of the existing research on ultra-processed foods.

“While past research has consistently linked UPFs to health conditions like obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease,” she said, “This study goes further by exploring direct structural changes in the brain, particularly in regions related to reward, hunger, and self-regulation.”

Zenker noted that UPFs are often high in sugar, sodium, fat, and carbohydrates, and low in vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants. “We know that this combination tends to be associated with unfavorable health outcomes.”

The researchers acknowledged limitations in their study, noting that while they found associations between UPF consumption and brain changes, they cannot definitively prove causation. The effect sizes were also relatively small.

“Given the observational nature of the study, we cannot exclude the fact that food processing is only part of the equation,” the study authors wrote. Kanyamibwa said that proving causation will require “further longitudinal or experimental evidence.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 20:55

From Matthew Graham at Mortgage News Daily: Mortgage Rates Take Another Step Toward April Lows

April 3rd and 4th saw the average top tier 30yr fixed mortgage rates well into the "mid 6's." Many lenders were able to quote 6.5% at the time. Just a few days ago, we noted there was still a ways to go before breaking below those early April levels, but the past few days have taken us within striking distance. [30 year fixed 6.67%]
emphasis added

Tuesday:
• At 9:30 AM ET, Discussion, Fed Chair Jerome Powell, Policy Panel Discussion, At the European Central Bank Forum on Central Banking 2025, Sintra, Portugal

• At 10:00 AM, ISM Manufacturing Index for June. The consensus is for the ISM to be at 48.8, up from 48.5 in May. 

• At 10:00 AM, Construction Spending for May. The consensus is for a 0.1% decrease in construction spending.

• At 10:00 AM, Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey for May from the BLS.

• Late in the day, Light vehicle sales for June. The consensus is for light vehicle sales to be 15.5 million SAAR in June, down from 15.6 million in May (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate).

The Future Of Crypto Equity Wrappers

Authored by Omid Malekan,

Co-authored with Frank Cavallo of Motus Capital Management

Crypto treasury companies such as Strategy are all the rage right now. Seemingly not a day goes by without an announcement of yet another public vehicle whose primary purpose is to provide cryptocurrency exposure inside an equity wrapper. While there are benefits to this design, some of these companies lack a unique value proposition and are indistinguishable from each other. Their stocks might not attract a premium during a bear market.

A better approach is to offer a crypto ecosystem company, one that offers comprehensive exposure to the different facets of a specific blockchain by combining operating businesses with targeted and fluid investments. Whereas treasury companies are ultimately little more than crypto market beta, an ecosystem company can provide alpha.

Background

In retrospect, the equity markets and cryptocurrencies were always destined for each other. The stock market is large, liquid, and broadly accessible. Crypto is none of these things, but is an exciting new asset class with greater upside potential. Thus the appeal of putting a long crypto strategy inside a public company wrapper, particularly in markets without cryptocurrency ETFs.

Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) has executed the plan successfully. It currently holds almost 3 percent of all Bitcoin and trades at over 1.5x times the value of its Bitcoin holdings. As the first — and by far largest — Bitcoin treasury company, it has enjoyed a significant first-mover advantage. Its stock is highly liquid, accessible to institutions and retail investors on countless platforms, and now part of the prestigious NASDAQ 100. That liquidity — along with the premium to its NAV — allows it to keep issuing more shares to buy more Bitcoin. Strategy has also pioneered the use of convertible notes to extend its reach (and exposure to Bitcoin) to the debt market.

Compared to owning Bitcoin outright, the benefits of investing in a Bitcoin treasury company include:

• Simplification of dealing with crypto custody, tax treatment, and reporting

• Getting crypto exposure via equity market infrastructure (custodians, prime brokers, etc.)

• Accessibility by a wide range of accounts and investor types (retirement plans, RIAs, etc.)

• Better tax treatment of equities over spot crypto in certain countries

• Access to a more liquid options market than that of spot BTC

• Investment mandate arbitrage via issuance of convertible senior notes

• Monetization of flexible capital stacks for leverage

Many of these advantages are also provided by spot Bitcoin ETFs, with the added benefit of lower fees and cleaner pass-through structures. Others will be eliminated by greater maturation of the spot Bitcoin markets or new laws that eliminate regulatory loopholes.

The most likely driver of Strategy’s premium to NAV is the market perception that friendly debt markets will allow it to keep acquiring more Bitcoin without dilution. But there’s no guarantee debt demand will continue, and it can always reverse to due market saturation or a bear market. The inability to refinance could lead to existing debt holders being repaid via newly issued equity, forcing dilution at the worst possible time.

This is not to say NAV discounts are imminent or argue that companies shouldn’t engage in leverage, but rather to point out that treasury operations alone won’t necessarily command NAV premiums, therefore crypto equities should look to additional value propositions.

A More Sustainable Approach

One way to distinguish a crypto treasury company is to focus on alt coins that don’t have ETFs. Such a stock would be particularly appealing if the underlying asset is one that doesn’t yet have a liquid spot market. If it’s a coin that can be staked, the treasury company could do so to earn yield with minimal counterparty risk.

But simply buying and holding such a coin might not be enough to distinguish a treasury company as more ETFs come online — including ones that stake. Access advantages diminish as overall access grows.

