Woke Investment Managers Pull $15.7 Trillion from Climate Activism Pact

BlackRock and other U.S.-based investment management conglomerates have chosen to withdraw from a controversial initiative, Climate Action 100+ (CA100+), that pressured companies to “reduce greenhouse gas emissions” to “net-zero emissions by 2050 [or] sooner,” in pursuit of “limiting global average temperature increase” to 1.5 degrees above “pre-industrial levels.” The withdrawals follow financial and legal pressure from U.S. state officials, as well a new phase of cooperation for CA100+ that would move “from words to action.”

As of last June, more than 700 firms had joined CA100+, controlling a breathtaking $68 trillion, or nearly 2.5 times the U.S.A.’s annual GDP.

However, last week, Reuters reported that some of the world’s largest investment managers had withdrawn from CA100+. BlackRock, the world’s largest investment firm with $9 trillion assets under management (AUM), withdrew its U.S. arm, worth $6.6 trillion. State Street (4th largest with $4.1 trillion AUM), J.P. Morgan (6th largest with $3.1 trillion AUM), and PIMCO (14th largest with $1.9 trillion AUM) all withdrew entirely. However, Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs, Invesco, and Franklin Templeton (U.S. firms among the world’s 20 largest asset managers) are still signatories.

With the withdrawal of these four firms, CA100+ lost influence over the $15.7 trillion in assets they managed, cutting its influence by 23%.

At least in part, the withdrawals were triggered last summer, when the Steering Committee for CA100+ announced a “Phase Two” for their campaign of corporate climate activism, expected to last until 2030. “In phase two, the overarching goal is to go from words to action,” explained CA100+ Steering Committee Chairman Francois Humbert. The new phase would mean “more accountability, more transparency, more seniority.” The new guidelines would require investment managers to disclose how they vote on climate-related motions at shareholder meetings, as well as how often they lobby corporations and policymakers with their climate agenda.

When CA100+ upped the ante, several major U.S. investment firms promptly folded. BlackRock and State Street cited independence concerns, J.P. Morgan said it had developed “its own climate risk engagement framework,” while PIMCO claimed it “operates its own portfolio-relevant engagement activities with issuers on sustainability.”

In other words, these investment managers do not object to leveraging their fiduciary trust to pursue climate activism. All four of them are still doing climate activism on their own. They did object to the loss of independence of having an international organization micromanage their climate activism — how very American.

However, independence concerns over CA100+’s move to “Phase Two” does not fully explain the abrupt withdrawal of these investment management firms. After all, they still basically share CA100+’s goal of leveraging the investments they manage to advance their climate activism agenda. And these firms did decide to join CA100+ in the first place, knowing that it might inevitably lead to phases that required more action and accountability. Here, grasping the full picture requires viewing the scenery from more than one vantage point.

On March 30, 2023, 21 state attorneys general wrote a letter to the largest U.S.-based asset managers, expressing concern over their political activism and warning that such behavior could violate federal securities laws. The letter, led by Montana AG Austin Knudsen (R), specifically highlighted the CA100+ agenda as “potential unlawful coordination” to “push policies through the financial system that cannot be achieved at the ballot box.” It put investment managers on notice that “ongoing investigations” would “continue to evaluate” whether the firms were engaged in “potential unlawful coordination and other violations … as part of Climate Action 100+, Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative [NZAM], or the like.”

Woke asset managers have sustained considerable pressure from state governments in recent years, as the vast scale of their political activism became known. State officials have issued opinions declaring political activism with public funds illegal, published blacklists of politicized corporations the state won’t do business with, opposed woke companies’ purchases of public utility shares, and demonstrated the public support for doing so by winning subsequent elections.

Asset management firms are wilting before the ire of these state officials. Last summer, after 11 state governments pulled more than $5 billion in assets from his firm’s management, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink declared he was abandoning the acronym “ESG” (for left-wing “environmental, social, and governance causes) — but not the spirit. In December 2022, Vanguard (the world’s second largest asset manager, with approximately $7 trillion AUM) announced plans to withdraw from the NZAM after pressure from state governments.

The mini-exodus from CA100+ seems to be undertaken with the same goal in mind. The firms withdrawing from the climate pact haven’t abandoned their commitment to climate activism, but they would prefer not to become the next Bud Light in doing so. Re-asserting their “independence” from CA100+ frees them to evaluate the political or legal costs of any particular deed of climate activism and avoid provoking uncomfortable investigations or costly lawsuits. Even without changing their behavior, distancing themselves from the climate organization can help them avoid charges of “unlawful coordination” without distancing themselves from the climate agenda.

The backdrop to this performative calculus is that much left-wing corporate activism is neither essential nor profitable. In a 2022 survey of top executives, 59% of CEOs said they would “plan to pause or reconsider their organization’s ESG efforts” in response to a recession. That’s the sort of numbers you would expect from an optional extra — like a soft-serve machine in the breakroom. It might keep the workforce happy, and it might help mute outside criticism, but it doesn’t help a business achieve its core mission — to produce, move, or sell a product, or to provide certain services.

In the case of asset management firms, they provide the service of managing assets, in hopes of providing a better return for investors than they could obtain on their own. Climate activism is not relevant to the goal of asset management. In fact, climate activism can hamper an asset manager’s goal (obtaining the best return for his client) by forcing a company to adopt costly “green” policies that reduce its profitability and thus the profitability of assets invested in that company.

“Broadly, [federal securities] laws require you to act as a fiduciary, in the best interests of your clients and exercising due care and loyalty,” the attorneys general wrote the asset management firms. “Simply put, you are not the same as political or social activists and you should not be allowing the vast savings entrusted to you to be commandeered by activists to advance non-financial goals.” Asset management firms aren’t yet convinced of this argument and continue to pursue climate activism, but changes in their behavior indicate the pressure is having an effect.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: Prosperity is Possible with Affordable Energy

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Disney’s DEI Policies Land Them in Court: ‘The Hit Factory Is Now the Flop Factory’

According to Bob Iger, Disney CEO, what happened on January 6 “was fundamentally wrong and … rooted in hatred … and intolerance.” In his view, that was the day Iger felt Disney needed to take “a stand” on political matters, which has been mostly rooted in the company’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. However, experts have highlighted the fact that these efforts have mostly backfired.

In prioritizing DEI, Disney has produced content largely centered on LGBT ideology. This agenda has caused their revenue to tank as they faced nationwide boycotts, decreased sales, and certain states pulling their investments from the Magic Kingdom. Nonetheless, Disney has insisted on prioritizing politics over profit. “The hit factory is now the flop factory,” wrote Breitbart’s John Nolte. “The trusted brand is now seen (accurately) as a threat to children’s innocence.”

