Connect with us

International

Apple MacBook Air M2 review

Our MacBook Pro review felt strangely incomplete when it dropped roughly two weeks back. In many ways, my experience with the laptop was defined as much…

Published

on

Our MacBook Pro review felt strangely incomplete when it dropped roughly two weeks back. In many ways, my experience with the laptop was defined as much by the product I was reviewing as it was by the absence of one I’d only briefly interacted with during a hands-on scrum at WWDC some weeks prior.

In many ways, the 13-inch 2022 MacBook Pro was a casualty of timing, a product of an earlier era, with new brains controlling the same vestigial organs. From the outside, it seemed the cadence of hardware refreshes has had some difficulty matching Apple’s progress on silicon over the past two years. It was something we saw with the first round of M1 systems — new chips in old shells.

For the M2 launch, the Pro has the unfortunate timing of being launched alongside what is arguably the single largest upgrade to the MacBook Air in the ultra portable’s 14-year history. It’s an external facelift to match new internal firepower. The 13-inch Pro, on the other hand, has little to recommend it beyond:

  1. Very possibly being the last device to sport the Touch Bar and
  2. A fan

If you’re an Apple user, you almost certainly have strong feelings about that first one. As far as No. 2, well, that’s not likely to be an issue for the majority of users. For those who anticipate pushing the M2 to a point that requires some active on-board cooling, however, might I interest you in the new 14-inch? That device set the stage for the next generation of MacBook designs, including this new Air.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

Here’s the full breakdown of the pluses and minuses of each.

Pro:

  • Touch Bar
  • Better audio capture — specifically the same three-mic array you’ll find on the 14-inch
  • A built-in fan-based cooling system for those occasions you really push the M2 to its limit (which, Apple will happily tell you, are few and far between for most users)
  • You’re Devin and you just, like, really hate notches, man
  • Longer battery (stated 20 hours versus 18), courtesy of a 58.2-watt-hour battery (the Air’s is 52.6)
  • You can buy it now

All right, it’s the Air’s turn. Let’s see:

Air:

  • Bigger screen (13.6 inch versus 13.3), with newer display technology (Liquid Retina versus Retina)
  • New design and colors
  • MagSafe (I would trade the Touch Bar for the new MagSafe in a second, but that’s just me)
  • 0.3 pounds lighter
  • 0.17 inches thinner
  • Upgraded camera (1080 to the Pro’s 780)
  • Function keys

Image Credits: Brian Heater

Seeing as how the Air really sucked the oxygen out of the room on the 13-inch Pro review, it seems only fair the device gets a fair bit of mention here, as well. It didn’t take a Nostradamus to intuit that the Air was going to be the better buy in 90% of scenarios (though I’m happy to still pat myself on the back for that one).

Having used the Air for the past couple of weeks, I can happily report that the prediction was right on, and, honestly, I’d say that — as the lineup currently exists — this is the MacBook I would recommend to a majority of users. The thin and light has long been one of the most popular entries in the line, but in past years, the form factor has — understandably — come with its share of trade-offs, including things like power and battery life. The 14-inch Pro will still edge out the M2 Air, but for most people in most scenarios, the trade-offs are negligible here.

As an owner of one of the earliest Air models, there were times the compromises could be glaring. I edit video and audio, both tasks that could feel dodgy on the system. The laptop was always a good companion in my pre-pandemic travel. The gulf in size and weight between those Airs and Pro was profound, and the system never left my side. But there was a tacit understanding for creative Pros with heavy workloads that you were going to need a more robust system to come home to.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

I’m certainly not suggesting that there isn’t still a gulf between the 8-core M2 Air and, say, the 20-core M1 Max or Pro Studio, but the floor is much higher than it was in those heady Intel days.

Design-wise, the Air has much more in common with the 14-inch Pro than the Airs that came before it. I’m sure some very long, heated conversations happened behind closed, transparent doors at Apple’s Cupertino spaceship, regarding the decision to retire the Air’s iconic tapered design. Apple did, after all, cling to it for nearly a decade and a half (a perhaps longer, if you consider the still-available M1 Air).

The new design is effectively a scaled-down version of the 14-inch Pro. It adopts the same, boxy design, shrinking it down to 0.44 inches thick (versus 0.61) and 2.7 pounds (versus 3.5). It’s a nice weight, with a solid feel that should slip nicely into a backpack and perform well on a seat-back tray table during a long flight.