A more lasting strategy is to turn the treasury company into an ecosystem play, one that represents an all-inclusive bet on an entire blockchain and whatever yield opportunities it presents, now and in the future.

Ecosystem companies can be deployed for any coin, even Bitcoin. They can offer a more comprehensive and diversified exposure to a platform and handle the operational complexity of deploying capital on a new chain. The larger surface area of activity also allows managers to distinguish themselves from competitors who focus on the same ecosystem.

Other advantages of being an ecosystem company include:

• Running operating businesses dedicated to a single chain, such as running validators, offering delegated staking, and launching an L2

• Going beyond simple staking to utilize liquid staking and restaking

• Participating in DeFi and yield farming opportunities

• Using leverage to increase returns on DeFi/yield farming

• Getting preferential treatment from protocol development teams

• Venture investing in new dApps building in that ecosystem

• Providing a one-stop shop for access to the totality of opportunities revolving around a native coin.

• Giving investors the ability to seamlessly move capital from being totally invested in one ecosystem to another, without delay or complexity and at minimum cost.

Ecosystem companies are designed to maximize the benefits of permissionless financial structures where capital can flow seamlessly from one yield-generating opportunity to another. There are countless opportunities on smart contract platforms like Ethereum and Solana, and more will emerge in the years to come.

The equity markets might find this feature of crypto uniquely appealing, given the lack of a TradFi equivalent. But capitalizing on this fluidity — and managing the risks — requires expertise and constant attention, especially for newer chains. Those who execute the strategy effectively can smooth out the inevitable market cycles.

There are diminishing returns to levering up pure treasury companies, and there is no guarantee of being able to raise debt and equity, particularly in difficult markets. Also, tax and access moats are unlikely to persist.

However, ecosystem development companies have features that offer something more valuable (and sustainable) than simple price exposure or leverage. They offer ecosystem convexity. Done right, that is a service the market would be justified to pay a premium for.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 20:05

Protesters Outraged As Trump Expected To Visit 'Alligator Alcatraz' In Florida

America has the best alligators in the world, big beautiful alligators, perfect for stopping dangerous illegal immigrants from escaping detention until they can be processed and deported.  At least, Donald Trump and the Department of Homeland Security think so.  Others, however, are not so enamored with the idea of 'Alligator Alcatraz' being constructed in the middle of Florida's swamplands.

A legal and environmental firestorm is growing around Florida’s controversial migrant detention center under construction at the remote Dade‑Collier airstrip deep in the Everglades.  Any illegals trying to escape the facility would have to face hundreds of National Guard soldiers as well as miles upon miles of snake and alligator infested waters before they reached civilization, essentially ensuring they stay in place until they are removed from the US.

Critics call the idea a "cruel spectacle" while proponents are cheering its ingenuity.  A variety of activist groups are already swarming sites near the center in protest, some arguing that the facility threatens the environmental balance of the Everglades and others asserting that it violates Miccosukee and Seminole tribal land.

The conflict over the land goes back to 1968, when authorities in Dade County, now known as Miami-Dade County, began building the Big Cypress Jetport on land the Miccosukees used for ceremonial practices. The Dade County Port Authority referred to the project as the “world’s largest airport,” with six runways designed to handle large jets. 

The airport became a flashpoint, but in 1969, a coalition if tribesmen and conservationists persuaded Florida Gov. Claude R. Kirk Jr. that the airport would damage the Everglades. He ordered construction be stopped. One runway, approximately 10,000 feet in length, was left behind as a training ground for pilots.

The current battle highlights a common tactic used by progressives - The exploitation of environmental sentiments as a tool to undermine unrelated conservative projects and policies.  One lawsuit, filed by Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity, alleges that federal and state agencies have violated laws that, in part, require evaluating potential environmental impacts before such a project can move forward.

Clearly the effort is driven less by environmentalism and more by a desire to thwart deportations of illegals by any means available, but it's unlikely that the preservation angle will work for activists this time.

Tribal leaders are outraged by the construction of the site, claiming they can trace their rights to the "sacred land" back thousands of years.  Of course, they have no rights to the land today, and this is all that really matters.

President Donald Trump and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem are expected to visit the site this week and the center it set to go into operations in July.  Florida officials, including Governor Ron DeSantis and AG James Uthmeier, defend the project as an efficient processing center. 

Coming soon! pic.twitter.com/v3DCJsrDwV

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) June 28, 2025

"There will be some very dangerous criminal aliens that get processed through here," DeSantis told FOX News. "But if, for some reason, someone would be able to get out, where are you gonna go? You gonna dodge alligators for 50 miles to try to get to... no, it’s not gonna happen. So this is basically as secure as it gets."  The state says the site will cost about $450 million a year to operate. That cost, according to officials, will be reimbursed by FEMA

At bottom, Alligator Alcatraz is going to open and there's not much that progressives can do to stop it. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 19:40

A Translation Guide To Progressive Slavespeak

Authored by David Thunder via The Brownstone Institute,

I propose that we accompany physical detox with a verbal detox: we need to purge our bloated vocabulary of several concepts that are poisoning our understanding of ourselves and the world.

These concepts have been elaborated by people who would describe themselves as “self-aware,” “progressive,” and “liberated,” but they are actually terms more fit for a society of slaves than a society of free persons. Indeed, these concepts, at least as they are typically employed by “progressives,” could be described, without exaggeration, as a species of slavespeak. By this, I simply mean that they are used disingenuously, to rationalise political oppression and slavery.

