Tag: corporations

Major Association Of Corporations Including Coca-Cola, Nestlé And General Mills Urge Congress To Ban Intoxicating Hemp Products

A major trade association that counts among its members corporations such as Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kraft Heinz and Nestlé is putting pressure on Congress to ban intoxicating hemp products.

In a letter sent to House and Senate leadership, the Consumer Brands Association (CBA) said it wants to see the so-called “hemp loophole” of the 2018 Farm Bill that legalized the crop closed. And to that end, the organization backed appropriations language led by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) to prohibit hemp products containing any quantifiable amount of THC.

The proliferation of intoxicating cannabinoid products—including those that contain synthesized delta-8 and delta-10 THC, for example—have “caused significant investigative and testing challenges, as well as unseen health and safety impacts,” CBA said in the September letter, as first reported by Cannabis Wire.

“This definition did not take into account the possibility for addition of various isomers (chemical variants with similar effects) of THC, and the possibility of intoxicating hemp-derived beverages, which can include more THC than ever intended,” it said. “Additionally, many products are deliberately marketed in ways that confuse consumers, featuring brightly colored packaging, cartoon imagery, and names that mimic candy or popular treats.”

Relatedly, CBA also advised Congress in 2022 to prevent the proliferation of marijuana-infused copycat products that mimic their well-known brands.

“Congress did not intend to create an unregulated market for intoxicating products that are not subject to Food and Drug Administration oversight. Two of the most prevalent isomers of THC, Delta-8 and Delta-10, have not had any FDA review,” the new letter says. “These products create risks for consumers who may falsely believe that they are reviewed and regulated for safety and purity.”

“As you consider finalizing FY 2026 appropriations, we encourage you to close this loophole and protect consumers,” CBA said.

Notably, the retail giant Target—which recently launch a pilot program selling hemp THC beverages at select locations in Minnesota—is also a member of CBA. Target’s decision came just weeks after the association sent out the letter to Congress on restricting such products from the marketplace.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan coalition of 39 state and territory attorneys general recently called on Congress to clarify the federal definition of hemp and impose regulations preventing the sale of intoxicating cannabinoid products.

Keep reading

The EU’s Green Ideology Is Crashing Europe’s Car Industry

The European Green Deal, launched in 2019, is an ecological pact that has been, unequivocally, an enemy of European taxpayers and innovation. Its declared goal is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 through a dense web of regulations that reach deep into every sector of the European economy. More than any other sector, the automotive industry is being put at risk of an irreversible crash.

Pressuring companies and citizens alike, the pact promotes the renunciation of capitalism, an inevitable sacrifice in the name of green policies. Such binding commitments will have severe economic consequences for a European Union increasingly weakened by its own laws and regulations.

At the heart of the Deal, by 2035, all new cars sold within the European Union are expected to be electric, imposing a total ban on combustion and engine vehicles. The problem is that this goal, far from being an environmental triumph, represents a deeply ideological political intrusion, an act of social engineering with an anti-capitalist character, disguised as green progress but detached from economic reality. The consequences are serious for the European automotive sector.

It is important to recall that this industry is one of the pillars of the European economy, representing over 7% of the EU’s GDP and around 13.8 million direct and indirect jobs.

Yet the sector now faces the prospect of mass layoffs, relocation of production, and a loss of global influence as a direct consequence of this heavy-handed Deal. Core EU countries such as Germany and Italy have already voiced resistance, warning of the economic and social consequences of a forced transition that ignores the continent’s technological and energy realities.

CEO of Mercedes-Benz, Ola Källenius, stated that the EU’s plan to eliminate combustion engines by 2035 would drive the sector “full speed into a wall.” His words, though strong, capture the growing sense of unease among Europe’s leading manufacturers.

The pressure is twofold. Internally, profit margins are shrinking as companies divert billions into forced electrification. Externally, they face fierce competition from China, with brands such as BYD and NIO, backed by an aggressive industrial policy, consolidated supply chains, and technological dominance in batteries. This combination allows Chinese manufacturers to produce at lower costs and scale faster.

Meanwhile, European brands struggle to survive between the high costs of transition and Asian price dumping, which has already led Brussels to impose additional tariffs of 30–40% on Chinese electric vehicles. 

The interventionist posture of Brussels remains unchanged, failing to understand that regulation only breeds more regulation, and inevitably creates market distortions that harm both businesses and consumers.