Apple added two new colors to the mix — Midnight and Starlight. I’m a fan of the darker Midnight, though that finish tends to be a massive fingerprint magnet (though, as you can no doubt detect in some of our photos, our system wasn’t immune). Apple ended up sending Starlight, a finish with a yellowish hue that is far subtler than the almost gold-colored press photos make it out to be. Honestly, I had to doublecheck the box to make sure it was the color the company sent. It’s more pronounced when the system is stacked up against others. The new colors arrive with matching power cables, which is a fun touch.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

Said cable is a MagSafe, the much-missed feature the company brought back with the 14-inch Pro. It’s nice to have a robot safety cable back on the product. It frees up the two USB-C ports, even if the difference in charging speeds is more or less negligible. All three of the aforementioned ports are located on the same side of the device, which is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. In general, my preference would be two per side in addition to MagSafe, but barring that, one on each side makes sense when it comes to negotiating cable space.

On the flip side is, mercifully, a headphone jack. There’s a part of me that worries Apple will think better of it with each subsequent release, but as someone who prefers to hard wire for audio editing, I’m grateful it’s still around. Better still, Apple’s added support for high-impedance headphones, which are a bit more power hungry, but provide improved audio qualify — a nice addition for people who use their system for music production.

[Left: M2 MacBook Pro 13-inch, Right: M2 MacBook Air]

The webcam has been upgraded, as well, from 720 to 1080p, a nice addition in this age of remote work. The color and clarity are improved, and there’s overall less noise. As your can see in the above photos, the 13-inch really struggles with backlighting. The ceiling lights cast glare across my face. The improvements come from new sensors, coupled with improved image processing on the new chips.

The quality still isn’t great. I’d be completely fine using it for a work Zoom, but for those times I’m broadcasting to the outside world, I’m going to opt for an external camera every time. In my case, that either means the Opal webcam or docking my iPhone and using Ventura’s new Continuity Camera feature. For the latter, I do have some questions around the long-term viability of sticking the weight of an iPhone atop the Air’s lid, especially with the smaller hinge. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see on that front.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The new camera comes with a new notch — another design piece borrowed from the 14-inch system. I assumed the cutout would be even more pronounced on a smaller screen, but honestly, I mostly forgot it was there after a while. In the end, the feature means Apple’s effectively able to cram more screen into the same footprint — which is part of the reason the Air can sneak in a few more fractions of an inch than the 13-inch Pro. The device trades a Retina Display for Liquid Retina, maintaining roughly the same pixel density (a 2560 x 1600 13.3-inch screen on the 2020 Air and 250 x 1664 on the new 13.6 system), though the brightness has been bumped from 400 to 500 nits.

The standard side grilles have been swapped out for back-firing speakers, designed to reflect off the bottom of the display. The array has been bumped up from two speakers (on the 2020 model) to four, and Apple has added in Spatial Audio headtracking for connected AirPods. The sound quality is passable, but for music listening, I’d advise investing in a Bluetooth speaker or headphones. I will say for my part, I very seldom rely on my laptop’s built-in speakers, with the exception of hotel rooms or watching something quick in bed.

The redesigned body, coupled with a thinner logic board, allows for more room for battery. The Air gets an upgrade from 49.9-watt-hours to 52.6. Overall, however, the stated battery life remains the same. I was able to get a bit over 17 hours of video playback, streaming video on Apple TV, with the brightness at 50 and the sound on. That should be enough to get you through just about any flight (maybe budget in a 90-minute nap if you’re flying from New York to Singapore). Interestingly, in addition to the new MagSafe colors, Apple’s trying something different with the power brick. Get the standard model with the 8-core GPU and you get the standard 30w USB-C charger.

Image Credits: Apple

Splurge for the 10-core GPU, and the company tosses in the new 35W Dual USB-C Port Compact Power Adapter. It’s surprisingly small for a MacBook charger. It’s fully flat on the bottom, with a retractable plug that lies flush when stowed. And, as advertised, you get a pair of USB-C cables to charge two devices at once (though at 35W, I definitely wouldn’t recommend attempting to top off the Pro with the thing).

The keyboard is consistent with recent MacBook models — which is, again, to say much improved from a few years ago. The Touch Bar has been swapped out for a familiar row of function keys — something you don’t realize just how much you miss until you have to go with out. The device does, however, maintain Touch ID, which, let’s be real, was the best part of the Touch Bar anyway.