Iger said he’s “very proud of the work” Disney has “done in terms of diversity and inclusion on screen.” However, Nolte pointed out that in the brand’s DEI efforts, they’ve failed to succeed in “telling a great story with appealing and relatable characters.” And not all of the pushback is based on gender politics.

America First Legal (AFL) filed a civil rights complaint against Disney on Wednesday “for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by engaging in illegal race, sex, and national origin discrimination.” According to Disney’s “Reimagine Tomorrow” website, AFL argued that there is a strong suggestion “that race, color, religion, sex, or national origin are often the only motivating factor in Disney’s hiring, training, and promotion decisions.” As such, they noted “the company is intentionally discriminating against white American men, Christians, and Jews simply because of their race, sex, religion, and citizenship.”

AFL President Stephen Miller said, “It is sad and tragic that a company whose name was once synonymous with wholesome and charming childhood fantasies is now dedicated to spreading divisive bigotry. We urge Disney to cease and desist its unlawful and destructive conduct at once.”

Referring to Disney’s goal of hiring 50% of its directors from “underrepresented groups,” the complaint stated, “It is patently unlawful to consider racial, ethnic, and sex-based characteristics in hiring, training, compensation, and promotion.” It continued, “Decades of case law have held that policies that impose racial balancing or quotas in employment, training, or recruitment, such as those presented on Disney’s websites, are prohibited.”

As Nolte pointed out, “Disney went from one of the most universally beloved and trusted brands — a company that produced one-billion-dollar blockbuster after another — into a failing propaganda outlet no decent parent would allow their children near.”

Stephen Soukup, author of “The Dictatorship of Woke Capital,” commented to The Washington Stand, “Disney and its leadership — its executives and board — have gone out of their way to ensure that politics takes priority over conventional business interests.”

Concerning the decisions Disney has made in recent years and whether they will alter their path, Soukup said, “Despite acknowledging their disconnect between their ideology and their customer base in SEC documents, they still seem unable or unwilling to change course. The evidence shows that CEO Bob Iger has been driving much of this, while the company’s board of directors has rewarded him with a lavish pay increase, even in the face of his failures.”

Ultimately, Soukup pointed out, “any change in the company’s positions will have to come from shareholders.” Which, he concluded, “short of a shareholder rebellion — approval on non-management approved board candidates, for example — it’s difficult to see Disney’s leaders doing what needs to be done to get back to something approximating neutral, to putting business ahead of politics.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

ORLANDO, FLORIDA: Jew-Hating Neo-Nazi Protesters at Disney World

Jews that vote Democrat are suicidal.

Antisemitic protests near Disney World

Protesters with swastika flags and antisemitic signs gathered in multiple locations near Disney World and in Orlando, Florida, over Saturday.

By: Israel National News, Feb 18, 2024:

Dozens of Neo-Nazi protesters gathered near Disney World and in nearby Orlando, Florida, yesterday.

Protesters waved flags with swastikas, displayed antisemitic signs, and shouted antisemitic slogans.

The local Jewish community condemned the protest and demanded that local authorities take action against similar incidents.

Anna Eskamani, representative of Florida’s 42nd district, criticized the protesters on X: “Sad to report that Nazi scum and losers are back in Winter Park, holding their disgusting flags and banner. Working with local officials to see what options we have for accountability.”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Imam Recites Quran Calling for Killing, Kidnapping of Jews at Belgian Parliament

‘End of the Jews’ Children’s Book Taught to Gazan Children

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Will NY Businesses Flee to Florida as New York State Becomes a ‘Legal Banana Republic’: Experts

The absurd ruling in the political persecution of Donald Trump represents the only big business penalized $365 million and shutdown without a showing of any obvious victims and major losses.

On the contrary the banks testified in defense of Trump.

The corrupt judge went out of his way to punish the former president with a worst-case scenario, making it easier for courts to wipe out companies in the future.

Clearly the Democrat elite decided to take out America’s greatest President and kill the greatest city in the world.

Trump’s penalty could cause NY biz exodus to Florida, as New York State becomes ‘legal banana republic’: Experts

NY AG Letitia James and liberal interests in the state appear to be seeking a political ‘death by exposure’ of Trump, analysts said

By Charles Creitz, Fox News, February 16, 2024:

Trump’s ‘breathtaking’ fine in fraud case is larger than budgets of some countries: Jonathan Turley

Fox News contributors Jonathan Turley and Ari Fleischer join chief legal correspondent Shannon Bream to react to Judge Arthur Engoron fining Donald Trump more than $350 million on ‘The Story.’

Legal experts analyzed what they called “breathtaking” civil penalties against former President Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, former Trump Organization Comptroller Jeffrey McConney and ex-CFO Allen Weisselberg – warning other corporations based in the Empire State may realize they could suddenly be put out of business by the state on a political whim.

New York Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable for more than $350 million in damages in the fraud suit brought against him and his company by New York State Democratic District Attorney Letitia James.

Trump Sr., the Trump Revocable Trust and Trump Organization were found liable for $60 million, while Trump’s sons and Weisselberg were found liable for $4.01 million each – and Trump Sr. plus several entities including the Trump Organization and the LLC signifying Trump’s Chicago hotel were banned from applying for loans with institutions registered with New York for three years.

The three Trump family members were also banned from serving as executives of any business or legal entity based in New York for a similar length – which is key, as the Trump Organization is housed at its iconic tower at 5 Av and E. 57th Street.
Jonathan Turley on Trump civil fraud verdict: No other company would be subject to this ‘draconian exercise’ Video

In that regard, former Bush White House press secretary Ari Fleischer told Fox News the ban may spur Trump to relocate his entire business empire to Florida, just as he has his primary residence.

“If you’re Eric [or] Donald Junior, what are you going to do?” he asked.

“[Y]ou just say goodbye to New York, which fits a pattern that many successful people have been doing and leaving New York because New York is just too political, too blue and too punitive – you’re seeing that in the business community and among upper income New Yorkers already,” he said – adding the state’s crime wave accentuates the issue.

George Washington University Law Prof. Jonathan Turley further commented to Fox News that Engoron appeared to compound the highest fine figures in most of the areas adjudicated – noting that New York’s civil law in this area is unique because the proverbial crime can essentially be victimless.

“[It’s] an odd one because it does not require that anyone actually lose money. And so James was able to come in here with this [fraud] figure, and she kept on going up.”