Europe is imposing a single path on manufacturers—electric cars—while the automotive sector itself argues that it is possible to meet environmental goals through multiple technological solutions. Brands such as Mercedes, Porsche, Ferrari, and Stellantis maintain that the transition can and should be technologically neutral, allowing electric, hybrid, e-fuel, and hydrogen vehicles to compete on equal terms. The goal, they say, must be to reduce emissions, not to eliminate technologies for ideological reasons. Instead of encouraging innovation, Brussels dictates by decree what may exist and what must disappear, ignoring the knowledge and experience of those who actually build the industry.

Synthetic fuels, produced from green hydrogen and captured CO₂, are the clearest example of a more appealing alternative: they drastically reduce emissions without leading to the destruction of engines, factories, and jobs, demonstrating that true innovation arises from freedom of choice, not political imposition.

Keep reading

ExxonMobil Sues California Over Climate Regulations

Energy giant ExxonMobil filed a lawsuit on Oct. 24 against California officials—including Lauren Sanchez, chair of the California Air Resources Board, and Attorney General Robert A. Bonta—accusing the state’s climate disclosure regulations of harming the company.

The complaint, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of California, is about two climate laws approved by Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2023: SB 253 and SB 261.

SB 253 requires businesses with total annual revenues of more than $1 billion that operate in California to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, while SB 261 requires businesses with more than $500 million in annual revenues operating in the state to develop a report on their climate-related financial risks.

The bills are scheduled to come into effect in 2026.

“Both bills require ExxonMobil to espouse California’s preferred framing for issues of immense public concern,” the company said in its lawsuit.

The bills require the company to “serve as a mouthpiece for ideas with which it disagrees,” it said, while using frameworks that place “disproportionate blame” of emissions and climate risks on companies like ExxonMobil just for “being large.”

Keep reading

The Myth of the “Robber Barons”: James Hill versus the Crony Competitors

Whether we like it or not, the Progressive Era and its mainstream historical interpretation—even when fictional—has virtually defined our last century. The dominant, though false, narrative is basically that unfettered free market capitalism led to negative outcomes, “robber barons” monopolized the market to their benefit, and that disinterested federal regulation brought discipline to this system, keeping its benefits while curbing its excesses. For that reason, among others, entrepreneurs and businesses have been maligned, even as society enjoyed their benefits.

Thankfully, important historical work has been done to attempt to correct the dominant narrative. One such work is Burton Fulsom’s The Myth of the Robber Barons: A New Look at the Rise of Big Business in America. This work—rather than relying on popular, but inaccurate, historical narratives—examines the contributions of several key American entrepreneurs. Unfortunately, rather than learning positively from real-life examples of successful entrepreneurs and the dangers of government interventions and cronyism, “many historians have been teaching the opposite lesson for years” (p. 121). Fulsom continues,

They have been saying that entrepreneurs, not the state, created the problem. Entrepreneurs, according to these historians, were often “robber barons” who corrupted politics and made fortunes bilking the public. In this view, government intervention in the economy was needed to save the public from greedy businessmen. This view, with some modifications, still dominates in college textbooks in American history. (pp. 121-122)

Crucially, Fulsom makes the useful distinctions between “political entrepreneurs” and “market entrepreneurs” (p. 1):

Those who tried to succeed in [business] through federal aid, pools, vote buying, or stock speculation we will classify as political entrepreneurs. Those who tried to succeed in [business] primarily by creating and marketing a superior product at a low cost we will classify as market entrepreneurs.

This distinction is critical because it qualitatively differentiates those who succeed through the production-and-exchange mechanism and those who use the political means and cronyism to gain wealth at the expense of the public. One example, though imperfect, is the main subject of this article—James J. Hill and his Great Northern transcontinental railroad.

Keep reading

Microsoft OneDrive Limits How Often Users Can Restrict Facial Recognition Setting

Microsoft is quietly testing a new facial-recognition feature in OneDrive that automatically sorts photos based on who appears in them.

The experimental version is being rolled out to some early-access users, and it turns on by default while placing strict limits on how often it can be disabled.

Those with access will see a new privacy notice in the app stating: “OneDrive uses AI to recognize faces in your photos.”

Microsoft’s support page, which still labels the option as “coming soon,” explains that “Microsoft collects, uses, and stores facial scans and biometric information from your photos through the OneDrive app for facial grouping technologies.”

The company says this is intended to “help you quickly and easily organize photos of friends and family.”

Microsoft insists that the face groupings remain private even when users share albums. It also claims that “Microsoft does not use any of your facial scans and biometric information to train or improve the AI model overall.”

When asked why the system is enabled by default instead of requiring consent first, a company spokesperson told Slashdot that “Microsoft OneDrive inherits privacy features and settings from Microsoft 365 and SharePoint, where applicable.”