Image Credits: Apple

Apple sent a unit with 8GB RAM, 512GB of storage, an 8-core CPU and 10-core GPU. That runs $1,499 as configured – $300 above the entry price. That’s considerably more expensive than the M1 Air, which starts at $1,000 and is honestly still a perfectly reasonable choice. It is, however, well below the 14-inch Pro’s $1,999 starting price.

The Air scored 1922 on the single-core and 8974 on the multi-core Geekbench 5 tests. Predictably, that puts its right in line with the 1939 and 8955 scores we got on the 13-inch M2 Pro. It also bested the 14-inch Pro’s 1781 single-core score, but the M1 Max unsurprisingly smoked on multi-core with a score of 12,674. We saw similar results on the Intel test at 1462  and 6955 for single- and multi-core, respectively. Again, that’s right in line with the 13-inch Pro’s 1485 and 6992 for applications that require the Rosetta 2 emulator (I’m looking at you, Audacity).

That’s a good way of thinking about the new M2 chips, really: higher floor, lower ceiling. They’re impressively fast with relatively simple tasks, but when you really push the limits, the M1 Max and Ultra can still do laps around them. The Air’s fanless design presents another bottleneck for truly resource intensive tasks, but most people aren’t likely to encounter that day-to-day.

The GPU gains are quite impressive, as well, falling in line with the M2 Pro, slightly edging out the 14-inch Pro and only being bested by the Mac Studio. The Air isn’t a gaming powerhouse just yet, but the future is starting to look much brighter on that front.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The 14-inch Pro arrived last year like a breath of fresh air. For the first time in a long time, it felt like Apple wasn’t making unnecessary compromises. It was, perhaps, a new era of truly listening to consumer feedback, rather than assuming a company always knows what’s best for its end users. The line was returning to its creative pro roots, without alienating mainstream consumers.

The Air is like version 2.0, bringing an even more mainstream sensibility to the fore. It’s the power of Apple silicon, improvements to key components like the webcam and charging, all in a smaller, more portable form factor. It’s true there are still compromises – that much might be unavoidable. I’d prefer, for instance, a better webcam and more than two USB-C ports. But taken as a whole, this is a great package.

There’s a good bit of variety in the MacBook line, at present — something you haven’t been able to say at every point in its history. If you’re looking for good performance at a lower price-point, the M1 Air is still a fine choice. If you need more power on-the-go, the 14-inch Pro is great (though I’m admittedly curious what the M2 Max and Ultra will bring). And if you want…I dunno, a Touch Bar, I guess, there’s always the 13-inch Pro vying for your hard-earned bucks.

The M2 Air, meanwhile, strikes a harmonious balance. It’s thin and light, has some of the line’s best new features and boasts enough power for most needs, without going overboard for daily use. It’s the right MacBook for most consumers and a warm reminder of why the Air struck a chord with so many users so many years ago.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Four Years Ago This Week, Freedom Was Torched

Four Years Ago This Week, Freedom Was Torched

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

"Beware the Ides of March,” Shakespeare…

Published

on

Four Years Ago This Week, Freedom Was Torched

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

"Beware the Ides of March,” Shakespeare quotes the soothsayer’s warning Julius Caesar about what turned out to be an impending assassination on March 15. The death of American liberty happened around the same time four years ago, when the orders went out from all levels of government to close all indoor and outdoor venues where people gather. 

It was not quite a law and it was never voted on by anyone. Seemingly out of nowhere, people who the public had largely ignored, the public health bureaucrats, all united to tell the executives in charge – mayors, governors, and the president – that the only way to deal with a respiratory virus was to scrap freedom and the Bill of Rights. 

And they did, not only in the US but all over the world. 

The forced closures in the US began on March 6 when the mayor of Austin, Texas, announced the shutdown of the technology and arts festival South by Southwest. Hundreds of thousands of contracts, of attendees and vendors, were instantly scrapped. The mayor said he was acting on the advice of his health experts and they in turn pointed to the CDC, which in turn pointed to the World Health Organization, which in turn pointed to member states and so on. 

There was no record of Covid in Austin, Texas, that day but they were sure they were doing their part to stop the spread. It was the first deployment of the “Zero Covid” strategy that became, for a time, official US policy, just as in China. 

It was never clear precisely who to blame or who would take responsibility, legal or otherwise. 

This Friday evening press conference in Austin was just the beginning. By the next Thursday evening, the lockdown mania reached a full crescendo. Donald Trump went on nationwide television to announce that everything was under control but that he was stopping all travel in and out of US borders, from Europe, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. American citizens would need to return by Monday or be stuck. 

