During a speech at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C. Tuesday, Joe Biden claimed that the US economy has been a “success” under his administration.
“Most economists agree the new administration is going to inherit a fairly strong economy,” Biden ridiculously claimed.
He added, “It is my profound hope that the new administration will preserve and build on this progress.”
What the hell is he talking about?
Just a few weeks before a poorly publicized Jan. 1 deadline, a judge has issued a nationwide injunction barring the enforcement of a controversial mandate that would compel tens of millions of small and large businesses to file beneficial ownership reports with an obscure federal agency. The ruling doesn’t kill the requirement altogether, but it does bar the Treasury Department from enforcing it until lawsuits challenging the requirement’s constitutionality are fully resolved.
“There are now CTA cases pending in the Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits,” notes attorney and Forbes contributor Kelly Phillips Erb, posting as @taxgirl on X. “It’s looking more like it could end up at the Supreme Court.” There’s also the possibility that the next Trump administration — either unilaterally or via cooperation with Congress — could find a way to kill or at least narrow the requirement.
The rule imposed by the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) swept the vast majority of “legal entities created to do business in the United States” into a new bureaucratic net, directing them to dump information about themselves and their “beneficial owners” into a federal database managed by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) — which most Main Street businesses and single-member LLC’s have probably never even heard of. Those who failed to comply faced severe penalties, ranging from civil fines of up to $591 a day to criminal consequences of up to $250,000 and a five-year prison term.
Just between November 2023 and November 2024, more than one million fewer native-born Americans were employed. The Biden-Harris economy is horrible for American citizens, and all the net job growth so touted by Democrats has gone to foreign-born workers, including an unknown number of illegal aliens.
Thank God Donald Trump is coming back into office, because American workers badly need a president and administration interested in protecting and promoting their interests rather than in bringing in the largest number of illegal aliens willing to work for low wages. Job numbers for November 2024 have come out from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and they tell a sobering tale about how American workers have actually lost jobs, not gained them, in total contradiction of Democrat propaganda.
Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni shared a chart from the BLS on Dec. 6, explaining, “There are now 1.1 million fewer native-born Americans employed than a year ago; all net job growth has gone to foreign-born workers, totally just over 400k since Nov ’23”. The BLS chart shows the major drop for “Native Born” workers and the rise in “Foreign Born” workers’ employment.
The use of a nuclear weapon by Russia in Ukraine would plunge the global economy into chaos, leading to food insecurity and high inflation, according to a declassified national security document.
The National Intelligence Council’s (NIC) memorandum from November 2022, titled “Potential Global Economic Consequences of a Use by Russia of Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine,” was declassified by Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines in September.
The NIC, established in 1979, reports to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and bridges the Intelligence Community with policy makers in the United States.
Unsurprisingly, the document states that a nuclear attack on Ukraine would trigger long-term global financial instability, push emerging markets into default, and lead to food insecurity.
Some leftists are so spiteful over the outcome of the election that they’re planning to not spend any money once Trump is sworn in as president.
Most people are expecting the economy to improve under Trump and these people don’t want that to happen, or at least don’t want Trump to get any credit for it.
They would rather that people remain miserable than see Trump and the country do well.
Breitbart News reports:
Leftists Pledge to Load Up on Supplies Before Biden Leaves Office, Buy Nothing ‘for the Next Four Years’ to Tank Trump Economy
Leftists have a master plan to ensure that President-elect Donald Trump’s economy tanks: They are not going to buy anything.
Leftists across the country are still reeling from Trump’s historic comeback victory, which saw him sweeping all seven swing states, garnering 312 electoral votes and also winning the popular vote after making historic gains in traditionally blue areas.
There was a sizable shift in the electorate and a clear mandate for change, but some leftists ardently disagree and have a plan to tank what everyone anticipates to be a strong economy under Trump’s leadership.
“Trump will not have a good economy because we don’t have to let him. I myself plan on paying my bills and saving every penny beyond that. I will not contribute to this economy in any other way,” one leftist X account with the handle @PrezLives2022 said to 127.1K followers, previewing plans to strategically purchase clothing “before he takes office and make sure I have everything I need for the next four years.”
If you’ve ever wondered whether that family-size cereal box is getting a little less family-friendly, you’re not alone. A report from Purdue University confirms what eagle-eyed shoppers have long suspected: our groceries are going on an unprecedented diet. In fact, over three-quarters of American consumers report noticing their favorite food products shrinking while prices stay the same. This practice, known as “shrinkflation,” has become increasingly prevalent in grocery stores across the nation, with snack foods being the primary culprit of this subtle downsizing strategy.
The October 2024 Consumer Food Insights report, conducted by Purdue University’s Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability (CFDAS), found that 77% of consumers have noticed shrinkflation in their grocery purchases over the past 30 days. The findings paint a picture of widespread awareness among shoppers, though many may still be missing the signs of this stealth price increase tactic.