Let’s name them and shame them, one by one:

1. Misinformation/disinformation: On its face, this means false or misleading information that could be harmful to citizens. But in slavespeak, while it parades under this apparently innocent meaning, it actually means information that some individuals find disagreeable or inconvenient, and therefore want censored or banished from the public square.

2. Far right: On its face, this means political positions that border on the insane, the pathological, and the irrational, and have violent and oppressive tendencies, with affinities to Nazism, white supremacism, and other dodgy political movements. In slavespeak, “far right” retains these connotations, but the term is applied arbitrarily to any position that disrupts the official narrative of the political Establishment.

3. Xenophobia: Xenophobia usually means blanket dislike or prejudice against foreigners. But in slavespeak, xenophobia is applied to anyone who affirms the value of national ties or national identity, defends the idea that immigrants should adapt to the their host culture, or dissents from open border policies.

4. Hate speech: On its face, this means speech that targets particular groups in society with vitriolic language and insults of various sorts, seeking to portray such groups as intrinsically detestable. In slavespeak, hate speech just means any strongly worded discourse that dares to speak critically of any protected cohort of society or its behaviour or opinions. So heated political discourse is treated as insidious hate speech, especially discourse that threatens the reigning ideology.

5. Tolerance: On its face, this means a disposition to peacefully put up with people, behaviour, or opinions one finds abhorrent or offensive. In slavespeak, tolerance means the uncritical celebration of every conceivable lifestyle under the sun, the anaesthesisation of one’s critical faculties. So verbally expressing disapproval or criticism toward a way of life, which used to be permitted by freedom of expression, is now condemned as intolerance.

6. Safe online experience: On its face, this means an internet that is protected from pornography, extreme violence, and child abuse. In slavespeak, it means an internet that is purged of political commentary that might disrupt officially sanctioned narratives.

7. Health equity: On its face, this means a health system that expands people’s access to opportunities to improve their health. In slavespeak, it parades publicly under this innocent interpretation, but really means extending a web of bio-surveillance and coercive vaccination across an ever widening web of nations.

8. Digital inclusion: On its face, this means allowing an ever greater number of citizens access to empowering digital technologies. In slavespeak, it carries this meaning for the undiscerning public, but in reality, it means the consolidation of an international web of digital censorship and financial control, copperfastened by a government-controlled “digital identity wallet.”

9. Environmental sustainability: On its face, this means achieving a stable, positive relationship between nature and human civilisation. In slavespeak, it parades under this innocent banner, but really it means demonising economic production and industrialisation, and putting the purity of “nature” and the minimisation of carbon output ahead of any possible gains that could come from modern agriculture, industry, or travel by air or by car.

10. Transphobia: On its face, this means hatred of individuals who suffer from some form of confusion about their gender or sexual identity. But in slavespeak, transphobia attributes hateful motives to anyone who believes in the social relevance of biology or rejects the idea that gender dysphoria or confusion about sexual identity should be uncritically reaffirmed and reinforced legally and socially.

11. Conspiracy theorist: The natural interpretation of this term is someone who builds far-fetched connections between events in an attempt to prove implausible conspiracies to advance nefarious secret agendas. But in slavespeak, “conspiracy theorist” refers to anyone who actually makes a plausible, evidence-based case that powerful actors are cooperating to advance harmful projects at the public’s expense. So people who suggest Big Pharma and government cooperated to impose a coercive vaccination programme on the public – an undeniable fact – would be dismissed as “conspiracy theorists.”

Republished from the author’s Substack

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 19:15

Where Can You Order A Robotaxi?

Self-driving cars - in real-world applications as of now limited to robotaxis - are simultaneously very real but also scary to many people as technological and ethical implications around the subject are plentiful.

As Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, last week, Tesla launched its first small-scale robotaxi service in Austin, Texas, but other than announced used safety drivers.

U.S. competitor Waymo, which already operated in Austin, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Phoenix, added Atlanta to its robotaxi portfolio on Tuesday.

You will find more infographics at Statista

In Chinese cities, it is already somewhat more normal to be able to board a robotaxi as several operators are vying for dominance and have expanded fleets.

Apollo Go by Chinese tech company Baidu, one of the larger operators, currently has as many as 1,000 robotaxis on the road in Chinese cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Wuhan and several more. A handful of companies are operating public trials and services in the cities of Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing. Smaller cities are also being included by some companies and they are often where they launched their first trial services to test in smaller environments with less traffic. While initial trials were often free and even on an application basis, new low fare structures for robotaxis in China have already ruffled feathers with taxi drivers. While Chinese company WeRide is already operating in Abu Dhabi and is conducting non-public tests in San Jose in the United States, Apollo Go has announced plans to expand to Hong Kong, Abu Dhabi and Dubai.

Many current robotaxis are limited to specific areas, times of day or distances and might have a remote safety operator, who under Chinese law can look after as many as three taxis.

Some operations in China also include on-board safety drivers, which are present but are not needed for any specific maneuvers of the vehicle.