Americans abroad panicked while spending on tickets home and crowded into international airports with waits up to 8 hours standing shoulder to shoulder. It was the first clear sign: there would be no consistency in the deployment of these edicts. 

There is no historical record of any American president ever issuing global travel restrictions like this without a declaration of war. Until then, and since the age of travel began, every American had taken it for granted that he could buy a ticket and board a plane. That was no longer possible. Very quickly it became even difficult to travel state to state, as most states eventually implemented a two-week quarantine rule. 

The next day, Friday March 13, Broadway closed and New York City began to empty out as any residents who could went to summer homes or out of state. 

On that day, the Trump administration declared the national emergency by invoking the Stafford Act which triggers new powers and resources to the Federal Emergency Management Administration. 

In addition, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a classified document, only to be released to the public months later. The document initiated the lockdowns. It still does not exist on any government website.

The White House Coronavirus Response Task Force, led by the Vice President, will coordinate a whole-of-government approach, including governors, state and local officials, and members of Congress, to develop the best options for the safety, well-being, and health of the American people. HHS is the LFA [Lead Federal Agency] for coordinating the federal response to COVID-19.

Closures were guaranteed:

Recommend significantly limiting public gatherings and cancellation of almost all sporting events, performances, and public and private meetings that cannot be convened by phone. Consider school closures. Issue widespread ‘stay at home’ directives for public and private organizations, with nearly 100% telework for some, although critical public services and infrastructure may need to retain skeleton crews. Law enforcement could shift to focus more on crime prevention, as routine monitoring of storefronts could be important.

In this vision of turnkey totalitarian control of society, the vaccine was pre-approved: “Partner with pharmaceutical industry to produce anti-virals and vaccine.”

The National Security Council was put in charge of policy making. The CDC was just the marketing operation. That’s why it felt like martial law. Without using those words, that’s what was being declared. It even urged information management, with censorship strongly implied.

The timing here is fascinating. This document came out on a Friday. But according to every autobiographical account – from Mike Pence and Scott Gottlieb to Deborah Birx and Jared Kushner – the gathered team did not meet with Trump himself until the weekend of the 14th and 15th, Saturday and Sunday. 

According to their account, this was his first real encounter with the urge that he lock down the whole country. He reluctantly agreed to 15 days to flatten the curve. He announced this on Monday the 16th with the famous line: “All public and private venues where people gather should be closed.”

This makes no sense. The decision had already been made and all enabling documents were already in circulation. 

There are only two possibilities. 

One: the Department of Homeland Security issued this March 13 HHS document without Trump’s knowledge or authority. That seems unlikely. 

Two: Kushner, Birx, Pence, and Gottlieb are lying. They decided on a story and they are sticking to it. 

Trump himself has never explained the timeline or precisely when he decided to greenlight the lockdowns. To this day, he avoids the issue beyond his constant claim that he doesn’t get enough credit for his handling of the pandemic.

With Nixon, the famous question was always what did he know and when did he know it? When it comes to Trump and insofar as concerns Covid lockdowns – unlike the fake allegations of collusion with Russia – we have no investigations. To this day, no one in the corporate media seems even slightly interested in why, how, or when human rights got abolished by bureaucratic edict. 

As part of the lockdowns, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which was and is part of the Department of Homeland Security, as set up in 2018, broke the entire American labor force into essential and nonessential.

They also set up and enforced censorship protocols, which is why it seemed like so few objected. In addition, CISA was tasked with overseeing mail-in ballots. 

Only 8 days into the 15, Trump announced that he wanted to open the country by Easter, which was on April 12. His announcement on March 24 was treated as outrageous and irresponsible by the national press but keep in mind: Easter would already take us beyond the initial two-week lockdown. What seemed to be an opening was an extension of closing. 

This announcement by Trump encouraged Birx and Fauci to ask for an additional 30 days of lockdown, which Trump granted. Even on April 23, Trump told Georgia and Florida, which had made noises about reopening, that “It’s too soon.” He publicly fought with the governor of Georgia, who was first to open his state. 

Before the 15 days was over, Congress passed and the president signed the 880-page CARES Act, which authorized the distribution of $2 trillion to states, businesses, and individuals, thus guaranteeing that lockdowns would continue for the duration. 

There was never a stated exit plan beyond Birx’s public statements that she wanted zero cases of Covid in the country. That was never going to happen. It is very likely that the virus had already been circulating in the US and Canada from October 2019. A famous seroprevalence study by Jay Bhattacharya came out in May 2020 discerning that infections and immunity were already widespread in the California county they examined. 