Snack foods lead the pack as the most commonly noticed category affected by shrinkflation, with 78% of respondents reporting smaller portions in their favorite treats. Following closely behind are packaged desserts and sweets at 53% and frozen foods at 48%. The trend appears to be particularly noticeable to households with children, who report seeing shrinkflation across a broader range of product categories compared to households without children.
While consumers are becoming increasingly aware of shrinkflation, they may not be equipped to detect it effectively. The study revealed that while 82% of shoppers regularly check the overall price of items they’re buying, only about half consistently check the unit price or product weight – key indicators that would help spot shrinkflation in action. This disconnect between price awareness and size awareness may explain why many instances of shrinkflation go unnoticed until the change becomes obvious.
“A variety of factors may influence a producer’s decision to downsize a product’s size, such as rising costs in the supply chain and inflationary pressures,” explains the report’s lead author, Joseph Balagtas, a professor of agricultural economics at Purdue and director of CFDAS, in a media release. “The goal is to better understand how consumers perceive these reductions and if they have noticed them happening at all.”
The research team put consumers to the test with a theoretical scenario: Would they prefer their favorite snack to maintain its current price of $3.00 but decrease from 6 ounces to 5 ounces, or keep the 6 oz size but increase to $3.60? Interestingly, despite the identical unit price in both scenarios, 53% of respondents chose the size decrease over the price increase. This preference suggests that psychological factors may be at play in how consumers perceive and react to different types of price adjustments.
The study also uncovered strong feelings about corporate transparency when it comes to shrinkflation. Three-quarters of consumers believe companies should be legally required to clearly label when products have been reduced in size or quantity. Many view shrinkflation as a profit-driven strategy rather than a necessary response to rising costs, with a majority agreeing that companies use it to increase profits even when cost pressures aren’t present.
This skepticism appears to have potential consequences for brand loyalty. A significant portion of consumers reported being less likely to trust brands that practice shrinkflation, and many indicated they would switch to different brands if they noticed their regular products shrinking. This suggests that while shrinkflation might help companies maintain profit margins in the short term, it could risk damaging customer relationships in the long run.
“It is interesting yet not entirely surprising to see this sentiment as articles about grocery prices, accusations of corporate greed and shrinkflation continue to circulate in popular news media,” notes Balagtas.
As this election cycle has demonstrated yet again, Democrats are not shy about calling for tax increases. In every election cycle they call for more taxes, whether through corporate taxes or through taxes on unrealized capital gains.
Donald Trump, meanwhile, has pledged to cut some taxes. I say “some” because Trump has also pledged to raise taxes on imports.
Nonetheless, Trump ran on the idea that he would reduce the tax burden on Americans if elected.
Unfortunately, Trump has no plans to cut government spending, and this means there is little chance that ordinary taxpayers are going to experience any real tax relief.
This is because tax cuts without spending cuts don’t actually lessen the cost of government. A tax cut without a spending cut simply moves around the tax burden, and often replaces explicit taxation with the stealth tax of price inflation.
Unless accompanied by spending cuts, a tax cut simply increases deficit spending, and taxpayers will pay for deficits one way or another. Typically deficits are paid for using one or more of the following: future taxes, present interest payments, and monetary inflation. Unfortunately for the taxpayers, when it comes to paying off deficit spending, “the future” is already here. In the 2024 fiscal year, the taxpayers had to pay nearly $900 billion in interest on the debt. That huge tax bill exists because federal politicians in the past spent more than they had in revenues.
Forcing the taxpayers to pay off old debts isn’t exactly popular, however. So, federal technocrats have found a way to push down interest rates on government debt. This reduces the amount of interest owed and nominally reduces the cost of government debt.
But this also ends up costing the taxpayers bigtime because the way that technocrats suppress the cost of interest is by having the central bank buy up more federal debt. (By buying government debt, the central bank artificially drives up demand, so the Treasury doesn’t have to pay as much in interest to attract buyers.) And where does the central bank get the money to buy up government debt? It prints the money. That then leads to both monetary inflation and (eventually) price inflation.
So, tax cuts that increase deficits only end up placing new and different burdens on the taxpayers. They’re not a real tax cut at all.
It’s not a good day for the establishment. Just hours after Kamala Harris – and the Democrats – staggering loss which ushered in Trump as president for the third time and gave Republicans a sweep of Congress, Germany’s three-party ruling coalition which had been on the verge of collapse for months, imploded on Wednesday evening after Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced he will fire Finance Minister Christian Lindner over persistent rifts on spending and economic reforms, a move that paves the way for a snap election at the end of March.
The firing ejects Lindner’s fiscally conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP) from the troubled coalition, forcing Scholz to call for a confidence vote that he said would take place on January 15. If Scholz loses that vote, which is virtually certain, a snap election is set to take place by March.
The collapse of Germany’s government came just hours after Donald Trump’s clear win in the U.S. election, a result that stunned German political leaders, who depend on American military might for their country’s defense and fear Trump’s tariff policies will hobble German industry.