A 2023 accidents in San Francisco where a Cruise robotaxi dragged a pedestrian as it failed to carry out an emergency stop has led to parent GM to abandon the project in 2024. A Las Vegas service by Motional was suspended in May of last year.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 18:50

New California Laws Effective July 1 Could Impact Students, Paychecks, Airbnb-Stays

Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times,

A wave of new California laws will take effect on July 1, touching nearly every corner of life, from subscriptions and short-term rentals to wages and student mental health.

Part of a broader package signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom during his latest legislative session, the measures aim to boost transparency, expand health coverage, raise wages, and improve access to legal and mental health support.

Here are some of the new laws.

Short-Term Rental Chores

AB 2202 requires short-term rental hosts, platforms, and anyone else listing the property to disclose all extra charges or penalties—such as cleaning fees—that will apply if guests fail to complete end-of-stay chores.

Rental hosts must detail those tasks before a booking is made. According to the legislation, platforms such as Airbnb are also responsible for ensuring that disclosures are made.

Violators face fines of up to $10,000 per offense.

The legislation builds on a 2023 law requiring all mandatory costs—including service and cleaning fees—to be listed upfront in rental and hotel listings.

Subscription Cancellations

AB 2863 mandates that companies offering subscriptions—such as streaming services or memberships—make it as easy to cancel as it is to sign up.

Companies must also send annual reminders with pricing and cancellation details, including a direct “click-to-cancel” link. Renewals after free trials or initial contract periods now require customer approval.

The law applies to contracts entered into, amended, or extended on or after July 1.

Stolen Goods Sales

SB 1144 targets retail theft by requiring online marketplaces such as eBay and Facebook Marketplace to verify the identity of high-volume sellers, defined as those who complete 200 or more transactions involving at least $5,000 in new or unused goods annually.

The law also requires the online platform to notify law enforcement agencies when it identifies potentially stolen item sellers.

Drink Lids in Bars

AB 2375 requires bars and nightclubs with Type 48 licenses to provide drink lids upon request and post signage informing patrons of their availability.

The measure, intended to combat drink spiking, follows a 2023 law requiring such establishments to offer drug-testing kits, including test strips or straws that detect substances such as Rohypnol and ketamine.

This law applies to more than 2,500 bars and nightclubs across the state, where minors are not allowed, and whether or not the business serves food.

Minimum Wage Increases

Several cities and counties will raise their minimum wage on July 1 as follows:

• Alameda: $17.46

• Berkeley: $19.18

• Emeryville: $19.90

• Fremont: $17.75

• Los Angeles City: $17.87

• Los Angeles County: $17.81

• Milpitas: $18.20

• Pasadena: $18.04

• San Francisco: $19.18

• Santa Monica: $17.81

The statewide minimum remains $16.50. Some industries—such as the hotel and fast food sectors—have higher local minimums.

Domestic Workers

SB 1350 extends Cal/OSHA health and safety protections to domestic workers—such as house cleaners, caregivers, and cooks—regardless of whether they are employed temporarily or permanently.

Student ID Cards

SB 1063 requires middle and high school ID cards to display the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline number. Schools are also encouraged to add QR codes linking to local mental health resources.

Special Education Planning

AB 438 moves up the start of postsecondary planning for students with special needs to the beginning of high school, rather than age 16, when deemed appropriate by their Individualized Education Program (IEP) team.

CARE Court Updates

SB 42 requires that family members or caretakers be notified and kept informed about proceedings under the CARE Act, which allows them to petition for court-mandated treatment plans for individuals with certain mental health conditions.

Fertility Coverage

SB 729 requires most employers that offer health insurance to include coverage for infertility diagnosis and treatment, including in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Religious employers are exempt from the law, and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)—the agency that manages pension and health benefits for state workers—will not be required to offer this coverage until July 1, 2027.

At Newsom’s request, implementation was delayed until January 2026 to allow time to update California’s benchmark plan and clarify insurer obligations.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 18:25

Disney Hit With More Layoffs As Latest Woke Projects Bomb Hard

It would seem that Disney still hasn't learned its lesson when it comes to DEI in entertainment.  The company which just initiated a series of layoffs of hundreds of employees at the beginning in June is now getting rid of at least 2% of staffers in its product and technology division.

The staff cuts are only part of an ongoing trend over the past few years as Disney's profits at the box office tumble into the abyss.  Only ten years ago the company dominated theaters and television, but it is now reeling from an endless string of embarrassing failures.

The company's latest entertainment bungles include the Pixar film Elio, about a Mexican-Domincan boy obsessed with space travel who is accidentally taken by aliens to the "Communiverse", an intergalactic socialist Utopia where all the species of the universe get together and work out their problems. 

Continuing with their messaging that minority characters are infallible no matter what they do, Pixar writes Elio as a spoiled thief who seems to get whatever he wants.  His background as an orphan living with his aunt is meant to invoke sympathy from the audience, but the effort falls flat.

"It was important for our art team to kind of design the world of space, to design the 'communiverse' to be this colorful, welcoming, diverse place, this aspirational place where aliens of all shapes and sizes and colors can come and live together," said director Domee Shi. "And when Elio first lands, he just feels like this is home and he wants to stay." 

The creators and voice actors on the movie hyped up the minority representation of Elio as if they are still living in 2018. 