What that implied was two crucial points: there was zero hope for the Zero Covid mission and this pandemic would end as they all did, through endemicity via exposure, not from a vaccine as such. That was certainly not the message that was being broadcast from Washington. The growing sense at the time was that we all had to sit tight and just wait for the inoculation on which pharmaceutical companies were working. 

By summer 2020, you recall what happened. A restless generation of kids fed up with this stay-at-home nonsense seized on the opportunity to protest racial injustice in the killing of George Floyd. Public health officials approved of these gatherings – unlike protests against lockdowns – on grounds that racism was a virus even more serious than Covid. Some of these protests got out of hand and became violent and destructive. 

Meanwhile, substance abuse rage – the liquor and weed stores never closed – and immune systems were being degraded by lack of normal exposure, exactly as the Bakersfield doctors had predicted. Millions of small businesses had closed. The learning losses from school closures were mounting, as it turned out that Zoom school was near worthless. 

It was about this time that Trump seemed to figure out – thanks to the wise council of Dr. Scott Atlas – that he had been played and started urging states to reopen. But it was strange: he seemed to be less in the position of being a president in charge and more of a public pundit, Tweeting out his wishes until his account was banned. He was unable to put the worms back in the can that he had approved opening. 

By that time, and by all accounts, Trump was convinced that the whole effort was a mistake, that he had been trolled into wrecking the country he promised to make great. It was too late. Mail-in ballots had been widely approved, the country was in shambles, the media and public health bureaucrats were ruling the airwaves, and his final months of the campaign failed even to come to grips with the reality on the ground. 

At the time, many people had predicted that once Biden took office and the vaccine was released, Covid would be declared to have been beaten. But that didn’t happen and mainly for one reason: resistance to the vaccine was more intense than anyone had predicted. The Biden administration attempted to impose mandates on the entire US workforce. Thanks to a Supreme Court ruling, that effort was thwarted but not before HR departments around the country had already implemented them. 

As the months rolled on – and four major cities closed all public accommodations to the unvaccinated, who were being demonized for prolonging the pandemic – it became clear that the vaccine could not and would not stop infection or transmission, which means that this shot could not be classified as a public health benefit. Even as a private benefit, the evidence was mixed. Any protection it provided was short-lived and reports of vaccine injury began to mount. Even now, we cannot gain full clarity on the scale of the problem because essential data and documentation remains classified. 

After four years, we find ourselves in a strange position. We still do not know precisely what unfolded in mid-March 2020: who made what decisions, when, and why. There has been no serious attempt at any high level to provide a clear accounting much less assign blame. 

Not even Tucker Carlson, who reportedly played a crucial role in getting Trump to panic over the virus, will tell us the source of his own information or what his source told him. There have been a series of valuable hearings in the House and Senate but they have received little to no press attention, and none have focus on the lockdown orders themselves. 

The prevailing attitude in public life is just to forget the whole thing. And yet we live now in a country very different from the one we inhabited five years ago. Our media is captured. Social media is widely censored in violation of the First Amendment, a problem being taken up by the Supreme Court this month with no certainty of the outcome. The administrative state that seized control has not given up power. Crime has been normalized. Art and music institutions are on the rocks. Public trust in all official institutions is at rock bottom. We don’t even know if we can trust the elections anymore. 

In the early days of lockdown, Henry Kissinger warned that if the mitigation plan does not go well, the world will find itself set “on fire.” He died in 2023. Meanwhile, the world is indeed on fire. The essential struggle in every country on earth today concerns the battle between the authority and power of permanent administration apparatus of the state – the very one that took total control in lockdowns – and the enlightenment ideal of a government that is responsible to the will of the people and the moral demand for freedom and rights. 

How this struggle turns out is the essential story of our times. 

CODA: I’m embedding a copy of PanCAP Adapted, as annotated by Debbie Lerman. You might need to download the whole thing to see the annotations. If you can help with research, please do.

*  *  *

Jeffrey Tucker is the author of the excellent new book 'Life After Lock-Down'

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/11/2024 - 23:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Red Candle In The Wind

Red Candle In The Wind

By Benjamin PIcton of Rabobank

February non-farm payrolls superficially exceeded market expectations on Friday by…

Published

on

Red Candle In The Wind

By Benjamin PIcton of Rabobank

February non-farm payrolls superficially exceeded market expectations on Friday by printing at 275,000 against a consensus call of 200,000. We say superficially, because the downward revisions to prior months totalled 167,000 for December and January, taking the total change in employed persons well below the implied forecast, and helping the unemployment rate to pop two-ticks to 3.9%. The U6 underemployment rate also rose from 7.2% to 7.3%, while average hourly earnings growth fell to 0.2% m-o-m and average weekly hours worked languished at 34.3, equalling pre-pandemic lows.