Turley said the public and other legal officials may indeed take note of Trump world’s penalty, because, “when you’re imposing fines larger than the budget of some countries, you really have to wonder whether you’ve allowed your thoughts to run away with your judgment.”

“It’s one of the greatest ironies of this case: In the name of protecting businesses in New York, you probably just led to hundreds of businesses looking at potential rentals in Florida because they look and they go, ‘wow, if we fall on the wrong side of the politics in New York, they could sell us off for spare parts’.”

Fleischer noted that New York’s justice system has descended into a quasi-political entity, in that liberals and Democrats have been placed at the highest levers of power for the past few decades.

Continue reading.

Dissolving Trump’s Business Empire, as State Judge Threatens, Would Be Unprecedented Under New York’s Decades-Old Fraud Law

AP’s review of nearly 150 reported cases since New York’s “repeated fraud” statute was passed in 1956 showed that nearly every previous time a company was taken away, victims and losses were key factors. Customers had lost money or bought defective products or never received services ordered, leaving them cheated and angry.

What’s more, businesses were taken over almost always as a last resort to stop a fraud in progress and protect potential victims. They included a phony psychologist who sold dubious treatments, a fake lawyer who sold false claims he could get students into law school, and businessmen who marketed financial advice but instead swindled people out of their home deeds.

Read more.

Who suffered here? There are no victims.

“This is a basically a death penalty for a business,” said a Columbia University law professor, Eric Talley. “Is he getting his just desserts … or because people don’t like him?”

Kevin O’Leary slams Trump’s civil ruling as ‘un-American’ and a shock to the entire real estate industry

In a scathing rebuke of a New York Judge’s decision to fine Donald Trump a staggering $355 million, the entrepreneur and media personality Kevin O’Leary minced no words, denouncing the ruling as “unjust,” “appalling” and ultimately “un-American.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron’s Friday ruling not only slapped Trump with that hefty fine, but also with a temporary ban from conducting business in his native New York.

O’Leary, known for his role on “Shark Tank,” lambasted the decision, arguing that it sets a dangerous precedent for the entire real estate industry.

O’Leary had previously been critical of the months-long fraud case in the media, saying on CNN recently that, “I don’t think this thing will ever survive appeal regardless of what the fine is. This doesn’t even make sense.”

“That fact that he was found guilty, you might as well find guilty every real estate developer on Earth,” O’Leary said in an exclusive interview with The Post.

The judge’s decree bars Trump from assuming any officer or director positions in New York for three years, a move O’Leary sees as detrimental not just to Trump, but also to the broader business landscape.

“I don’t understand where someone got hurt … What developer doesn’t ask for the highest price valued for any building they built?” O’Leary said.

O’Leary said in an exclusive interview with The Post. The judge’s decree bars Trump from assuming any officer or director positions in New York for three years, a move O’Leary sees as detrimental not just to Trump, but also to the broader business landscape.

“I don’t understand where someone got hurt … What developer doesn’t ask for the highest price valued for any building they built?” O’Leary said.

Read more.

Ayn Rand called it.

In this 1961 talk, Ayn Rand argues that “[E]very ugly, brutal aspect of injustice toward racial or religious minorities is being practiced towards businessmen” under America’s antitrust laws. Rand catalogs the injustices of antitrust, decries the scapegoating of businessmen.

An edited version of this talk is available in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, a book of essays by Rand and others.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

50% of Hotels [in NYC] Are Housing Illegal Aliens At Double the Room Rates With Free Meals, Lodging and Healthcare

TRUMP VERDICT PROTEST: Truckers To BOYCOTT NYC, Refusing to Deliver Loads in New York City

“America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business” by Ayn Rand

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Disney Board Wants To Hide Political Donations, Spending On Sex Changes From Shareholders, Docs Reveal

The Walt Disney Company board wants to hide key financial data from the public, particularly as it relates to their funding of the transgender movement and donations to political candidates, documents reviewed by the Daily Caller reveal.

The 2024 proxy vote ballot for Disney’s annual shareholder meeting, scheduled for April 2, reveals the board doesn’t want the public, or even their own shareholders, to know how much Disney spends on “gender transition compensation and benefits” for its staff. Despite the board’s suggested vote to shareholders, the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) and National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR) are urging the company to release the data.

In Disney’s 2024 “Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Statement,” Disney details how the NLPC and NCPPR notified the company that they intend to present proposals focused on these issues. Within the same document, Disney “affirms” that people who suffer from gender dysphoria can “transition to a different sex.” However, “an increasing body of scientific evidence shows no benefits result from such medical treatments,” the NLPC argues. They go on to cite the European and American medical community’s “increasing” caution about gender-transition “therapies.”

“Victims report transition treatments and surgeries are harmful. Examples include long-lasting or permanent outcomes like chronic pain, sexual dysfunction, unwanted hair loss or hair gain, menstrual irregularities, urinary problems, and other complications,” the statement continues. “Rather than resolve health problems ‘gender affirming’ therapies instead often exacerbate them. In such instances, those who desire to ‘detransition’ cannot find medical care or insurance coverage, and are permanently mutilated. Many of these sufferers litigate against those who misled or harmed them.”

But as transitioners are de-transitioners are protected under “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” aspects of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), they cannot be discriminated against in any way, resulting in Disney covering transition procedures.

Shareholders have asked the board to issue a report on Disney’s funding of gender care and related activities by Dec. 31, 2024, and whether there are any “benefit gaps” related to gender dysphoria, as well as “associated reputational, competitive, operational and litigative risks.”

Similarly, Disney doesn’t want shareholders to approve the publication of the company’s charitable and political donations. The board recommends a vote against “requesting a report on political expenditures” and “publication of recipients of charitable contributions.”

In their recommendation, NCPPR argued that there are “issues” with donating to certain groups who support sex-change surgeries, not just for the potential legal and medical issues listed above, but because is it “time Disney stop injecting itself into controversial and significant social policy issues,” the proposal stated.

Disney’s board ignores all the arguments and scientific evidence laid out by the NCPPR and NLPC in their explanation for why they’re recommending voting “against” the proposals. “We believe the proposal is an attempt to generate attention from a proponent with a narrow focus seeking to advance a limited agenda rather than an authentic attempt to call for action in the best interest of the Company and shareholders,” Disney wrote in response to the proposals.

The board also ignored any mention of “gender” in their request for shareholders to reject the proposal to publicize Disney’s charitable donation, and instead stated the company is already transparent enough about their spending.

“In its opposition statement Disney revealed why our proposal is so important, and how badly it has failed to fulfill its fiduciary duties. Disney clearly hasn’t spent a single moment considering how much Iger and his team have harmed the company by going full-in on politics instead of running the company for shareholder and even genuine stakeholder benefit. Iger has hired people like Kathleen Kennedy who hate Disney’s customers and want to shove their politics down audiences’ throats rather than entertaining them,” NCPPR director Scott Shepard said in a statement to the Daily Caller. “Iger seems to think that by adopting a partisan position he makes it non-partisan and just ‘the right thing to do.’ He is wrong in this, of course, as he’s wrong in just about every decision he’s made for many years.”

Disney has found itself increasingly mired in political squabbles in recent years, most notably with Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has gone after the megacorporation’s special tax status. Conservatives have accused Disney of shoehorning progressive messaging into its content and pursuing a political agenda over putting out quality family content.

Disney did not respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

KAY SMYTHE

News and commentary writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Disney CEO Pledges To Double Down On LGBT ‘Storytelling’ In Animated Kids’ Movies

‘I Was Being Hunted Down’: Gina Carano Announces Lawsuit Against Disney, Teams Up With Elon Musk

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Major News Outlets Continue Losing Millions Amid Anti-Trump Coverage

Gorgeous!

Major News Outlets Continue Losing Millions Amid Anti-Trump Coverage

By: Jon Dougherty, Conservative Brief, January 20, 2024

Several major newspapers and media outlets have continued losing tens of millions of dollars per year after they were purchased by billionaires who initially believed they could turn things around financially while still maintaining a decidedly anti-Trump, anti-GOP editorial slant.

According to a report in DNYUZ, outlets like the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and Time magazine are still losing millions of dollars years after being sold to billionaire benefactors, and there appears to be no sign of their financial conditions improving on the horizon.

“As the prospects for news publishers waned in the last decade, billionaires swooped in to buy some of the country’s most fabled brands. Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, bought The Washington Post in 2013 for about $250 million,” DNYUZ reported. “Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a biotechnology and start-up billionaire, purchased The Los Angeles Times in 2018 for $500 million. Marc Benioff, the founder of the software giant Salesforce, purchased Time magazine with his wife, Lynne, for $190 million in 2018.”
Advertisement

On each occasion, the newsrooms welcomed their new owners with guarded optimism, hoping that their business expertise and technological knowledge would provide solutions to the challenging puzzle of generating revenue as a digital publication, the report said.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mail-In Ballot Fraud Study Finds Trump ‘Almost Certainly’ Won in 2020

WATCH LIVE: MASSIVE OVERFLOW CROWDS as Donald Trump Speaks in Conway, South Carolina

Hundreds of Muslims at Leeds University Call to Kill Campus Rabbi, Rape His Wife, Murder Their Children.’Us Muslims Are Coming for You, You Dirty Zionist M****therf**ker’

Antisemitic Poster of Skunk with Star of David Plastered Across Columbia University Demonizes Jews

Biden Regime Pressured Amazon to Suppress Books It Didn’t Like

WATCH: Illegals Excited to Vote for Biden in 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

An Insurance Scam that Affects Us All

We are being fleeced by film-flam artists.

The absurdity of a requested 100% rate increase for some North Carolina property owners got my attention. (Note that insurance PR people knew that 100% might sound unreasonable, so they adjusted it to be 99.4%!). Let’s back up a bit to see what’s going on here…

Every one of us pays for insurance, one way or another. Some of the most common types of insurance related to property are: homeowners, flood, wind, earthquake, umbrella, tenant, etc. Since what we pay is supposedly related to such matters as actuarial calculations, most of us believe that there is little we can do to complain about our premiums — as what would be the business basis of our argument?

I’ll try to answer that key question…

Note: this issue can get very complicated quite quickly, so this is a layperson’s overview. (FYI: when discussing rates, obfuscation is often a tactic purposefully employed by the insurance industry.) For simplicity, I’ll primarily talk about flood insurance. For those readers who have joined recently, you may have missed an earlier commentary I published on the flood insurance fiasco. Please reread that. I’m writing this update to focus on one unappreciated major development.

A profoundly significant change has happened in the property insurance business over the last decade or so — and almost no one is discussing it! The most fundamental property insurance question is: how is future risk calculated?

Traditionally (i.e., for as long as property insurance has been offered), future risk has always been primarily calculated based on PRIOR HISTORY.

For example, if your property is located near the ocean, river, etc., the insurance company’s estimate of the likelihood of your property flooding in the next year, was based on the average prior history. In other words, if your property was flooded once in the last hundred years, the future estimate for flooding risk would be 1/100 (1%) per year going forward.

All things being equal, that not only makes logical sense, it was also the basis for almost all insurance companies being profitable. That, in turn, resulted in FEMA et al being careless regarding underwriting policy conditions, actuarial flood rates, etc.

So along came a perfect storm: climate alarmism (and their government enablers) plus Katrina. Insurance companies saw this motley pairing as an exceptional opportunity to increase their profits: they scrapped historical data as being the basis for our rates.

NOW, future risk is calculated based on a computer program. Worse, this program incorporates some undeclaredundocumented, and unproven assumptions!

This is a revolutionary change, that is ripe for self-serving manipulations by the insurance industry. For example, using the traditional methodology, a homeowner could always choose to research prior history. They would then know for certain whether it was accurately reflected in calculations of future projections.

With the current methodology of everything done by a computer (and operated by men behind the screen), no homeowner (or anyone else — including watchdogs) has even a remote chance of double-checking hardly anything.

Insurance regulators wouldn’t normally allow such a change simply to make insurance companies more profitable. So the insurance industry shed crocodile tears while using Katrina and Climate Change as a double-barreled shotgun, to blast away any semblance of actuarial sensibility or accountability.

Rather than fix the multiple serious deficiencies with the FEMA flood insurance program, it’s much easier just to charge everyone more. (Again, I’m just using flood insurance as an example.) Consider that NC homeowners are being targeted with an average of 42% rate increase, for homeowners insurance (NOT flood insurance).

It’s all traceable to the same issue: calculating rates based on historical results is old school. Now, an unaccountable computer program is used to project future risk.

Critical-thinking citizens should be strenuously objecting to their state and federal representatives about this greedy and unaccountable sleight-of-hand.

Some articles of interest:

Copyright. John Droz, Jr.. All rights reserved.

Rich Investors Are Scooping Up Cheap Property As Commercial Real Estate Sector Suffers

Investors flush with cash are looking to buy up commercial real estate properties that developers are putting on the market at deep discounts as companies struggle to pay debts, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Many investment firms are looking to buy up discounted real estate after stacking up cash during the COVID-19 pandemic, including Ares Management, which is buying up 3 million square feet of office space with offers to buy up assets related to $500 million in high-priority property debt, according to the WSJ. Commercial real estate is facing around $2.81 trillion in loans that are set to expire through 2028 at a time when the industry is struggling with low demand and huge debt costs from high interest rates.

“We’re in a period of time where it’s great to have dry powder,” Rich Banjo, co-president of Artemis Real Estate Partners, told the WSJ. Artemis recently closed a $2.2 billion fund at the end of last year that has been buying up discounted properties.

Private-equity firms operating global real estate funds had $544 billion in cash in the second quarter of 2023, up from $457 billion in the fourth quarter of 2022, according to the WSJ. Around $85.8 billion of commercial property was in distress at the end of 2023, up from $56.9 billion at the end of 2022.

Investors in particular are looking at struggling office building owners who have had their profits cut from a widespread shift to remote work that began during the COVID-19 pandemic, lowering office space needs, according to the WSJ. Hotel owners who have failed to keep up with repairs and apartment buildings that are behind on construction schedules due to pandemic-related supply chain shortages and work stoppages have also been targets for investors.

Interest rates for commercial properties are facing upward pressure from hikes to the federal funds rate by the Federal Reserve, which has been placed in a range of 5.25% and 5.50%, the highest rate in 22 years, in an effort to combat high inflation.

The collapse of top developer China Evergrande Group, prompted by a judge in January, has led to the liquidation of more than $300 billion in liabilities, which could depress global property prices as the firm sells off assets. The increases in the cost of borrowing have resulted in a $1 trillion loss in office property values around the world.

AUTHOR

WILL KESSLER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Americans Are In More Debt Than Ever Before — And It May Get Even Worse

The Most Damning Poll Of Biden’s Presidency Quietly Dropped Super Bowl Sunday

Nearly 90% Of Americans Think Biden Is ‘Too Old’ To Serve Another Term As President: POLL

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

VIDEO: Act for America founder Brigitte Gabriel Shares Her Views on News, Politics, and More!

Don’t Miss This Interview!

Brigitte Gabriel visits the PBD Podcast for independent and critical thinkers with podcast sensation Patrick Bet-David and his co-hosts Adam Sosnick, Tom Ellsworth, and Vincent Oshana as they cover the biggest stories in news, politics, business, and current events!

8:47 – Brigitte talks about her upbringing in Lebanon and how it affected her view of Arabs and Muslims worldwide.

58:04 – Does a shadow war with Iran risk turning into a direct conflict?

1:21:20 – James O’Keefe records White House cyber security expert Charlie Kraiger saying Joe Biden is “mentally slowing down” and Kamala Harris is unpopular.

1:30:39 – Mark Zuckerberg addresses families of victims of online child exploitive content during Senate hearing.

1:41:06 – Woman filmed giving her teenage daughter puberty blockers.

1:49:31 – California Governor Gavin Newsom discusses witnessing a criminal walking out of a Target without paying.

2:07:01 – UPS to Cut 12,000 jobs and mandate return to offices five days a week

2:14:49 – Illegal immigrants in NYC caught on film assaulting NYPD cops, released without bond.

2:24:40 – PBD and crew surprise Adam Sosnick with a big birthday surprise!

EDITORS NOTE: This Act for America column is republished with permission  All rights reserved.

Budget Office’s 10-Year Forecast: Historic Deficits, Record Debt, Higher Taxes

America’s fiscal future is gloomy, according to the 10-year forecast released Wednesday by the economic meteorologists (accountants, really) at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO projected that by 2034 the U.S. federal government will run a $2.6 trillion deficit, equivalent to 6.1% of GDP, while public-held debt would nearly double from $26 trillion to $48 trillion, reaching a record 116% of GDP. These numbers are “mind boggling” and “absolutely astounding,” said Heritage Foundation research fellow Jeffrey Griffith on “Washington Watch.”

Indeed, the historic nature of America’s irresponsible borrowing binge is so unprecedented that it earned multiple mentions in the CBO’s report summary. The CBO noted that a debt equivalent to 116% of GDP represents “an amount greater than at any point in the nation’s history.” That’s more debt — both in absolute terms, and as a percentage of GDP — than the U.S. accumulated during any war, including the Revolutionary War and World War II, during any economic crisis or peacetime spending binge, or even during the century and a half that the government survived without an income tax.

Regarding the deficit reaching 6.1% of GDP (the 50-year average is 3.7%), the report noted that “deficits have exceeded that level” only three times since the Great Depression: “During and shortly after World War II, the 2007-2009 financial crisis, and the coronavirus pandemic.” In other words, soon the U.S. federal government will be running up the credit card as fast as it did during America’s largest international war and the two worst economic crises of this millennium — for no discernable reason at all.

The problem, fundamentally, is too much spending. The CBO estimated government revenues to average 17.8% of GDP over the next 10 years, slightly above the 50-year average of 17.3%. That estimate was based on the assumption that the 2017 tax cuts will be allowed to expire in 2025. By contrast, the CBO estimated that government spending will average 23.5% over the next decade, topping out at 24.1%, far higher than the 50-year average of 21%.

Although the CBO’s statistics might be useful for comparisons over time, they fail to communicate the gravity of America’s current economic peril. Griffith bridged the gap by converting the trillions into numbers that can be brought home to each family. “We owe $400,000 per family in federal debt,” he said. “We’re expected to add another quarter million dollars per family over the next 10 years.” Who’s ready for a third mortgage?

Two types of spending were leading culprits in the CBO’s growing deficit projection: “Growth in spending on programs that benefit elderly people and rising net interest costs” — in other words, mandatory entitlement spending and servicing the debt. The CBO projected that mandatory spending will increase steadily to 15.1% of GDP, net interest payments will increase to 3.9%, while discretionary spending (both military and domestic) will actually decrease to 5.1% by 2034 — if you can believe it.

Forecasters have known for decades about the fiscal turbulence catalyzed by the rising longevity of America’s aging population. The relatively new factors are the recent arrival of a high interest system and its costly interaction with mountains of recently accrued debt.

According to the Committee for Responsible Budget, for the first time, net interest payments exceeded Medicaid spending in 2023 and will exceed defense spending and Medicare spending in 2024. “Starting next year,” wrote CBO, “net interest costs are greater in relation to GDP than at any point since at least 1940, the first year for which the Office of Management and Budget reports such data.”

Griffith translated, “We’re already paying around $10,000 per family per year, just on the interest on the federal debt. And that is going to nearly double to close to $20,000 per family per year.” Sorry, Jimmy, I know you wanted to go to college. But now your Uncle Sam needs that money to pay off his gambling debts.

These factors, combined with sultry stagnation of Bidenomics, are cooking up the perfect fiscal storm. Americans can expect a “Poor Front” to follow. “Such soaring debt would slow economic growth, push up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt, and pose significant risks to the fiscal and economic outlook,” analyzed the CBO. “It could also cause lawmakers to feel more constrained in their policy choices.” Coming from an agency that reports to Congress, that last sentence is the bureaucratic equivalent of, “Don’t say I didn’t warn you, boss.”

Based on historical precedents, Griffith described “multiple ways this can pan out.” Through Door Number One, America could fully embrace European socialism. We already have most of the social programs; now we just need the taxes to match. This solution could avoid the fiscal crisis at the cost of “a long-term relative decline in our prosperity,” said Griffith. Through Door Number Two lies the fate of Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain, who nearly went bankrupt during the Great Recession through extreme profligacy. To obtain the foreign loans they needed to stay afloat, they were forced to make deep spending cuts dictated by outside countries — which naturally caused massive social unrest. Through Door Number Three, Griffith described “very extreme examples” of hyperinflation, such as Argentina and Venezuela. “None of the scenarios are good,” he warned.

Predicting the future is notoriously impossible, and CBO budget forecasters are usually no more successful than weather meteorologists. If anything, however, the CBO’s debt estimate is a conservative, even “optimistic” one, as The Wall Street Journal editorial board remarked skeptically. “They assume no recession and that the 2017 individual tax cuts and Inflation Reduction Act’s sweetened ObamaCare subsidies expire in 2025. Oh, and that Congress doesn’t lather on more spending, and more student debt isn’t canceled by executive decree.” That’s four unsafe assumptions that each lower the CBO’s 10-year debt estimate.

Undeterred by the glowering forecast, the Biden administration has planned a weekend cook-out. “Over the past three years, the Biden administration has driven an historic recovery,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen declared during Thursday testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, with all the cheeriness of a turnip. She later conceded under questioning that “we need to reduce deficits and to stay on a fiscally sustainable path,” an answer as effective as a clogged culvert. “By suggesting that we need to stay on a sustainable path, she’s saying we’re on one right now,” Griffith responded. “We are already on the path to unsustainability.”

Yellen further argued that America’s current debt burden is nothing to worry about. “Thus far, in real terms, the interest burden of the debt has remained within or below historical norms,” she said. According to the CBO, the 50-year average of net interest expenditures is 2.1% of GDP; the U.S. government spent 2.4% of GDP servicing the debt in 2023 and will spend 3.1% of GDP servicing the debt in 2024. Coming from a current Treasury Secretary and former Federal Reserve chair, Yellen’s remark is akin to an air traffic controller arguing, “Thus far, in real terms, that jet airliner accelerating down the runway has not yet become airborne.”

In response to a question from Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Yellen said she had “seen no sign” of waning foreign interest in U.S. debt, an “absolutely ludicrous” remark in Griffith’s estimation. “Over the last two and a half years, foreign investors have only been willing to purchase about one penny of every new dollar of federal debt that we’ve taken on. In years past, foreign investors bought about one third of our federal debt,” Griffith explained. “With investor demand drying up for that debt, that means that the federal government has to pay more to those who will lend us money. … That trickles down directly to us as consumers.”

While the Biden administration may be unconcerned about the debt, at least some members of Congress have sought to restore sanity and accountability to the budgeting process. Thus far, their achievements have been flimsy at best. As a result of the spending cuts Republicans negotiated in the debt limit deal last summer, the CBO reduced their estimated deficit for 2024 by $0.1 trillion (4%) and their estimated cumulative deficit for 2024-2033 by $1.4 trillion (7%). You could as easily dig a trench with a teaspoon, or stop a locomotive’s momentum with a Q-tip, as resolve America’s budgetary crisis with such puny half-measures.

This situation illustrates the truth that elections have consequences. The reason why congressional budget hawks can’t achieve any significant savings is that there are too few of them, compared to their colleagues who want to keep spending money. At root, this is a problem that can only be solved when voters and candidates get serious about demanding and delivering fiscal sanity in Washington. America is barreling straight toward a fiscal cliff. Will anyone care enough to stop her?

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

High Consumer Prices among Top Concerns as Voters Lose Confidence in Biden, Polls Show

As new polls indicate that American voters remain worried about the persistently high cost of goods and have largely lost confidence in President Joe Biden’s handling of the economy, a leading economist is pointing out that the economies in red states that feature free market policies are outpacing the economies of blue states.

An NBC News poll published Sunday revealed that Biden lagged behind former President Donald Trump by over 20 points on the question of “which candidate would better handle the economy.” Overall, the poll found that Biden’s approval rating has reached the lowest point of his presidency at 37%.

The survey comes as voters say that the economy is among their top concerns going into the November elections. A recent Harvard CAPS-Harris poll found that inflation was the primary worry for 32% of respondents, a close second behind the border crisis at 35%.

While inflation has largely leveled off since reaching a high of 9.1% in June 2022, consumers are still worried about the persistent rising costs of virtually all goods since the 2020 pandemic that have not come back down. As reported by CNN, “More than 90% of the items tracked in the Consumer Price Index are more expensive than they were in February 2020, with most price increases landing north of 20% and some (fuel and margarine) approaching 55%.” Overall, food prices have risen almost 25%.

Stephen Moore, distinguished fellow in Economics at The Heritage Foundation, joined “Washington Watch” last week to discuss the current economic outlook in America.

“What’s happening in America today is you’ve got red states with low taxes, less regulation, [and] right-to-work that are doing extraordinarily well,” he explained. “You know, they’re actually booming [in] Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Utah, Idaho. So many of these states, [like] South Carolina, the southern states are doing amazing. … [B]y the way, the South now is the number one leading region in the economy. It used to be the northeast for 100 years. But the northeast is losing its people, its businesses, its capital. And they’re going to states like Florida and Texas and Arizona … because the taxes are lower [and] there’s a more pro-business atmosphere. They follow free market policies. That’s what American businesses want. That’s what workers want.”

Moore, who also serves as a senior economist at FreedomWorks, went on to argue that the Biden administration’s federal spending policies have negatively affected the economy.

“[T]he question becomes, ‘Why don’t we do, on the national level, what works in the states? Why don’t we cut our taxes, reduce our regulations? Why don’t we get our budget under control?’ We’re running a $1.5 trillion debt. … It’s because we’ve got a president who is spending and printing and borrowing a trillion and a half dollars a year — it’s as obvious [as] the sun ris[ing] in the East and set[ting] in the West when you have that kind of out of control spending. You know what? You’re going to get inflation.”

At an event last week, Biden accused grocery stores of “ripping people off” through “price gouging, junk fees, greedflation [and] shrinkflation.”

“That’s the way all these Democrats are,” Moore responded. “They keep saying, ‘Oh, the profits are too high.’ Why don’t you go out there and show you can make a profit? It ain’t so easy to do it. These are businesses that are providing jobs, providing growth for our economy, putting food on our table. I’m sick of him criticizing American businesses.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

When the Stealth Invasion of America Goes Mainstream: And Nobody Cares

You know we are in the final stages of an invasion when even the corporate media is reporting on the thousands of Chinese nationals streaming across the U.S. southern border.

CBS’s 60 Minutes reports that the Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok is being used to aid and abet the invasion of America.

Well, they sorta, almost told the truth.

Notice how almost all the Chinese illegals in the above video were men, most of them of military age. The folks at 60 Minutes conveniently forgot to report that part.

Many in the alternative media started reporting about the Chinese communists exploiting Joe Biden’s open borders almost right after Biden was installed in the White House. But if you depend on CBS for your news, you’re just now hearing about it for the first time, and then, you are only getting a very filtered version of a much bigger story.

You will not hear the words “border invasion” in that report by 60 Minutes. But that’s exactly what it is. And it’s not just Chinese, either. These men are coming from the Middle East, parts of Africa, and many other regions not known for their love and affection for America or its people.

Compare the above pathetic report from 60 Minutes to this one from Drew Hernandez giving details about a border encampment of military-age male invaders in California.

Prepare now for war on U.S. soil. The army has been assembled. The barbarians are inside the gates. All that needs to happen is for them to be given orders to start attacking and the final plan to take down America will be in play. All it will take is a false flag attack on the right group by the right type of attacker (someone decked out in MAGA gear?). Then you will start to see stories about civil unrest and a spate of reprisal attacks. They will be mostly peaceful attacks, I’m sure.

These attacks, and the timing of them, should come as no surprise. America’s enemies have been busy building up a stealth army for three years running and, even before that, thousands of bad actors were allowed into the country under Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. They came from Bosnia, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Yemen and Syria, among other places. For every new war that Washington’s neocons got us involved in, there was a new wave of refugees imported from the war zone to cities and towns across America. For every ally of Washington that wanted to get rid of its violent criminals and terrorists, Washington was eager to take them in. Just wait, we will soon get tens of thousands of potential terrorists delivered to American cities, compliments of Israel, which wants to be rid of its Palestinian problem. The problem won’t be solved, it will just be shifted from Gaza to America.

And America will welcome them.

We are the host country of the Statue of Liberty, that pagan goddess, designed by French Freemasons, who takes in everyone from everywhere, no questions asked. We take them under the assumption that they all desire to come here to live free. That may have been mostly true at one time, but not anymore. The sonnet “The New Colossus” by American poet Emma Lazarus sits at the base of the Statue of Liberty and reads:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Nothing that you get from the mainstream corporate media is as it appears. It’s all carefully crafted theater meant to deceive.

Truth is, even if we built a border wall tomorrow the immigration problem remains. The army has already been assembled and is waiting for its orders. The only answer to that problem, at this critical stage, would be to start mass deportations of those who came here under false pretenses — those who came not yearning for freedom but to kill it and to kill those who still believe in it. That’s a policy few politicians wish to even talk about, let alone engage in.

Until you hear that issue at least being put up for debate, whether to deport or not deport, don’t be deceived. All other issues amount to political fools’ gold.

Paul Craig Roberts summed it up well in his recent article, What Powerful Force is Preventing the United States from Defending its Borders? Below is an excerpt from that article:

Why do Americans sit on their butts and permit their country to be stolen?

Why do a majority of American women vote for the Democrats who are aiding and abetting the theft of America?

When Washington speaks of “American national interests,” whose interests is meant? The military/security complex’s interest? How does a tower of babel have a national interest?

Why is it in America’s national interest to be overrun by invaders? Why is Washington worried about attack from Russia and China but not from the vastly larger army of the anti-American NGOs?

Does the U.S. military have any role other than protecting the profits of the military/security complex?

How can the United States be a country when it has no borders?

How can something as abnormal as a country without borders continue to exist? When the Western Roman Empire was overrun, Rome ceased to exist.  How can it be any different for America?

Think about this: If the globalists’ overarching goal is depopulation, which they say is the answer to preventing “climate change,” then why wouldn’t they open the borders of the one nation they most want to destroy and beckon the useless eaters of the world to come here? Why wouldn’t they invite the world to America before using Russia and/or China to blow it up in World War III?

We are living right now in the proverbial calm before the storm. Now is the time to get out of the cities, get stocked up on food and water, flashlights, batteries, and a means of self defense. But more than anything, get your head out of its state of denial.

National leaders the world over are warning their people to prepare for war. We’ve seen government officials recently making very public calls for their people to prepare. We’ve seen it in Poland, in Sweden, in Germany, the Netherlands, in Russia and China, even in the U.K.

It’s pretty much only in the U.S. where there’s been no such warning. Why is that? It goes back to the depopulation plan laid out above. America is a burgeoning kill zone. Don’t be caught off guard. Prepare now — mentally, physically and spiritually.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: What are we REALLY Fighting Against?


LeoHohmann.com is 100 percent reader supported and not beholden to any government or corporate ads or sponsorships. If you appreciate my work and would like to support it, you may send a donation of any size c/o Leo Hohmann, P.O. Box 291, Newnan, GA, 30264, or via credit card here.

Washington’s Welfare Uniparty Passes ANOTHER Massive Spending Bill

House Republicans voted for a child tax credit and business tax-break bill that they claim is a bipartisan achievement, but it’s another election-year spending bonanza and a bigger policy victory for Democrats. The GOP is embracing Democratic welfare and government spending priorities, writes Kim Strassel. The Senate can stop it.

Trillions and trillions in debt – money we do not have. Economists increasingly sound the alarm over the torrid pace of spending by Congress and the White House. And yet these degenerates keep spending.

another election-year spending bonanza and a bigger policy victory for Democrats

Washington’s Welfare Uniparty

Republicans are on board with the expanded child tax credit, a handout dating to 1997.

By Kimberley A. Strassel, WSJ, Feb. 1, 2024 6:09 pm ET

Rep. Jason Smith leaves a meeting of House Republicans in Washington, Jan. 30. Photo: Tom Williams/Zuma Press

Four months after decapitating their own speaker for a supposed lack of conservative principle, House Republicans this week celebrated by collaborating with Democrats to pass a welfare blowout. Kevin McCarthy, we hardly knew ye.

Proving again that Congress is incapable of anything beyond redistributing other people’s money, 357 representatives passed another $78 billion spending bill. Add it to the pantheon of Nancy Pelosi-era bipartisan binges—the “infrastructure” bill, the semiconductor-welfare transfer, the $1,400 Covid checks. New GOP leadership, same debt-fueled status quo.

Don’t go looking for “reform” or “spending discipline” or any of the usual GOP catchwords in this blob. The beating heart of Wednesday’s package is two longtime Democratic priorities—increasing the size of the child tax credit and its availability to parents who don’t pay income tax. The left accomplished both during Covid and have worked fervently to resurrect them since they expired in 2021. Republicans granted their wish.

Democrats built this Trojan Horse in 1997, when Bill Clinton won a $500 child tax credit. Their goal since has been to increase its size and expand eligibility, making it the basis of a future universal basic income. Republicans went from understanding the perfidy of government handouts to hoping they cadge a bit of credit for said income redistribution.

We’re all for “families” now—and that’s the justification for robbing the paychecks of productive childless taxpayers and rerouting their earnings to nonworking parents. This bill would further discourage work, leaving more parents and children dependent on government largess. It’s of a piece with the Republican lurch toward bills that micromanage industrial policy or penalize the free market. Today’s MAGA populism amounts to little more than warmed-over big-government Rockefeller Republicanism.

In return for this huge win, House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith got Democrats to support three business-related tax provisions that many already supported. That includes allowing corporations to deduct more of their interest expenses, which reverses a reform Republicans worked hard to include in the 2017 tax reform. Mr. Smith complains that critics of the bill care more about “Wall Street” than “Main Street.” He should look in the mirror.

It gets worse. Tucked in the bill are “low-income housing” credits, disaster dollars, budget gimmicks. And in an attempt to buy off a few hostage-taking Northeastern Republicans, Speaker Mike Johnson is apparently open to blowing up another hard-won GOP tax reform, the limit on deductions for state and local taxes. The SALT deduction is a sop to high earners, and forces taxpayers in low-tax states to subsidize the soaring progressive tax rates of New York, New Jersey and California. Yet there is talk of a bill that would double the current $10,000 cap for married couples.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Republican Led Congress and our new $34 Trillion Debt

America’s CEOs Are More Scared Of Country’s Huge Debt Than Anything Else

U.S. National Debt of $34,088,375,076,993.31 Trillion is a Ticking Time Bomb

BIDENOMICS: American Credit Card Debt Soars Past $1 Trillion

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Black Small Business Owners Favor President Donald J. Trump

Biden is bleeding black votes, especially those with small businesses who are trending towards voting for Trump with motivations like — “Well, we were broke with Biden. We weren’t with Trump.”

WATCH: Black business owners in South Carolina discuss the 2024 Presidential race.

‘We’re broke with Biden’: Black men discuss their support of Trump on MSNBC

By

MSNBC’s decision this week to host a discussion about former President Donald Trump with several black male voters from Charleston, South Carolina did not go as planned.

As seen and heard below, a number of them wound up expressing support for the network’s arch-nemesis.

The discussion occurred at a barbershop where MSNBC correspondent Trymaine Lee asked barbers and customers alike what Trump’s “appeal” is among them.

“Money,” several responded.

“I mean, Donald Trump has a reputation of being the money man, so,” one man, Anthony Freeman, said.

Thomas Murray, another black man, added that he’s particularly impressed with Trump’s business acumen.

“I just think that Donald Trump, in spite of all the craziness he may have in his head, reading some of the things that he talks about with business, I can kind of agree with as far as business-wise, because I’m trying to grow my business,” he said.

“As far as Biden, I haven’t seen Biden really care about business like that. And my concern is having my business so that I can build generational wealth, so my kids can see and have something to take upon when I’m not here,” he added.

He made a terrific point about current President Joe Biden’s apathy — if not distaste — for small and large businesses alike. There’s a reason why the president’s approval rating among small business owners hit a new low late last year.

Read more.

©2024. Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘With Trump, we had money’: What these Black voters told MSNBC could spell bad news for Biden

Have We had Honest or Dishonest Elections?

UPS Cuts 12,000 Jobs

Blue Shield, Clorox, Other Companies Hire Security To Protect Employees Because Crime Is So Bad in California

Employees at a number of these companies were advised to take caution when traveling to and from work and even told to stay inside during meal breaks.

The poison fruit of Democrat rule.

Blue Shield and Clorox Hire Security To Help Employees

By: Liberty Mass, January 30, 2024:

The city of Oakland, California has been facing a significant crime surge in recent years, prompting major employers in the state to take action to protect their workers.

Blue Shield, a health insurance provider, and Clorox, a cleaning and household products company, have both announced plans to improve the safety of their employees by providing them with security escorts and other measures. This comes after a report by CBS News Bay Area revealed that workers at these companies were advised to take caution when traveling to and from work and even told to stay inside during meal breaks.

A representative from Blue Shield stated that the company is committed to supporting the safety of their employees, and has implemented various options to ensure their well-being. This includes providing ridesharing services, paid parking, and private security to employees when they come into the office. In a statement to Fox News Digital, Blue Shield highlighted the need for city, county, and state leaders to work together with the community to improve safety in Oakland.

Similarly, Clorox expressed their commitment to prioritizing the safety and security of their workers. In a statement to Fox News Digital, the company stated that it has been working with other local businesses to collaborate on ways to make Oakland a safer place for everyone. Operating out of Oakland for over 110 years, Clorox has a strong connection to the community and is devoted to making a positive impact.

The rise in crime in Oakland has been alarming, with a 21% increase in violent crime in 2022 compared to the previous year. Robberies have increased by 38%, and burglaries by 23%. The city also reported a total of 120 homicides, which is the second consecutive year of this number. This alarming trend has not gone unnoticed, with major employers like Blue Shield and Clorox taking action to protect their employees.

Blue Shield and Clorox are not the only companies in Oakland that have advised their workers to take safety precautions when coming to and leaving work. Kaiser Permanente, the largest employer in Oakland, has also issued a memo urging its employees to stay inside for meals due to a string of local robberies. In a statement to multiple media outlets, Kaiser emphasized their commitment to ensuring the safety of their employees and continually monitoring their environments for any potential concerns.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Border Catastrophe

Moms For Liberty: Exposé on Slander by NYC Democrat Politicians and Leftwing Media

Jack Smith’s Trump Case in DC has been REMOVED FROM THE COURT CALENDAR

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.