Keep reading

War on Farmers Continues in Many States, Expert Warns

The escalating attacks on small and medium farms and ranches is continuing in Democrat states in the form of burdensome regulations, attacks on water rights, dismantling infrastructure such as dams, and much more, warned agriculture expert and Yanasa.TV founder Charles Rankin in this interview on Behind The Deep State with The New American magazine’s Alex Newman. 

Rankin, who hosts a very popular agriculture show and publishes a successful newsletter on the topic, gave multiple examples of attacks on farming and ranching communities from West Coast states. And while some of the pressure from the federal level is easing, many states and even foreign governments—not to mention mega-corporations—are continuing to undermine U.S. food producers. 

Ultimately, the goal is to control the food supply, restrict choice, drive producers off their land, and force consumers to accept lab-grown “meat,” processed “foods,” genetically engineered products, and even horrors such as mRNA “vaccines” delivered via the food supply. Thankfully, everybody can play a role in pushing back against this assault, Rankin explained. 

Keep reading

JP Morgan’s Biometric Mandate Signals New Era Of Workplace Surveillance In Finance

When employees begin reporting to JPMorgan Chase’s new Manhattan headquarters later this year, they will be required to submit their biometric data to enter the building.

The policy, a first among major U.S. banks, makes biometric enrollment mandatory for staff assigned to the $3 billion, 60-story tower at 270 Park Avenue.

JPMorgan says the system is part of a modern security program designed to protect workers and streamline access, but it has sparked growing concern over privacy, consent, and the expanding use of surveillance technology in the workplace.

Internal communications reviewed by the Financial Times and The Guardian confirm that JPMorgan employees assigned to the new building have been told they must enroll their fingerprints or undergo an eye scan to access the premises.

Earlier drafts of the plan described the system as voluntary, but reports say that language has quietly disappeared. A company spokesperson declined to clarify how data will be stored or how long it will be retained, citing security concerns. Some staff reportedly may retain the option of using a badge instead, though the criteria for exemption remain undisclosed.

The biometric access requirement is being rolled out alongside a Work at JPMC smartphone app that doubles as a digital ID badge and internal service platform, allowing staff to order meals, navigate the building, or register visitors.

According to its listing in the Google Play Store, the app currently claims “no data collected,” though that self-reported disclosure does not replace a formal employee privacy notice.

In combination, the app and access system will allow the bank to track who enters the building, when, and potentially how long they stay on each floor, a level of visibility that, while defensible as security modernization, unsettles those wary of the creeping normalization of biometric surveillance in the workplace.

Executives have promoted the new headquarters as the “most technologically advanced” corporate campus in New York, and that it is designed to embody efficiency and safety. Reports suggest that the decision to make biometrics mandatory followed a series of high-profile crimes in Midtown, including the December 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Within the bank, the justification has been framed as protecting employees in a volatile urban environment.

Yet, the decision thrusts JPMorgan into largely uncharted territory. No other major U.S. bank has been publicly documented as requiring its employees to submit biometric data merely to enter a headquarters building.

Keep reading

Inside the Texas town where locals are running out of water because huge energy plants are guzzling the supply

Residents of a Texas city are running out of water due to huge energy plants hoarding the supply, according to officials.  

Big name companies, including Exxon Mobil and Tesla, have gone on to call South Texas their home in recent years so they can scoop up cheap energy, land and copious amounts of water. 

Over the past 20 years, the companies have shelled out billions of dollars to build massive plants that use up tons of water to turn fossil fuels into gasoline, and other products like jet fuel. 

And in recent years, these corporations have pushed further with the move to electric vehicles and batteries. In doing so, they refine lithium to make the batteries and produce plastic pellets. 

All of this has severely impacted locals in Corpus Christi, a coastal city about two hours outside of San Antonio. 

An active drought has taken over the area that is home to about more than 500,000.

The city anticipates it won’t be able to meet its water demand within the next 18 months, The Wall Street Journal reported. 

The city’s water supply not only serves the big companies, but is also the source for residents across seven counties. 

And the excess use of water is not only affecting locals, but the companies that guzzle it all away. 

Soon, they could also see a water shortage that could then trickle down to layoffs and a pause in the industry. 

Meanwhile, residents are just trying to do the best they can with what they have while also preparing for the worst. 

Many are trying to financially prepare for booming water prices and also keep their lawns from running dry. 

According to Mike Howard, chief executive of Howard Energy Partners, the water situation ‘is about as dire as I’ve ever seen it.’ 

Howard, who runs a private energy company that owns multiple facilities in the area, said his powerful business can’t even make it through because of the lack of water. 

‘It has all the energy in the world, and it doesn’t have water,’ he said. 

Corpus Christi might not be the only location in the state to be impacted by the drought, as its refineries provide products to markets and regional airports in San Antonio, Austin and Dallas, Texas. 