Undeterred by the devil in the detail, the algos sprang into action once exchanges opened. Market darling NVIDIA hit a new intraday high of $974 before (presumably) the humans took over and sold the stock down more than 10% to close at $875.28. If our suspicions are correct that it was the AIs buying before the humans started selling (no doubt triggering trailing stops on the way down), the irony is not lost on us.

The 1-day chart for NVIDIA now makes for interesting viewing, because the red candle posted on Friday presents quite a strong bearish engulfing signal. Volume traded on the day was almost double the 15-day simple moving average, and similar price action is observable on the 1-day charts for both Intel and AMD. Regular readers will be aware that we have expressed incredulity in the past about the durability the AI thematic melt-up, so it will be interesting to see whether Friday’s sell off is just a profit-taking blip, or a genuine trend reversal.

AI equities aside, this week ought to be important for markets because the BTFP program expires today. That means that the Fed will no longer be loaning cash to the banking system in exchange for collateral pledged at-par. The KBW Regional Banking index has so far taken this in its stride and is trading 30% above the lows established during the mini banking crisis of this time last year, but the Fed’s liquidity facility was effectively an exercise in can-kicking that makes regional banks a sector of the market worth paying attention to in the weeks ahead. Even here in Sydney, regulators are warning of external risks posed to the banking sector from scheduled refinancing of commercial real estate loans following sharp falls in valuations.

Markets are sending signals in other sectors, too. Gold closed at a new record-high of $2178/oz on Friday after trading above $2200/oz briefly. Gold has been going ballistic since the Friday before last, posting gains even on days where 2-year Treasury yields have risen. Gold bugs are buying as real yields fall from the October highs and inflation breakevens creep higher. This is particularly interesting as gold ETFs have been recording net outflows; suggesting that price gains aren’t being driven by a retail pile-in. Are gold buyers now betting on a stagflationary outcome where the Fed cuts without inflation being anchored at the 2% target? The price action around the US CPI release tomorrow ought to be illuminating.

Leaving the day-to-day movements to one side, we are also seeing further signs of structural change at the macro level. The UK budget last week included a provision for the creation of a British ISA. That is, an Individual Savings Account that provides tax breaks to savers who invest their money in the stock of British companies. This follows moves last year to encourage pension funds to head up the risk curve by allocating 5% of their capital to unlisted investments.

As a Hail Mary option for a government cruising toward an electoral drubbing it’s a curious choice, but it’s worth highlighting as cash-strapped governments increasingly see private savings pools as a funding solution for their spending priorities.

Of course, the UK is not alone in making creeping moves towards financial repression. In contrast to announcements today of increased trade liberalisation, Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers has in the recent past flagged his interest in tapping private pension savings to fund state spending priorities, including defence, public housing and renewable energy projects. Both the UK and Australia appear intent on finding ways to open up the lungs of their economies, but government wants more say in directing private capital flows for state goals.

So, how far is the blurring of the lines between free markets and state planning likely to go? Given the immense and varied budgetary (and security) pressures that governments are facing, could we see a re-up of WWII-era Victory bonds, where private investors are encouraged to do their patriotic duty by directly financing government at negative real rates?

That would really light a fire under the gold market.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/11/2024 - 19:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Trump “Clearly Hasn’t Learned From His COVID-Era Mistakes”, RFK Jr. Says

Trump "Clearly Hasn’t Learned From His COVID-Era Mistakes", RFK Jr. Says

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President…

Published

on

Trump "Clearly Hasn't Learned From His COVID-Era Mistakes", RFK Jr. Says

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Joe Biden claimed that COVID vaccines are now helping cancer patients during his State of the Union address on March 7, but it was a response on Truth Social from former President Donald Trump that drew the ire of independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. holds a voter rally in Grand Rapids, Mich., on Feb. 10, 2024. (Mitch Ranger for The Epoch Times)

During the address, President Biden said: “The pandemic no longer controls our lives. The vaccines that saved us from COVID are now being used to help beat cancer, turning setback into comeback. That’s what America does.”