Zoe Saldaña, the voice of Aunt Olga, shared a personal message at the premiere of Elio in reference to the Mexican representation in the film as well as the ongoing immigration raids in Los Angeles: 

"I do believe that the future of America are Latinos, and people of color...I just think that as long as we keep being who we are and coming from a place of love and dignity and hard work we will win."

Critics also mention the movie's noticeable lack of animation quality, further cementing allegations that Disney has fired most of its seasoned animators and replaced them with cheaper and less knowledgeable artists.  Elio imploded at theaters.  With a budget of over $300 million the animated flick is expected to lose around $150 million and is the worst performing film ever released by Pixar. 

On the streaming front, Disney+ has released their long delayed Marvel series Ironheart, a superhero story featuring woke representation including multiple insufferable trans actors and a black, female ghetto version of Iron Man who is somehow smarter than Tony Stark.  She gets a free ride through college but complains constantly about her circumstances, helps fellow university students cheat on their exams in exchange for cash and steals regularly in order to get what she thinks she's entitled to. 

A typical DEI character with no moral compass and zero likability.  Disney keeps its streaming stats a closely guarded secret and Nielson stats don't come out for a month, but Ironheart is currently being pummeled in audience reviews and third-party ratings companies show audience numbers in the gutter.

In the film industry projects are often released many years after initial production is launched.  This is why it's a big mistake to inject the political messaging of the current day into movies and television, as movements can fail, disappear or change direction before the content is available to audiences.  Ironheart is so dated by its politics that it feels like a time portal back to the early days of the Biden era; an era almost everyone hates.  The smart move would have been to shelve the product and never release it.

The sheer size of Disney's operations allow it to financially weather a number of failed projects, but it's a bad sign that the company is currently relying more on its theme park revenues and less on its film and streaming divisions.  After sinking every franchise it owns with woke messaging, including Star Wars, Marvel, Dr. Who, etc., it's unlikely that Disney will recover anytime soon from its endless box office defeats.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 18:00

America's 75,000 Page Horror Story

Via SchiffGold.com,

While most of the American government can be characterized by regulatory overgrowth, few areas loom larger in the public imagination than the Tax Code. This reputation is well earned, as the Tax Code seems to become more complicated each time people try to reform it. 

Hundreds of years of revisions have left American taxpayers in an unenviable situation.

While tax rates are at historic highs, the complexity of the Tax Code itself presents enough problems to be worthy of a complete renewal.

• The first problem with the Tax Code complexity is that enforcement has become such a nightmare that even the well-funded IRS cannot begin to properly enforce it.

• The next problem is that the tax code’s complexity unfairly benefits those with time, resources, and ironically, money, to spend avoiding taxation, allowing the richest and most unethical to benefit from the web of confusion.

• The last problem with the tax code is that it creates a fundamental rift between the American people and the government through providing a realistic view into the complexity and self-contradictory nature of the state.

The IRS is much maligned by anyone who wants to keep their well learned money, yet one of their greatest problems they face is that they can barely keep their head above water organizationally. The tax code is so complicated that it is nearly impossible to carry out action plans, or even create strategic priorities. Any focus that the IRS chooses for a tax cycle can be contradicted by another part of the tax code. Administrations constantly adding in different elements and revisions of the tax codes mean that the source document for enforcement provides much less clear guidance than can be found at other agencies. Only a small part of the tax code can be enforced, and the subjective choice about what part that is allows a lot of room for corruption and uncertainty. Additionally, the IRS bears the burden of punishing people who unknowingly violated the tax code while being unable to hunt down those who use its complexity to their advantage. A simplified Tax Code would benefit the IRS both strategically and administratively. 

The complexity of the tax code benefits the most unscrupulous and wealthy citizens uniquely. Not to mention that some parts of the tax code itself were written to provide benefits to friends of politicians throughout history, it is so vast that people with skilled lawyers and accountants can take a gamble on numerous loopholes and slight misclassification that will allow them to protect their money. Hypothetically, these people should be the greatest target of additional tax laws. When politicians pass tax laws, both they and the citizens are often subconsciously thinking of the unscrupulous wealthy as being on the receiving end of the incoming higher taxation. However, too many years of code growth have cemented the middle class and the most scrupulous  law-abiding rich citizens as those hardest hit by any increase in taxes. The IRS’ inability to enforce the Code along with the massive opportunity for abuse make complicated tax laws a boon for their intended targets.

At the root of the American identity is a repulsion to taxation. Of course some taxation is necessary for any government to exist, but the current state of taxation is a recurring point of contention between American citizens and their government. Countless years and billions of dollars spent trying to fulfill and understand the requirements of the tax code serve as humiliating reminders of our government’s incompetence. Even the officials who voted to make the tax code law can barely understand the parts they most support. The government needs no help losing trust, but forcing a massive and extremely complicated set of laws to come into contact with nearly every American, every year, does little to repair the bond that has been severed. The worst stereotypes of the Federal Government are shown to be true in the tax codes’ bland display of bureaucratic rot and excess.

Before the level of taxation can be discussed, we must first recognize the blatantly terrible practicalities of the tax code. It is both theoretically and practically compromised. It does no good for those enforcing it or those it is being enforced upon.

While a simplified tax code might not provide a special case for every possibility in human life, it might be time to recognize that having a brutally simple tax code would be better.