“Dear fellow citizens, I would have liked to have spared you this difficult decision, especially in times like these, when uncertainty is growing,” said Scholz – viewed as the weakest German chancellor in decades – in a statement at the chancellery.
But the rifts inside the coalition proved too great to overcome. Caught in the middle of an impossible battle, Lindner and his conservative FDP insisted that the German government stick to strict spending rules and cut taxes, even as his left-wing coalition partners wanted to maintain social spending and boost German industry through economic stimulus.
“All too often, Minister Lindner has blocked laws in an inappropriate manner,” said Scholz in a statement. “Too often he has engaged in petty party-political tactics. Too often he has broken my trust.”
Scholz said he had offered Lindner a deal to create an emergency fund to aid Ukraine that would exist outside Germany’s regular budget, but Lindner refused to participate in such fiscal gimmicks that saw the UK recently redefine the nature of “debt.”
“Olaf Scholz has long failed to recognize the need for a new economic awakening in our country,” said Lindner. “He has long played down the economic concerns of our citizens.”
As Politico reports, the FDP is the smallest party in the coalition and is now polling at only four percent — below the threshold needed to make it into the German parliament — meaning its leaders have been mulling a coalition break in order to save their political futures.
Crisis talks in the coalition of Scholz’s Social Democratic Party, the Greens and Lindner’s Free Democratic Party had come to a head after the FDP issued a paper with demands for liberal economic reforms that were difficult for the other two parties to accept.
Lindner’s recent policy paper, leaked to the media last week, called for tax cuts and a scaling back of climate policies in order to stimulate economic growth — both positions that put the party at odds with his coalition partners.
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are delivering for the American people. Unfortunately, no one wants what they’re delivering.
In the month of October, we had a disastrous jobs report with only 12,000 jobs being created. On the flipside, there was no shortage of illegal aliens flowing over the border in October. Biden and Harris really succeeded with that number.
These people do not deserve to be in power.
Breitbart News reports:
Biden/Harris Deliver More Migrants than Jobs in October
President Joe Biden’s border deputies invited four times more migrants in October than the number of extra jobs created by CEOs, according to data obtained by NewsNation.
Business groups created 12,000 additional jobs in September, amid an economic slowdown at the strike at Boeing. The 12,000 number was one-ninth of the 112,500 new jobs that were expected.
But Biden’s deputies also invited 49,840 more parole migrants to fly or bus into the U.S. for jobs during October. Those legally contested “parole migrants” are welcomed by the Office of Field Operations (OFO) at the ports of entry along the border.
An additional 56,580 migrants– including many women and children – crossed the border illegally and were registered by the Border Patrol. Some will be deported.
Biden’s deputies also welcomed at least 150,000 legal immigrants, foreign temporary workers, and refugees.
When the special military operation (SMO) was launched to end the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, the political West insisted that Russia was finished (precisely what it tried to ensure back in the 1990s). Its economy was supposed to be ruined, with the Kremlin even expected to default after much of its forex reserves were frozen (i.e. stolen) by Western banks.
After all this failed, the US-led belligerent power pole tried to impose the laughable price cap on Russian oil, one that even the most prominent Western nations tried to circumvent, including Japan and even the pathologically Russophobic United Kingdom. As for the United States, it continued buying Russian commodities while criticizing everyone else who did. Still, through its Neo-Nazi puppets in Kiev, NATO launched a virtual total war on Moscow in an attempt to disrupt its economy and cause as much damage as possible.
And yet, it all failed once again. The Kremlin secured economic stability despite being forced to conduct the SMO against the entire political West. Not only that, Russia overtook Germany as the world’s fifth and Europe’s largest economy, a humiliating defeat for its EU/NATO rivals who expected quite the contrary. Berlin’s economic performance was worse than in decades, while London was at its lowest in well over 300 years (since 1709, to be specific).
And yet, to “add insult to injury”, even Western data showed that the initial estimates of Moscow’s economic performance were wrong and that it was actually even better in both 2023 and 2024. Updated IMF’s forecast of 2.6% GDP growth doubled its previous assessment. According to the Financial Times, this increase of 1.5% was the largest for any economy featured in an update to the IMF’s World Economic Outlook, released on January 30 this year.
Top-ranking Russian officials, including the current Defense Minister Andrei Belousov (previously tasked with economic development), expected the growth to be stable enough for the Eurasian giant to overtake Japan by 2030. However, what was supposed to happen in no less than six years, actually happened in less than six months. According to this year’s data, President Putin’s forecast of increased economic growth (over 3.5-4%) not only turned out to be true, but even conservative, although the mainstream propaganda machine attempted to portray it as “too overoptimistic”. However, the only thing that was actually too overoptimistic was the political West’s expectation that the sanctions would work. Namely, according to earlier World Bank data updates for this year, Russia indeed managed to overtake Japan as the fourth largest economy in the world (in terms of GDP PPP).
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.