President Trump wrote: “The Pandemic no longer controls our lives. The VACCINES that saved us from COVID are now being used to help beat cancer—turning setback into comeback. YOU’RE WELCOME JOE. NINE-MONTH APPROVAL TIME VS. 12 YEARS THAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN YOU.”

An outspoken critic of President Trump’s COVID response, and the Operation Warp Speed program that escalated the availability of COVID vaccines, Mr. Kennedy said on X, formerly known as Twitter, that “Donald Trump clearly hasn’t learned from his COVID-era mistakes.”

“He fails to recognize how ineffective his warp speed vaccine is as the ninth shot is being recommended to seniors. Even more troubling is the documented harm being caused by the shot to so many innocent children and adults who are suffering myocarditis, pericarditis, and brain inflammation,” Mr. Kennedy remarked.

“This has been confirmed by a CDC-funded study of 99 million people. Instead of bragging about its speedy approval, we should be honestly and transparently debating the abundant evidence that this vaccine may have caused more harm than good.

“I look forward to debating both Trump and Biden on Sept. 16 in San Marcos, Texas.”

Mr. Kennedy announced in April 2023 that he would challenge President Biden for the 2024 Democratic Party presidential nomination before declaring his run as an independent last October, claiming that the Democrat National Committee was “rigging the primary.”

Since the early stages of his campaign, Mr. Kennedy has generated more support than pundits expected from conservatives, moderates, and independents resulting in speculation that he could take votes away from President Trump.

Many Republicans continue to seek a reckoning over the government-imposed pandemic lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

President Trump’s defense of Operation Warp Speed, the program he rolled out in May 2020 to spur the development and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines amid the pandemic, remains a sticking point for some of his supporters.

Vice President Mike Pence (L) and President Donald Trump deliver an update on Operation Warp Speed in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington on Nov. 13, 2020. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

Operation Warp Speed featured a partnership between the government, the military, and the private sector, with the government paying for millions of vaccine doses to be produced.

President Trump released a statement in March 2021 saying: “I hope everyone remembers when they’re getting the COVID-19 Vaccine, that if I wasn’t President, you wouldn’t be getting that beautiful ‘shot’ for 5 years, at best, and probably wouldn’t be getting it at all. I hope everyone remembers!”

President Trump said about the COVID-19 vaccine in an interview on Fox News in March 2021: “It works incredibly well. Ninety-five percent, maybe even more than that. I would recommend it, and I would recommend it to a lot of people that don’t want to get it and a lot of those people voted for me, frankly.

“But again, we have our freedoms and we have to live by that and I agree with that also. But it’s a great vaccine, it’s a safe vaccine, and it’s something that works.”

On many occasions, President Trump has said that he is not in favor of vaccine mandates.

An environmental attorney, Mr. Kennedy founded Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit that aims to end childhood health epidemics by promoting vaccine safeguards, among other initiatives.

Last year, Mr. Kennedy told podcaster Joe Rogan that ivermectin was suppressed by the FDA so that the COVID-19 vaccines could be granted emergency use authorization.

He has criticized Big Pharma, vaccine safety, and government mandates for years.

Since launching his presidential campaign, Mr. Kennedy has made his stances on the COVID-19 vaccines, and vaccines in general, a frequent talking point.

“I would argue that the science is very clear right now that they [vaccines] caused a lot more problems than they averted,” Mr. Kennedy said on Piers Morgan Uncensored last April.

“And if you look at the countries that did not vaccinate, they had the lowest death rates, they had the lowest COVID and infection rates.”

Additional data show a “direct correlation” between excess deaths and high vaccination rates in developed countries, he said.

President Trump and Mr. Kennedy have similar views on topics like protecting the U.S.-Mexico border and ending the Russia-Ukraine war.

COVID-19 is the topic where Mr. Kennedy and President Trump seem to differ the most.

Former President Donald Trump intended to “drain the swamp” when he took office in 2017, but he was “intimidated by bureaucrats” at federal agencies and did not accomplish that objective, Mr. Kennedy said on Feb. 5.

Speaking at a voter rally in Tucson, where he collected signatures to get on the Arizona ballot, the independent presidential candidate said President Trump was “earnest” when he vowed to “drain the swamp,” but it was “business as usual” during his term.

John Bolton, who President Trump appointed as a national security adviser, is “the template for a swamp creature,” Mr. Kennedy said.

Scott Gottlieb, who President Trump named to run the FDA, “was Pfizer’s business partner” and eventually returned to Pfizer, Mr. Kennedy said.

Mr. Kennedy said that President Trump had more lobbyists running federal agencies than any president in U.S. history.