Some good things would not be as heavily incentivized by tax credits, but the deletion of the miasma of confusion that currently exists would allow Americans of all types to flourish. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 17:40

The Decline And Fall Of Our So-Called Degreed Experts

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

The first six months of the Trump administration have not been kind to the experts and the degree-holding classes.

Almost daily during the tariff hysterias of March, we were told by university economists and most of the PhDs employed in investment and finance that the U.S. was headed toward a downward, if not recessionary, spiral.

Most economists lectured that trade deficits did not really matter. Or they insisted that the cures to reduce them were worse than the $1.1 trillion deficit itself.

They reminded us that free, rather than fair, trade alone ensured prosperity.

So, the result of Trump’s foolhardy tariff talk would be an impending recession. America would soon suffer rising joblessness, inflation—or rather a return to stagflation—and likely little, if any, increase in tariff revenue as trade volume declined.

Instead, recent data show increases in tariff revenue. Personal real income and savings were up. Job creation exceeded prognoses. There was no surge in inflation. The supposedly “crashed” stock market reached historic highs.

Common-sense Americans might not have been surprised. The prior stock market frenzy was predicated on what was, in theory, supposed to have happened rather than what was likely to occur. After all, if tariffs were so toxic and surpluses irrelevant, why did our affluent European and Asian trading rivals insist on both surpluses and protective tariffs?

Most Americans recalled that the mere threat of tariffs and Trump’s jawboning had led to several trillion dollars in promised foreign investment and at least some plans to relocate manufacturing and assembly back to the United States. Would that change in direction not lead to business optimism and eventually more jobs? Would countries purposely running up huge surpluses through asymmetrical trade practices not have far more to lose in negotiations than those suffering gargantuan deficits?

Were Trump’s art-of-the-deal threats of prohibitive tariffs not mere starting points in negotiations that would eventually lead to likely agreements more favorable to the U.S. than in the past and moderate rather than punitive tariffs?

Would not the value of the huge American consumer market mean that our trade partners, who were racking up substantial surpluses, would agree they could afford modest tariffs and trim their substantial profit margins rather than suicidally price themselves out of a lucrative market entirely?

Economists and bureaucrats were equally wrong on the border.

We were told for four years that only “comprehensive immigration reform” would stop illegal immigration. In fact, most Americans differed. They knew firsthand that we had more than enough immigration laws, but had elected as President Joe Biden, who deliberately destroyed borders and had no intention of enforcing existing laws.

When Trump promised that he would ensure that, instead of 10,000 foreign nationals entering illegally each day, within a month, no one would, our experts scoffed. But if the border patrol went from ignoring or even aiding illegal immigrants to stopping them right at the border, why would such a prediction be wrong?

Those favoring a reduction in illegal immigration and deportations also argued that crime would fall, and citizen job opportunities would increase, given an estimated 500,000 aliens with criminal records had entered illegally during the Biden administration, while millions of other illegal aliens were working off the books, for cash, and often at reduced wages.

Indeed, once the border was closed tightly, hundreds of thousands were returned to their country, and employers began turning to U.S. citizens. Job opportunities did increase. Crime did go down. Legal-only immigration regained its preferred status over illegal entry.

Trump talked of trying voluntary deportation—again to wide ridicule from immigration “experts.” But why would not a million illegal aliens wish to return home “voluntarily”—if they were given free flights, a $1,000 bonus, and, most importantly, a chance later to reapply for legal entry once they arrived home?

Many of our national security experts warned that taking out Iran’s nuclear sites was a fool’s errand. It would supposedly unleash a Middle East tsunami of instability. It would cause a wave of terrorism. It would send oil prices skyrocketing. It would not work, ensuring Iran would soon reply with nuclear weapons.

In fact, oil prices decreased after the American bombing. A twenty-five-minute entrance into Iranian airspace and bombing led to a ceasefire, not a conflagration.

As for a big power standoff, World War III, and 30,000 dead, common sense asked why China would wish the Strait of Hormuz to close, given that it imports half of all Middle Eastern oil produced?

Why would Russia—bogged down in Ukraine and suffering nearly a million casualties—wish to mix it up in Iran, after ignominiously fleeing Syria and the fall of its Assad clients?

Russia usually thinks of Russia, period. It does not lament when tensions elsewhere are expected to spike oil prices. Why would Russia resupply Iran’s destroyed Russian-made anti-aircraft systems, when it was desperate to ward off Ukrainian air attacks on its homeland, and Iran would likely again lose any imported replacements?

As for waves of terror, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis have suffered enormous losses from Israel. Their leadership has been decapitated; their streams of Iranian money have been mostly truncated. Why would they rush to Iran’s side to war with Israel, when Iran did not come to their aid when they were battling and losing to the Israelis?

Has a theater-wide war really ever started when one side entered and left enemy territory in 25 minutes, suffering no casualties and likely killing few of the enemy?

As far as the extent of damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, why should we believe our expert pundit class?

Prior to the American and Israeli bombing, many of them warned that Iran was not on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon, and therefore, there was little need for any such preemptive action.

Then, post facto, the same experts flipped. Now they claimed, after the bombing that severely damaged most Iranian nuclear sites, that there was an increased threat, given that some enriched uranium (which they had previously discounted) surely had survived and thus marked a new existential danger of an Iranian nuclear bomb.

Was Trump really going to “blow up”, “destroy” or “cripple” NATO, as our diplomatic experts insisted, when his first-term jawboning led from six to twenty-three nations meeting their two percent of GDP defense spending promises?

Given two ongoing theater-wide wars, given Trump’s past correct predictions about the dangers of the Nord Stream II pipeline, given the vulnerability of an anemic NATO to Russian expansionism, and given that Putin did not invade during Trump’s first term, unlike the three presidencies before and after his own, why wouldn’t NATO agree to rearm to five percent, and appreciate Trump’s efforts both to bolster the capability of the alliance and the need to end the Ukraine war?

Why were our “scientific” pollsters so wrong in the last three presidential elections, and so at odds with the clearly discernible electoral shifts in the general electorate?

Where were crackpot ideas like defund the police, transgender males competing in women’s sports, and open borders first born and nurtured?

Answer: the university, and higher education in general.

The list of wrongheaded, groupthink, and degreed expertise could be vastly expanded. We remember the “51 intelligence authorities” who swore the Hunter Biden laptop was “likely” cooked up by the Russians. Our best and brightest economists signed letters insisting that Biden’s multitrillion-dollar wasteful spending would not result in inflation spikes. Our global warming professors’ past predictions should have ensured that Americans were now boiling, with tidal waves destroying beachfront communities, including Barack Obama’s two beachfront multimillion-dollar estates.

Our legal eagles, after learning nothing from the bogus Mueller investigation and adolescent Steele dossier, but with impressive Ivy League degrees, pontificated for years that, by now, Donald Trump would be in jail for life, given 91 “walls are closing in” and “bombshell” indictments.

So why are the degreed classes so wrong and yet so arrogantly never learn anything from their past flawed predictions?

One, our experts usually receive degrees from our supposedly marquee universities. But as we are now learning from long overdue autopsies of institutionalized campus racial bias, neo-racial segregation, 50-percent-plus price-gauging surcharges on federal grants, and rabid anti-Semitism, higher education in America has become anti-Enlightenment. Universities now wage war against free-thinkers, free speech, free expression, and anything that freely questions the deductive groupthink of the diversity/equity/inclusion commissariat, and global warming orthodoxies.

The degreed expert classes emerge from universities whose faculties are 90–95 percent left-wing and whose administrations are overstaffed and terrified of their radical students. The wonder is not that the experts are incompetent and biased, but that there are a brave few who are not.

Two, Donald Trump drove the degreed class insane to the degree it could no longer, even if it were willing and able (and it was not), offer empirical assessments of his policies. From his crude speech to his orange skin to his Queens accent to his MAGA base to his remarkable counterintuitive successes and to his disdain for the bicoastal elite, our embarrassing experts would rather be dead wrong and anti-Trump than correct in their assessments—if they in any small way helped Trump.

Three, universities are not just biased, but increasingly mediocre and ever more isolated from working Americans and their commonsense approaches to problem solving. PhD programs in general are not as rigorous as they were even two decades ago. Grading, assessments, and evaluations in professional schools must increasingly weigh non-meritocratic criteria, given their admissions and hiring protocols are not based on disinterested evaluation of past work and expertise.

The vast endowments of elite campuses, the huge profit-making foreign enrollments, and the assured, steady stream of hundreds of billions of dollars in federal aid created a sense of fiscal unreality, moral smugness, unearned superiority, and ultimately, blindness to just how isolated and disliked the professoriate had become.

But the public has caught on that too many Ivy-League presidents were increasingly a mediocre, if not incompetent, bunch. Most university economists could not run a small business. The military academies did not always turn out the best generals and admirals. The most engaging biographers were not professors. And plumbers and electricians were usually more skilled in their trades than most journalist graduates were in their reporting.

Add it all up, and the reputation of our predictors, prognosticators, and experts has been radically devalued to the point of utter worthlessness.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 17:00

MIT Invents "Bubble Wrap" That Pulls Fresh Water From The Air...Even In The Driest Places In The World

MIT researchers have invented a new water-harvesting device — a high-tech version of “bubble wrap” — that can pull safe drinking water straight from the air, even in extreme environments like Death Valley, the driest desert in North America, according to LiveScience.

In a study published June 11 in Nature Water, the team described how their innovation could help address global water scarcity. “It works wherever you may find water vapor in the air,” the researchers wrote.

The device is built from hydrogel, a material that can absorb large amounts of water, sandwiched between two glass layers resembling a window. At night, the hydrogel draws moisture from the air. During the day, a special coating on the glass keeps it cool, allowing water to condense and drip into a collection system.

The hydrogel is molded into dome shapes — likened to “a sheet of bubble wrap” — that swell when absorbing moisture. These domes increase surface area, helping the material absorb more water.

LiveScience writes that the system was tested for a week in Death Valley, a region spanning California and Nevada that holds the record as the hottest and driest place in North America.

Despite the harsh conditions, the harvester consistently produced between 57 and 161.5 milliliters of water daily — about a quarter to two-thirds of a cup. In more humid regions, researchers expect even greater yields. According to MIT representatives, this approach outperforms earlier water-from-air technologies and does so without needing electricity.

One major breakthrough was solving a known problem with hydrogel-based water harvesters: lithium salts used to improve absorption often leak into the water, making it unsafe. The new design adds glycerol, which stabilizes the salt and keeps leakage to under 0.06 parts per million — a level the U.S. Geological Survey deems safe for groundwater.

Though a single panel can’t supply an entire household, its small footprint means several can be installed together. The team estimates that eight 3-by-6-foot (1-by-2-meter) panels could provide enough drinking water for a household in areas lacking reliable sources. Compared to the cost of bottled water in the U.S., the system could pay for itself in under a month and remain functional for at least a year.

“We imagine that you could one day deploy an array of these panels, and the footprint is very small because they are all vertical,” said Xuanhe Zhao, an MIT professor and co-author of the study. “Now people can build it even larger, or make it into parallel panels, to supply drinking water to people and achieve real impact.”

The researchers plan to continue testing the device in other low-resource areas to better understand its performance under different environmental conditions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 16:40

Today President Trump put out a note urging Fed Chair Powell to lower rates.

The following image, courtesy of Conor Sen, shows the central bank rates around the world. Mr. Trump wrote:

Jerome, You are, as usual, "Too Late". You have cost the USA a fortune - and continue to do so - you should lower the rate - by a lot! Hundreds of billions of dollars being lost! No Inflation.

Mr. Trump also wrote "Should be here" and referenced rates between 0.25% and 1.75%.  The current Fed's Fund rate is between 4.25% and 4.5%.   Fed Chair Powell is probably correct about rates currently being "modestly" restrictive, but it is possible we are neutral now.
First, there is some inflation.  The current rate of core PCE inflation was at 2.7% year-over-year in May, up from 2.5% in April. Core PCE inflation has slowed to 1.7% annualized over the last 3 months. Add in a 1.75% real rate - and you get close to the current Fed Funds rate.
It is difficult to predict what will happen over the next year.  There is considerable uncertainty about the impact of policy on inflation and the economy in coming months. Click on graph for larger image.

Goldman Sachs economists noted today:

"We are pulling forward our forecast for the next cut to September. We had previously expected a cut in December because we thought that the peak summer tariff effects on monthly inflation would make it awkward to cut sooner. But the very early evidence suggests that the tariff effects look a bit smaller than we expected, other disinflationary forces have been stronger, and we suspect that the Fed leadership shares our view that tariffs will only have a one-time price level effect. And while the labor market still looks healthy, it has become hard to find a job, and both residual seasonality and immigration policy changes pose near-term downside risk to payrolls."

Maybe the impact on inflation from the tariffs will be less than expected. And it seems likely the impact will be mostly transitory.

It is also possible the economic weakness from policy (immigration, fiscal) will more than offset any boost to inflation from the tariffs.  Although immigration policy might push up inflation for food, etc.  It is very uncertain right now. 
It appears that currently Fed Funds policy is reasonably appropriate.

Trump Pivots To Pressuring Israel For New Ceasefire Deal In Gaza

"MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!" President Trump wrote on social media early Sunday, pivoting from a month dominated by large-scale Iran strikes to seeking more peace and stability in the long-running Israel-Palestine conflict.

Naturally, the Palestinian side remains doubtful that any real progress will be made, given especially that the Netanyahu government has repeatedly refused to steer away from its primary war aims in the Gaza Strip of utterly destroying Hamas, and ensuring it can never come back to lead.

Ron Dermer, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is expected to travel to Washington this week for discussions on a possible ceasefire, also amid reports that the Israeli leader himself will soon be hosted in the White House. 

President Trump was quoted in The Washington Post last Friday as saying, "I just spoke with some of the people involved. It’s a terrible situation that’s going on in Gaza … We think within the next week we’re going to get a ceasefire."

Following this, Netanyahu held a secretive meeting with his security Cabinet on Sunday as pressure builds to re-enter negotiations with Hamas.

"They promised to stop the war if the hostages were released," one Palestinian resident, Abdel Hadi Al-Hour, was quoted in The Associated Press as saying. "But the war never stopped."

Ceasefire negotiations have not gotten anywhere largely over the question of whether a truce should bring an end to the war entirely. This is as Hamas insists on a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza in exchange for the release of all hostages; however, Israel has consistently demanded that all Hamas militants disarm and leave the Strip completely.

These are non-starters for both sides at this point, even if their respective populations put pressure on leadership to achieve a deal which would bring relief from war.

Israeli warplanes have continued pounding various areas of Gaza, including more Monday airstrikes on Gaza City. Al Jazeera details the latest as follows:

• Israel has launched dozens of air strikes across Gaza with northern Gaza City in its crosshairs after the military issued forced evacuation threats, raising fears of an intensified ground assault.
• Israeli forces killed at least 80 Palestinians in Gaza since dawn with dozens wounded including in an attack on Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir el-Balah.
• Israel’s opposition leader Yair Lapid urged an end to the war, saying there was “no longer any benefit” for Israel to continue.
• Egypt’s foreign minister says his country is working on a new Gaza deal that includes a 60-day ceasefire in exchange for the release of some Israeli captives.

Palestinian sources have said that over 56,000 Gazans have been killed since the war began, with an additional more than 133,000 wounded. 

And the Israeli side has tallied some 1,139 people were killed in Israel during the October 7 attacks, with more than 200 taken captive after that. Possibly less than 20 living hostages remain, based on prior indications given by Israeli sources.

Tyler Durden Mon, 06/30/2025 - 14:25