They also provide supplies to Mexico, as Corpus Christi sits approximately 150 miles from the border.  

Keep reading

The Moral Flaws in Corporate Ethics Codes

In the world of modern corporations, ethics codes are often presented as beacons of integrity, guiding employees toward right conduct and fostering a just workplace. Yet, upon closer scrutiny, many such codes reveal themselves to be deeply flawed, prioritizing institutional self-preservation over genuine moral principles. This is particularly evident in how they handle reporting mechanisms, employee treatment, enforcement roles, and inclusivity policies. Far from upholding true ethics rooted in human dignity and fairness, these codes can become instruments of imbalance and dehumanization, rendering them not only unethical but profoundly immoral. By examining these aspects through the lens of timeless moral values — those emphasizing justice, truth, and the inherent worth of every person — we can see why such codes fail to embody authentic goodness and instead perpetuate harm.

One of the most troubling features of these corporate ethics codes is their emphasis on anonymous reporting, which, while intended to encourage openness, often empowers complainers at the expense of fairness. Anonymity allows individuals to raise concerns without personal risk, but it creates a system where accusations can be made freely, even over trivial matters or with ulterior motives, without the accused having a chance to respond directly or challenge the claims. This imbalance undermines the core ethical principle that justice must be even-handed, protecting both the one who speaks and the one who is spoken against. Morally, it erodes trust and invites abuse, as it favors one side’s voice while silencing the other’s right to defend their reputation. In a truly moral framework, accountability should bind everyone equally; by skewing power toward hidden accusers, the code fosters division rather than harmony, making it unethical in its disregard for balanced resolution and immoral in its potential to enable falsehood and injustice.

Equally concerning is how these codes tend to safeguard the company above all else, treating employees as mere tools rather than beings of intrinsic value. They frame ethical behavior as a means to enhance business success — building trust with customers or maintaining operational excellence — while downplaying the human element. Employees are expected to comply rigorously, facing penalties for lapses, yet the code offers little assurance that the company will prioritize their well-being in return. This approach reduces people to interchangeable parts, valued only for their utility, which contradicts the ethical imperative that every individual deserves respect and care independent of their productivity. Morally, it offends the fundamental truth that humans are ends in themselves, not means to corporate ends; by elevating institutional interests over personal dignity, the code promotes a cold, utilitarian mindset that dehumanizes workers and sows resentment, proving its immorality through this inversion of priorities.

Keep reading

Corporate And Academic DEI Offices Imported H-1B Workers To Tell Americans They’re Racist

American companies and institutions have utilized the notoriously abused H-1B work visa program to staff diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices, according to documents released by Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.

“I’ve reviewed numerous examples of hospitals, universities and other employers hiring foreign H-1B workers as DEI bureaucrats,” Schmitt said on social media. “Examples range from large banks and law firms to universities, healthcare systems, and even municipal park districts. Obviously, DEI positions are plainly non-technical and ideological in nature, and appear to fall outside the ‘specialty occupation’ intent of the H-1B statute.”

The senator’s office reviewed H-1B visa applications submitted by various employers and found that Yale New Haven Health filed Labor Condition Applications for the job of “Diversity and Inclusion Specialists.”

Carnegie Mellon University filed the same document for “Associate Dean of Diversity, Inclusion, Climate & Equity.” The trustees of Dartmouth College wanted a “Program Manager, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion.” As American academia is the progenitor of the DEI ideology, it is unsurprising to find it behind much of the H-1B abuse to fill DEI jobs.

In a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Joseph Edlow, Schmitt said those are “just a few of many examples.”

“More to the point, in light of everything we know about DEI, it is alarming that both private companies and public institutions alike appear to be using foreign workers to work in these roles — placing non-Americans in positions where they are tasked with policing the speech and thought of our own citizens,” Schmitt added.

As The Federalist reported, that kind of replacement is a feature of the playbook run by the left and the so-called “elite,” who consolidate power over the generational folkways of Americans by ushering in millions of people whose culture is totally unrecognizable to U.S. citizens. H-1B visas appear to be yet another tool in the left’s arsenal of government programs to achieve its political goals.

Schmitt himself recognized the detriments of “legal” immigration earlier this month at the National Conservatism conference, slamming the H-1B program specifically because it “imported millions of foreign nationals to replace American workers — and transferred entire industries into the hands of foreign lobbies.”

“Rather than recruiting genuinely exceptional top-level talent, in many cases the H-1B visa is now regularly used to staff middle management bureaucracies,” Schmitt said on social media. “Rather than 160+ IQ rocket scientists, it’s being used to import HR managers, customer service representatives, and so on.”

Keep reading