“You can’t reform them when you’ve got the swamp creatures running them, and I’m not going to do that. I’m going to do something different,” Mr. Kennedy said.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, President Trump “did not ask the questions that he should have,” he believes.

President Trump “knew that lockdowns were wrong” and then “agreed to lockdowns,” Mr. Kennedy said.

He also “knew that hydroxychloroquine worked, he said it,” Mr. Kennedy explained, adding that he was eventually “rolled over” by Dr. Anthony Fauci and his advisers.

President Donald Trump greets the crowd before he leaves at the Operation Warp Speed Vaccine Summit in Washington on Dec. 8, 2020. (Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)

MaryJo Perry, a longtime advocate for vaccine choice and a Trump supporter, thinks votes will be at a premium come Election Day, particularly because the independent and third-party field is becoming more competitive.

Ms. Perry, president of Mississippi Parents for Vaccine Rights, believes advocates for medical freedom could determine who is ultimately president.

She believes that Mr. Kennedy is “pulling votes from Trump” because of the former president’s stance on the vaccines.

“People care about medical freedom. It’s an important issue here in Mississippi, and across the country,” Ms. Perry told The Epoch Times.

“Trump should admit he was wrong about Operation Warp Speed and that COVID vaccines have been dangerous. That would make a difference among people he has offended.”

President Trump won’t lose enough votes to Mr. Kennedy about Operation Warp Speed and COVID vaccines to have a significant impact on the election, Ohio Republican strategist Wes Farno told The Epoch Times.

President Trump won in Ohio by eight percentage points in both 2016 and 2020. The Ohio Republican Party endorsed President Trump for the nomination in 2024.

“The positives of a Trump presidency far outweigh the negatives,” Mr. Farno said. “People are more concerned about their wallet and the economy.

“They are asking themselves if they were better off during President Trump’s term compared to since President Biden took office. The answer to that question is obvious because many Americans are struggling to afford groceries, gas, mortgages, and rent payments.

“America needs President Trump.”

Multiple national polls back Mr. Farno’s view.

As of March 6, the RealClearPolitics average of polls indicates that President Trump has 41.8 percent support in a five-way race that includes President Biden (38.4 percent), Mr. Kennedy (12.7 percent), independent Cornel West (2.6 percent), and Green Party nominee Jill Stein (1.7 percent).

A Pew Research Center study conducted among 10,133 U.S. adults from Feb. 7 to Feb. 11 showed that Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents (42 percent) are more likely than Republicans and GOP-leaning independents (15 percent) to say they have received an updated COVID vaccine.

The poll also reported that just 28 percent of adults say they have received the updated COVID inoculation.

The peer-reviewed multinational study of more than 99 million vaccinated people that Mr. Kennedy referenced in his X post on March 7 was published in the Vaccine journal on Feb. 12.

It aimed to evaluate the risk of 13 adverse events of special interest (AESI) following COVID-19 vaccination. The AESIs spanned three categories—neurological, hematologic (blood), and cardiovascular.

The study reviewed data collected from more than 99 million vaccinated people from eight nations—Argentina, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, New Zealand, and Scotland—looking at risks up to 42 days after getting the shots.

Three vaccines—Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines as well as AstraZeneca’s viral vector jab—were examined in the study.

Researchers found higher-than-expected cases that they deemed met the threshold to be potential safety signals for multiple AESIs, including for Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), myocarditis, and pericarditis.

A safety signal refers to information that could suggest a potential risk or harm that may be associated with a medical product.

The study identified higher incidences of neurological, cardiovascular, and blood disorder complications than what the researchers expected.

President Trump’s role in Operation Warp Speed, and his continued praise of the COVID vaccine, remains a concern for some voters, including those who still support him.

Krista Cobb is a 40-year-old mother in western Ohio. She voted for President Trump in 2020 and said she would cast her vote for him this November, but she was stunned when she saw his response to President Biden about the COVID-19 vaccine during the State of the Union address.

I love President Trump and support his policies, but at this point, he has to know they [advisers and health officials] lied about the shot,” Ms. Cobb told The Epoch Times.

“If he continues to promote it, especially after all of the hearings they’ve had about it in Congress, the side effects, and cover-ups on Capitol Hill, at what point does he become the same as the people who have lied?” Ms. Cobb added.

“I think he should distance himself from talk about Operation Warp Speed and even admit that he was wrong—that the vaccines have not had the impact he was told they would have. If he did that, people would respect him even more.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/11/2024 - 17:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending