The Trump administration is imposing a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada, along with a 10% tariff on imports from China.

The U.S. President says he wants strong action to halt the flow of the opioid fentanyl and its precursor chemicals into the U.S. from China via Mexico and Canada, as well as to stop illegal immigration across U.S. borders.

This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, illustrates the top import partner of every U.S. state as of November 2024.

The data is sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Canada, the Top Import Partner

Mexico, Canada, and China are the top trade partners for 42 states.

Canada is the top import partner for 23 U.S. states. As expected, the northern U.S. is dominated by Canada, which is the largest supplier of grain, livestock, meat, and poultry to the U.S.

State	Top Import Partner	% of Total State Imports	Import Value (USD)
Alabama	🇲🇽 Mexico	17%	6B
Alaska	🇰🇷 South Korea	33%	1B
Arizona	🇲🇽 Mexico	28%	11B
Arkansas	🇨🇦 Canada	14%	1B
California	🇨🇳 China	25%	113B
Colorado	🇨🇦 Canada	33%	5B
Connecticut	🇨🇦 Canada	25%	5B
Delaware	🇨🇦 Canada	10%	1B
District of Columbia	🇦🇺 Australia	24%	477M
Florida	🇨🇳 China	11%	12B
Georgia	🇨🇳 China	12%	16B
Hawaii	🇰🇷 South Korea	28%	558M
Idaho	🇲🇾 Malaysia	50%	4B
Illinois	🇨🇦 Canada	29%	58B
Indiana	🇮🇪 Ireland	31%	31B
Iowa	🇨🇦 Canada	25%	3B
Kansas	🇨🇦 Canada	15%	2B
Kentucky	🇲🇽 Mexico	10%	9B
Louisiana	🇲🇽 Mexico	14%	4B
Maine	🇨🇦 Canada	67%	4B
Maryland	🇩🇪 Germany	18%	7B
Massachusetts	🇨🇦 Canada	25%	10B
Michigan	🇲🇽 Mexico	44%	70B
Minnesota	🇨🇦 Canada	35%	13B
Mississippi	🇲🇽 Mexico	15%	3B
Missouri	🇲🇽 Mexico	23%	5B
Montana	🇨🇦 Canada	86%	6B
Nebraska	🇨🇦 Canada	17%	1B
Nevada	🇨🇳 China	23%	4B
New Hampshire	🇨🇦 Canada	22%	2B
New Jersey	🇨🇳 China	9%	13B
New Mexico	🇲🇽 Mexico	25%	2B
New York	🇨🇦 Canada	12%	17B
North Carolina	🇮🇪 Ireland	14%	11B
North Dakota	🇨🇦 Canada	75%	3B
Ohio	🇨🇦 Canada	22%	18B
Oklahoma	🇨🇦 Canada	50%	8B
Oregon	🇯🇵 Japan	15%	4B
Pennsylvania	🇨🇳 China	13%	15B
Rhode Island	🇩🇪 Germany	20%	2B
South Carolina	🇨🇳 China	15%	8B
South Dakota	🇨🇦 Canada	30%	593M
Tennessee	🇨🇳 China	17%	19B
Texas	🇲🇽 Mexico	40%	146B
Utah	🇲🇽 Mexico	20%	4B
Vermont	🇨🇦 Canada	67%	2B
Virginia	🇨🇳 China	13%	5B
Washington	🇨🇦 Canada	28%	16B
West Virginia	🇨🇦 Canada	40%	2B
Wisconsin	🇨🇦 Canada	17%	6B
Wyoming	🇨🇦 Canada	66%	656M

Meanwhile, Mexico is the top import partner for 10 states, predominantly in the South. The country is the largest supplier of fruits and vegetables to the United States. Forty percent of Texas’s imports come from Mexico.

U.S. trade with these two neighboring countries also involves machinery, vehicles, oil, and petroleum products. In total, the U.S. imports about $900 billion in goods from Canada and Mexico annually.

China is the top trading partner for nine states, including California and Florida, two of the largest economies in the country. About a quarter of all imports to California come from China, totaling $113 billion per year.

How does Canada compare with all other 50 states on various metrics? We compare Canada to every other state on GDP, GDP per capita, college degrees, life expectancy, and homicide rates on our new data-driven app, Voronoi.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

The answer is all of them, in due time. Here are the latest spectacular failures.

Birds Fry Every Two Minutes

It took 10 years, and hundreds-of-thousands of dead birds, before the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System in California would meet its fate.

The Wall Street Journal explains in ‘A Prolific Executioner of Wildlife’

An Obama-era monument to green delusions finally faces extinction.

Longtime readers may recall a 2014 Journal editorial about California’s “bird-fryer” solar plant, a taxpayer-backed venture that was hell on local animals. Turns out it was also hell on electricity ratepayers. But as with so many politically favored green ventures, waiting for official acknowledgment of failure can feel like an eternity.

Now finally here in 2025 it seems the reckoning has begun. The Las Vegas Review-Journal notes in an editorial that “a major California utility —  Pacific Gas & Electric — announced that it will no longer buy power from the Ivanpah solar plant off Interstate 15 near the Nevada-California border. As a result, two of the plant’s three towers will shut down next year — and the third will probably follow.”

The plant might have functioned merely as the world’s most expensive backyard bug zapper. But it was just too lethal. The Review-Journal’s Emerson Drewes reported last month:

Federal wildlife officials said Ivanpah might act as a “mega-trap” for wildlife, with the bright light of the plant attracting insects, which in turn attract insect-eating birds that fly to their deaths in the intensely focused light rays.

So many birds have been victims of the plant’s concentrated sun rays that workers referred to them as “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair. When federal wildlife investigators visited the plant around 10 years ago, they reported an average of one “streamer” every two minutes.

Performance has proven so poor that PG&E has exercised its right to terminate the contract, about which negotiations have been completed; there is no doubt that towers 1 and 3 will cease operations within roughly a year. And it appears to be the case that Edison too wants out: “the utility is in ‘ongoing discussions’ with the project’s owners and the federal government over ending the utility’s contract.”

Calculating the Number of Dead Birds

There are 525,600 minutes in a year.

At one fried bird every two minutes, assuming sunshine 50 percent of the time (more in summer and less in winter), that’s 525,600 / 4 or roughly 131,400 dear birds per year.

Over 10 years that would be 1.31 million dead birds. Ouch!

That may be the high side, perhaps even low side. However, it’s clear that hundreds of thousands of birds were killed in this boondoggle that was never profitable even with subsidies.

New Jersey Reaps the Wind, Again

It’s not just solar. Also note that Shell just backed out of a wind-energy project despite huge subsidies.

Please note New Jersey Reaps the Wind, Again

Another offshore wind development stalled this week off the Jersey shore, making it the latest of three such projects to fail despite generous terms from the state. Energy giant Shell wrote off its 50% stake in Atlantic Shores, choosing to take a $1 billion impairment instead of complete the 2,800 megawatt wind farm. New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities canceled its request for a wind-energy provider, leaving the unfinished project with no prospective customer.

Ratepayers can rejoice. Atlantic Shores would have charged about three times the market price for the power it generated, according to a review by Whitestrand Consulting. That would have raised electricity rates by 11% for residents and 13% to 15% for businesses, forcing them to overpay by $48 billion over the wind farm’s lifetime.

Gov. Murphy has treated renewable energy as a sacred cause no matter the costs since 2018. That includes a bill he signed to let Ørsted pocket federal credits it had promised to pass on to customers, though he clawed money back when the projects died.

Mr. Murphy says he approves of the utility bureau’s decision not to seek a new wind provider, but he still hasn’t given up his green dreams, calling offshore wind a “once-in-a-generation opportunity.” A once-in-a-generation failure is more accurate.

A Mountain of Unrecyclable Waste

The Institute for Energy Research notes Broken Windmill Blade Closes Nantucket Beaches

This story is from July 2024, but it contains pertinent details.

A massive wind turbine blade shattered offshore Massachusetts causing extensive debris, which shut down beaches on Nantucket Island and caused serious concern to fishermen, who worried that the debris could damage their boats. The failure of the massive blade and the resulting debris caused the federal Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement to suspend operations at Vineyard Wind until it could be determined whether the “blade failure” impacts other turbine blades on the development of the offshore wind farm. Power production has been suspended and installation of new wind turbine construction is on hold. And as more green energy trash washes ashore the local town is considering litigation. The facility’s massive wind turbines began sending electricity to the grid this past winter.

A GE Vernova turbine blade failed at the U.K.’s massive Dogger Bank offshore wind installation this spring, and another broke several blades in Germany last fall, which brought the number of broken GE blades at the Alfstedt-Ebersdorf wind farm in Lower Saxony to three. The first blade had broken off the previous year at one of the wind farm’s eight GE 5.3-158 turbines.

On June 28, America Electric Power (AEP) filed suit against GE Vernova in New York court over quality and warranty concerns, claiming widespread issues with the turbines it has deployed at three wind projects in Oklahoma. It is alleging that “within only two to three years of commercial operation, the GE wind turbine generators have exhibited numerous material defects on major components and experienced several complete failures, at least one turbine blade liberation event, and other deficiencies.”

GE Vernova is not the only wind turbine maker facing losses. Last year, Germany’s Siemens Energy, announced it would take a loss on its wind business due to quality problems with its wind turbines. Siemens Energy announced that quality problems at its wind turbine unit would take years to fix, wiping over a third off its market value and dealing a blow to one of the world’s biggest suppliers of wind turbines.

Massive Wind Graveyards

Wind turbine blades are made from fiberglass, or fiber reinforced plastic, and cannot be recycled. The Biden-Harris administration has not indicated what or who it expects to deal with the mountain of waste that will result when thousands of turbine blades reach the end of their useful lives in 20 to 25 years, or in many cases less. In fact, wind blades are piling up in Texas and Iowa without proper disposal. Massive wind graveyards, for example, have popped up on the outskirts of Sweetwater, Texas. The pile of wind blades covers more than thirty acres, in stacks rising as high as basketball backboards.

How Many Birds are Killed by Wind Turbines?

The American Bird Conservancy estimates approximately 538,000 wind turbine-caused bird deaths occur in the U.S. each year.

Raptors like Golden Eagles and nighttime migratory songbirds are particularly vulnerable. 

That estimate is from 2021. So double or triple it. But skeptics point out cats kill 2.4 billion birds a year. And 200 million birds are allegedly killed by automobiles each year.

Have cats killed any golden eagles?

Economic Reality

Let’s return to economic reality.

None of these projects are profitable, even with subsidies. That’s why they fail.

Meanwhile, consumers face monstrous hikes in energy bills to pay for these boondoggles as mounds of unrecyclable garbage piles up in massive wind graveyards.

Related Posts

August 19, 2020: Green Energy Failed Leaving Millions in California Blackout

Electrical companies imposed rolling blackouts for the first time since 2001. Inability to meet the surge in demand is due to a shift from natural gas.

September 5, 2023: Biden’s Green Energy Inflation Reduction Act Needs a Big Bailout Already

Surprise, surprise. Subsidies were not enough to make Biden’s energy projects profitable.

May 21, 2024: Hoot of the Day: No One Wants Green Energy if It’s Too Cheap

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wants the EU to hike tariffs on China just as the US did.

August 10, 2024: Another Green Energy Company Declares Bankruptcy, Thank Biden’s Tariffs

Conflicting goals often leads to the worst of both outcomes. That’s what’s happening with solar panels and EVs.

Finally please consider The Futility of Wind and Solar Power in One Easy to Understand Picture

How do we get green energy from here to there and at what cost?

Let’s return to the lead question. 

Q: How Many More Ridiculous Green Energy Projects Will Fail?

A: All of them, unfortunately not fast enough. And none of them should have been approved in the first place.

Addendum

One reader commented, “Onshore wind is cheap and kills a tiny amount of birds. To me it is an important part of future energy mix.”

I replied … If wind was cheap, without subsidies, then we would have more of it.

That we don’t, even with subsidies, is telling.

And if government would stop investing in losers, with subsidies, and just stay out of it, we would likely be further along with solutions.

Since Trump’s inauguration, the U.S. dollar has been highly sensitive to tariff announcements given its role in global trade and economic confidence.

The dollar strengthened after tariff threats against China, Mexico, and Canada, it later fell once they were suspended in January. 

While trade policy remains uncertain, some predict the dollar will strengthen over the next few years, but then pullpack amid swelling U.S. debt accelerated by Trump’s tax cuts.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows the performance of the U.S. Dollar Index by president since 1967, based on data from TradingView.

The U.S. Dollar Under Every President Since 1967

Below, we show trends in the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) across each president since Richard Nixon.

The DXY measures the value of the dollar against six major currencies as a way to track its relative performance or weakness. When the U.S. economy is strong relative to global economies, the value of the DXY often rises, given higher demand for the safe haven asset.

In 1985, the DXY ascended to record highs during Ronald Reagan’s presidency when the federal funds rate reached 18%.

These high rates made holding U.S. dollars more attractive, and America’s relative economic strength played a role in driving investor sentiment.

At the time, the sharp appreciation of the dollar contributed to a substantial trade deficit as American goods became increasingly expensive while imports were cheap. To curb the dollar’s rise, global leaders struck a deal in 1985 called the Plaza Accord, which contributed to its 40% decline over the next two years.

By contrast, the dollar hit all-time lows in 2008 during the global financial crisis under George W. Bush. At the end of 2008, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to near-zero amid deteriorating labor market conditions. Amid concerns of a slow economic recovery, investors looked to gold and other higher-yielding currencies.

Will the U.S. Dollar Index Continue Rising?

Over 2024, the dollar’s uptrend was underscored by America’s economic dynamism while Europe and China faced muted GDP growth.

This trend could continue if Trump follows through on tariffs for a number of reasons. First, tariffs could rekindle inflation, leading the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates elevated, which could cause the dollar to strengthen. Secondly, tariffs could cause economic weakness in other countries, improving America’s relative strength, creating higher demand for the currency.

However, tariffs run the risk of dampening the U.S. economy, which could weigh on the dollar.

While Trump’s position on the dollar is contradictory—he wants it to maintain its dominance but advocates for competitive weakening to boost U.S. exports—all eyes will be watching if tariffs serve as bargain chips or materialize into new sweeping policies.

To learn more about this topic from a global perspective, check out this graphic on the performance of the U.S. dollar against major currencies in 2024.

Authored by Liz Heflin via Remix News,

The European Commission is essentially manipulating NGOs to achieve its own goals in exchange for financial support. A Dutch newspaper has exposed part of this process, writes Magyar Nemzet, which then shows how Brussels does this and who the biggest domestic beneficiaries are. 

On Jan. 22, De Telegraaf reported on secret contracts that the European Commission had signed with green NGOs to conduct alleged covert lobbying activities. According to the newspaper, the lobbying organizations, commissioned by Brussels with EU money, were tasked with persuading MEPs and member states to support the commission’s ambitious green policy initiatives.

For example, the European Environment Bureau (EEB), an umbrella organization for green groups, was tasked with providing at least 16 examples of how the European Parliament had tightened green legislation thanks to its lobbying. According to documents reviewed by the newspaper, the EEB was also tasked with supporting the controversial nature restoration bill initiated by former Commissioner Frans Timmermans. 

In addition, they could use around €700,000 in support to steer the debate on agricultural activity in a more environmentally friendly direction.

In Hungary, the EU provides funding to certain organizations, which then use their activities to serve Brussels’ political goals. Here are some examples.

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee is heavily dependent on international funding. According to their latest available financial report for 2023, more than 61 percent of their annual income came from private foundations, including George Soros’s organization. They received a total of 48.85 million forints from the European Commission, which accounted for 6.1 percent of their income. Helsinki has received funding for various projects serving legal protection purposes, typically for several years.

In recent years, the organization has often criticized the Hungarian government’s immigration policy, especially the measures related to border closures and the operation of transit zones, and has also undertaken the legal representation of migrants, for example, at the European Court of Human Rights.

One of the “results” of Helsinki’s operation is that in June 2024, the European Court of Justice imposed a migration fine of €200 million on Hungary and ordered our country to pay an additional €1 million per day until we change the relevant regulations.

Helsinki has actively contributed to the European Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law Report, which contains a number of criticisms of Hungary, including problems and recommendations in the areas of justice, the fight against corruption, and institutional checks and balances. The Helsinki Committee, together with other NGOs, including Transparency International Hungary, has submitted a nearly 100-page submission to the European Commission, which is withholding billions of euros from Hungary.

Transparency International Hungary (TI Hungary) has regularly attacked the Hungarian government in recent years, primarily on issues related to corruption, lack of transparency, and the management of public funds. 

The organization also receives significant foreign funding, including funds from Soros’ Open Society Foundations, but their supporters also include the European Commission, from which they received a total of 13.7 million forints in revenue, according to their 2023 report.

Transparency International produces its Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) every year, which is used to calculate which countries are the most and least corrupt in the world. Tamás Lánczi, president of the Office for the Protection of Sovereignty, has already held the organization accountable for the bias experienced in determining the CPI. 

All of this is significant because the index serves as a reference point for the withholding of EU funds due to Hungary.

The 2023 report from Amnesty International Hungary shows that the organization is significantly dependent on foreign sources. 

Their revenues from the European Union budget, as well as other states and international organizations, exceeded 170 million forints, which represented 42 percent of their total revenue in that year.

They received almost 53 million forints in funding from the European Commission in 2023, which is almost 13 percent of their total annual income. They received the money as the winner of a call for proposals under the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Value (CERV) program to promote gender equality. Amnesty has been working against Hungary’s interests on several fronts, as shown below.

The organization reports that it prepared its analysis related to the European Commission’s annual rule of law assessment, which examined, among other things, the Hungarian justice system, corruption, the press, civil society organizations, and the legislature. It says: “The success of our work, which has been carried out for four years, together with our civil society friends, is also demonstrated by the fact that many of our recommendations are reflected in the report published in July.” 

In other words, they are explicitly proud of having put Hungary at a disadvantage.

The annual report also mentions that in March 2023, in addition to the European Parliament, 15 EU member states joined the European Commission v. Hungary lawsuit filed on the side of the commission over the child protection law adopted in 2021. Amnesty boasts that the actions of many member states are due to their work.

The Hungarian Digital Media Observatory (Lakmusz–HDMO) was established in January 2023 as the Hungarian center of the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), established by the European Commission in 2020. Six organizations work together within the framework of the project: Political Capital, Mérték Médiaelemző Műhely, AFP news agency, Lakmusz, Idea Foundation and Epresspack. According to their own admission, their activities include fact-checking and related research and analysis, and they also provide training for journalists and teachers on the topic of fact-checking and conscious media consumption.

The HDMO Project is being implemented with the partial support of the European Commission, and the consortium forming the HDMO was selected by the Commission through an open tender. Lakmusz, which participated in the project, has also previously attacked the Hungarian government. For example, they have tried to discredit the institution of the national consultation on several occasions. Political Capital, Mérték, and Lakmusz can also be directly or indirectly linked to the foundations of George Soros.

Read more here…

Transparency International has released its 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index which gauges levels of perceived public sector corruption in 180 countries and territories around the world.

The index scores countries on a scale of zero (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean) with the average score just 43 out of 100. 

As Statista’s Felix Richter details below, more than two thirds of countries (122) scored lower than 50 this year, as 148 countries have either stagnated or worsened since 2012. Just 32 countries have significantly reduced corruption during that period, illustrating how hard it is to achieve meaningful change in this area.

 

You will find more infographics at Statista

In 2024, the countries with the lowest perceived level of public sector corruption were Denmark (90), Finland (88) and Singapore (84), followed by New Zealand (83), Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland (all at 81). 

The opposite end of the index saw South Sudan scoring just 8 points, making it the world’s most corruption-stricken country. 

Somalia (9), Venezuela (10) and Syria (12) were only marginally better, as were Yemen, Libya, Eritrea and Equatorial Guinea (all 13). 

Africa and the Middle East remained hotspots of public sector corruption, while the Nordics stand out as examples of low corruption. 

The United States ranked tied 28th with a score of 65 – the lowest since 2012 and the continuation of a negative trend that began in 2015, when the country’s score peaked at 76.

“Corruption is an evolving global threat that does far more than undermine development – it is a key cause of declining democracy, instability and human rights violations,” François Valérian, chair of Transparency International said in a statement. 

“The international community and every nation must make tackling corruption a top and long-term priority. This is crucial to pushing back against authoritarianism and securing a peaceful, free and sustainable world.”

This year’s report also highlights corruption as major roadblock in the way of more decisive climate action.

“Governments and multilateral organizations must embed anti-corruption measures into climate efforts to safeguard finance, rebuild trust, and maximize impact,” Maíra Martini, CEO of Transparency International, said. 

“Corrupt forces not only shape but often dictate policies and dismantle checks and balances – silencing journalists, activists, and anyone fighting for equality and sustainability.”

And finally, we know you’re all wondering how Ukraine did…

It’s getting ‘more corrupt’ again!

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

The Starmer government, which has the most ambitious plan for decarbonizing the country in Europe, is going to make it easier to build nuclear power plants in what appears to be yet another piece of proof that an energy transition is unattainable without nuclear power.

Bloomberg reports that the government of Keir Starmer plans to widen the availability of sites for nuclear power plant construction, which has been extremely restricted. 

The goal: bring down energy costs and provide a boost for the economy.

There are currently two nuclear power plants under construction in the UK. 

Both, however, have suffered delays and massive cost overruns, drawing strong public criticism. 

Hinkley Point C began construction over 10 years ago and is yet several years away from completion. 

The delay would also increase the final tab for the power plant.

Sizewell C has doubled in cost since 2020 when the original plans were made for the project, with developer EDF – which is also building Hinkley Point C – attributing the cost jump to construction material costs and general inflation.

This is perhaps why the new government plan for nuclear focuses on small modular reactors rather than the traditional large-scale facilities that take years to build. 

Per the government’s website,

“Reforms to planning rules will clear a path for smaller, and easier to build nuclear reactors – known as Small Modular Reactors –to be built for the first time ever in the UK. This will create thousands of new highly skilled jobs while delivering clean, secure and more affordable energy for working people.”

Small modular reactors are touted as the nuclear power plants of the future but they have yet to be deployed at any scale, with cost challenges and red tape among the obstacles to this deployment. 

The Starmer government’s plan appears to focus on the red tape as well as opposition from local communities to new nuclear power plants.

The European Union, a political and economic bloc of 27 member countries, has faced uneven growth in recent years, with its largest economies experiencing stagnation or mild contractions.

Despite recent challenges, the EU continues to be a significant global economic force, underpinned by its strong industrial base, developed financial sector, and extensive trade relationships, though its overall influence is subject to increasing competition.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes the GDP the European Union’s 27 member countries in U.S dollars. Data is for 2024.

Data comes from the International Monetary Fund.

Europe’s Economic Giants Hold Their Ground

Below, we show each EU country’s GDP in 2024 and their share of EU’s total GDP.

Rank	Country	2024 GDP (USD)	Share of EU Economy
1	🇩🇪 Germany	4.7T	24.3%
2	🇫🇷 France	3.2T	16.4%
3	🇮🇹 Italy	2.4T	12.2%
4	🇪🇸 Spain	1.7T	8.9%
5	🇳🇱 Netherlands	1.2T	6.3%
6	🇵🇱 Poland	863B	4.4%
7	🇧🇪 Belgium	662B	3.4%
8	🇸🇪 Sweden	609B	3.1%
9	🇮🇪 Ireland	561B	2.9%
10	🇦🇹 Austria	536B	2.8%
11	🇩🇰 Denmark	412B	2.1%
12	🇷🇴 Romania	381B	2.0%
13	🇨🇿 Czechia	343B	1.8%
14	🇫🇮 Finland	306B	1.6%
15	🇵🇹 Portugal	303B	1.6%
16	🇬🇷 Greece	253B	1.3%
17	🇭🇺 Hungary	229B	1.2%
18	🇸🇰 Slovakia	143B	0.7%
19	🇧🇬 Bulgaria	108B	0.6%
20	🇱🇺 Luxembourg	91B	0.5%
21	🇭🇷 Croatia	90B	0.5%
22	🇱🇹 Lithuania	83B	0.4%
23	🇸🇮 Slovenia	73B	0.4%
24	🇱🇻 Latvia	46B	0.2%
25	🇪🇪 Estonia	43B	0.2%
26	🇨🇾 Cyprus	35B	0.2%
27	🇲🇹 Malta	24B	0.1%

Germany, France, and Italy have long been the EU’s largest economies, driven by industrial strength, financial hubs, and manufacturing power.

Together, they account around 53% of the EU’s $19.4 trillion GDP, with Germany alone surpassing the combined output of the 20 smallest EU economies.

However, these top three economies saw stagnating or negative growth last year.

Spain and the Netherlands round out the top five, bringing their collective share to 68%. Meanwhile, Malta posted the highest GDP growth at 5% in 2024 but remains the EU’s smallest economy at just 0.1% of the total.

The UK, which joined the EU in 1973 and officially left in 2020, recorded a GDP of $4.4 trillion in 2024—placing it second only to Germany if it were still in the EU.

To see more regional GDP breakdowns, check out this graphic that visualizes Asia’s economy by country.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

Trump signed an Executive Order late last week “Addressing Egregious Actions Of The Republic Of South Africa” that mandated cutting off aid to the country as punishment for its new contentious Expropriation Act and promoting the resettlement of the white minority (Afrikaners) to the US.

Supporters applauded him for giving attention to what they consider to be the long-ignored issue of black-on-white racially discriminatory policies while opponents believe that it’s a racist move promulgated on false pretexts.

Before proceeding, readers might want to review some of RT’s reports about the Afrikaner farmer (Boer) issue, South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC), and the country’s economic challenges:

* 19 March 2009: “The Boer War and the Russo-Japanese War”

* 25 October 2013: “S. Africa evacuation plan: White Afrikaner group fears genocide upon Mandela’s death”

* 1 May 2018: “Why South Africa’s govt plans to strip land from white farmers”

* 15 June 2018: “Calls to ‘kill the Boer’ make all farmers targets, not just whites – South African official”

* 9 July 2018: “‘A matter of life & death’: 15,000 white South African farmers seek refuge in Russia, report says”

* 19 July 2018: “‘They want us all to leave’: South African farmer wants to move to Russia, change name to Ivan”

20 July 2018: “First 50 families of farmers from South Africa may soon resettle in Russia”

* 4 August 2018: “South African farmers seek refuge in Russia’s Crimea”

* 28 February 2019: “South Africa’s ANC needs just 5 years ‘to destroy the economy & the country,’ economist warns”

* 17 April 2019: “South Africa’s economic & social decline the worst of nations not at war”

* 18 April 2019: “‘Don’t ever vote for white person’: South African ANC leader’s race-based call discussed on RT”

* 11 May 2019: “As it re-elects hopeless ANC again, do we finally admit that post-apartheid South Africa has failed?”

* 4 April 2020: “‘White monopoly capital’: Anti-white South African radicals scorn massive donations that could help black businesses”

* 16 October 2020: “White farmer’s brutal murder sends protesters & counter-protesters to rally outside courthouse in South Africa”

To oversimplify, the brutal murder of some Boers on their farms led to some Afrikaners suspecting that the ANC turns a blind eye to this and even encourages it, while the ANC believes that the Afrikaners’ outsized control over national wealth is an injustice that must be rectified via redistribution. The Expropriation Act’s recent passing came amidst the country’s continued economic challenges, ergo why some of the Afrikaners consider it a distraction while the ANC insists that it’s a long-overdue solution.

Regardless of one’s personal views on this subject, it’s arguably the case that this is just a pretext for Trump to pressure South Africa for reasons beyond those stated in his Executive Order. While some speculate that his motives are as crude as a favor to South African-born Elon Musk amidst his public feud with President Cyril Ramaphosa over this issue and/or revenge for South Africa’s ICJ ruling against Israel, and these could have indeed played a role, his team might have broader strategic interests in mind.

ANC-led South Africa has presented itself as a rising multipolar pole in Africa amidst the global systemic transition, to which end it’s sought to increase its role in BRICS alongside participating in multilateral naval drills with China and Russia, thus reinforcing the aforesaid international reputation. The US disapproved of South Africa flexing its sovereignty in such a symbolic way, especially given the ongoing NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine, hence why the Biden Administration began pressuring it.

Here are some background briefings about their campaign against it over the past few years:

* 3 September 2022: “South Africa Deserves Praise For Its Neutral Foreign Policy In The New Cold War”

* 11 December 2022: “Germany’s Double Standards On South African Coal Expose Its ‘Green Imperialism’”

* 18 February 2023: “South Africa’s naval drills with China and Russia set a positive example”

* 26 April 2023: “South Africa’s Neutrality In The New Cold War Is Under Threat From Western Pressure”

* 12 May 2023: “The US Is Forcing South Africa To Take Sides In The New Cold War”

* 17 May 2023: “South Africa Is Presenting Itself As The Continent’s Leader”

* 14 July 2023: “South Africa’s Deputy President Spilled The Beans About His Country’s BRICS-ICC Dilemma”

* 19 July 2023: “South Africa Showed That BRICS Isn’t What Many Of Its Supporters Assumed”

* 20 July 2023: “South Africa Bungled The Optics Of Its BRICS Compromise With Russia”

* 3 September 2024: “Mongolia’s Embrace Of Putin Despite His ICC Warrant Exposes South Africa’s Political Cowardice”

This is the basis upon which Trump is now waging his own pressure campaign against South Africa.

His predecessor succeeded in coercing South Africa into complying with the ICC’s arrest warrant for Putin and therefore forcing him to participate in that year’s BRICS Summit by video instead. For as symbolic of a concession that that was to the US, it didn’t change anything tangible with regard to South Africa’s foreign policy, which is what Trump is aiming to do. His team might have identified South Africa as one of the weak links in BRICS and correspondingly concluded that a pressure campaign could break it.

It’s debatable whether Trump truly believes that BRICS is conspiring to create a new currency or backing the yuan as a rival to the dollar, or if this is just a pretext for him to individually pressure its members, but his recently repeated threat to impose 100% tariffs against them preceded his Executive Order. Therefore, the possibility exists that cutting off aid to South Africa in response to its Expropriation Act is just an excuse to coerce it into tangible foreign policy changes, most immediately with regard to BRICS.

In practice, this could hypothetically take the form of South Africa obstructing progress on the BRICS Bridge, BRICS Clear, and BRICS Pay initiatives that were discussed during last October’s Kazan Summit. It might also lead to South Africa militarily distancing itself from Russia and especially China together with exporting more precious minerals to the US in the long term in exchange for pressure relief. To be clear, just because Trump might want this doesn’t mean that it’ll happen, but it should still be taken seriously.

The relevance that all of this has to the Expropriation Act is that the aforesaid represents both a populist distraction from South Africa’s continued economic challenges as well as a potential solution from the ANC’s perspective despite some warning that it risks leading to a Zimbabwean-like disaster. In the far-fetched scenario that the same lawmakers who voted for this act are coerced by the US into voting to rescind it, then this would deal a deathblow to the ANC, which might then be replaced by the EFF.

The Economic Freedom Fighters are led by radical leftist-populist Julius Malema, who’s infamous for leading chants of “Kill the Boer”, which he and his supporters claim is just metaphorical and not literal. He fashions himself as a revolutionary that’s been very outspoken against the US and in favor of multipolarity. More South Africans might flock to Malema and his EFF for patriotic-nationalist reasons if Ramaphosa and his ANC ultimately capitulate to what he just described as Trump’s “bullying”.

In order to preemptively avoid any misunderstanding, talking about this scenario doesn’t mean that it’s likely, only that it’s possible and should thus be considered just in case. Ramaphosa knows that he and his party would be doomed if they give in to Trump so they’re not expected to budge, at least for now, unless the US drastically ramps up its pressure campaign. Even then, however, they might try to co-opt Malema’s leftist-populist and nationalist rhetoric in order to rally the population at large behind them.

Observers should also be aware that new Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared late last week that he won’t attend this November’s G20 Summit in Johannesburg in protest of the Expropriation Act and what he said are South Africa’s other “anti-American” policies. Knowing that this act likely won’t be rescinded, it could very well be that Trump’s team planned to exploit this pretext for the purpose of weakening the world’s most influential economic-financial multilateral platform by boycotting its annual event.

He’s already taken a wrecking ball to economic globalization in recent weeks by threatening tariffs against Colombia, Panama, Canada, and Mexico before they gave in to his pressure, all while imposing 10% tariffs on China and threatening to do something similar against the EU too. If this trend continues, then the G20 might no longer wield anywhere near the influence that it did just one year ago, thus dooming November’s summit to failure regardless of whether or not the US ends up attending.

It’s South Africa’s bad fortune that it was already in the US’ crosshairs during the Biden Administration for its multipolar foreign policy, that there’s genuine concern about the treatment of some of its white minority, and its plans to host the next G20 Summit later this year. These factors converged to incentivize Trump into launching a pressure campaign against it in order to coerce tangible changes to its foreign policy, particularly vis-à-vis BRICS, so as to fully subordinate South Africa it to the West.

The ANC’s long track record of political mistakes and policy failures is finally catching up to it precisely at the moment when the party finally started prioritizing South Africa’s participation in global processes, thus creating the pretext for the US to meddle in this BRICS member’s affairs. The outcome of Trump’s pressure campaign against it will indicate he continues picking off this group’s countries one-by-one or decides to reconsider this strategy, therefore making it immensely important.

Authored by Maryanne Demasi via The Brownstone Institute,

An explosive new study conducted within the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) own laboratory has revealed excessively high levels of DNA contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA Covid-19 vaccine.

Tests conducted at the FDA’s White Oak Campus in Maryland found that residual DNA levels exceeded regulatory safety limits by 6 to 470 times.

The study was undertaken by student researchers under the supervision of FDA scientists. The vaccine vials were sourced from BEI Resources, a trusted supplier affiliated with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), previously headed by Anthony Fauci.

Recently published in the Journal of High School Science, the peer-reviewed study challenges years of dismissals by regulatory authorities, who had previously labelled concerns about excessive DNA contamination as baseless.

The FDA is expected to comment on the findings this week. However, the agency has yet to issue a public alert, recall the affected batches, or explain how vials exceeding safety standards were allowed to reach the market.

The Methods

The student researchers employed two primary analytical methods:

• NanoDrop Analysis – This technique uses UV spectrometry to measure the combined levels of DNA and RNA in the vaccine. While it provides an initial assessment, it tends to overestimate DNA concentrations due to interference from RNA, even when RNA-removal kits are utilised.

• Qubit Analysis – For more precise measurements, the researchers relied on the Qubit system, which quantifies double-stranded DNA using fluorometric dye.

Both methods confirmed the presence of DNA contamination far above permissible thresholds. These findings align with earlier reports from independent laboratories in the United States, Canada, Australia, Germany, and France.

Expert Reaction

Kevin McKernan, a former director of the Human Genome Project, described the findings as a “bombshell,” criticising the FDA for its lack of transparency.

“These findings are significant not just for what they reveal but for what they suggest has been concealed from public scrutiny. Why has the FDA kept these data under wraps?” McKernan questioned.

CSO and Founder of Medicinal Genomics

While commending the students’ work, he also noted limitations in the study’s methods, which may have underestimated contamination levels.

“The Qubit analysis can under-detect DNA by up to 70% when enzymes are used during sample preparation,” McKernan explained. “Additionally, the Plasmid Prep kit used in the study does not efficiently capture small DNA fragments, further contributing to underestimation.”

In addition to genome integration, McKernan highlighted another potential cancer-causing mechanism of DNA contamination in the vaccines.

He explained that plasmid DNA fragments entering the cell’s cytoplasm with the help of lipid nanoparticles could overstimulate the cGAS-STING pathway, a crucial component of the innate immune response.

“Chronic activation of the cGAS-STING pathway could paradoxically fuel cancer growth,” McKernan warned. “Repeated exposure to foreign DNA through COVID-19 boosters may amplify this risk over time, creating conditions conducive to cancer development.”

Adding to the controversy, traces of the SV40 promoter were detected among the DNA fragments. While the authors concluded that these fragments were “non-replication-competent” meaning they cannot replicate in humans, McKernan disagreed.

“To assert that the DNA fragments are non-functional, they would need to transfect mammalian cells and perform sequencing, which wasn’t done here,” McKernan stated.

“Moreover, the methods used in this study don’t effectively capture the full length of DNA fragments. A more rigorous sequencing analysis could reveal SV40 fragments several thousand base pairs long, which would likely be functional,” he added.

Regulatory Oversight under Scrutiny

Nikolai Petrovsky, a Professor of Immunology and director of Vaxine Pty Ltd, described the findings as a “smoking gun.”

“It clearly shows the FDA was aware of these data. Given that these studies were conducted in their own labs under the supervision of their own scientists, it would be hard to argue they were unaware,” he said.

Nikolai Petrovsky, Professor of Immunology and Infectious Disease at the Australian Respiratory and Sleep Medicine Institute in Adelaide

Prof Petrovsky praised the quality of work carried out by the students at the FDA labs.

“The irony is striking,” he remarked. “These students performed essential work that the regulators failed to do. It’s not overly complicated—we shouldn’t have had to rely on students to conduct tests that were the regulators’ responsibility in the first place.”

The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), which has consistently defended the safety of the mRNA vaccines, released its own batch testing results, claiming they met regulatory standards. However, Prof Petrovsky criticised the TGA’s testing methods.

“The TGA’s method was not fit for purpose,” he argued. “It didn’t assess all the DNA in the vials. It only looked for a small fragment, which would severely underestimate the total amount of DNA detected.”

Implications for Manufacturers and Regulators

Now that DNA contamination of the mRNA vaccines has been verified in the laboratory of an official agency and published in a peer-reviewed journal, it becomes difficult to ignore.

It also places vaccine manufacturers and regulators in a precarious position.

Addressing the contamination issue would likely require revising manufacturing processes to remove residual DNA, which Prof Petrovsky explained would be impractical.

“The only practical solution is for regulators to require manufacturers to demonstrate that the plasmid DNA levels in the vaccines are safe,” Prof Petrovsky stated.

“Otherwise, efforts to remove the residual DNA would result in an entirely new vaccine, requiring new trials and effectively restarting the process with an untested product.”

Now the onus is on regulators to provide clarity and take decisive action to restore confidence in their oversight. Anything less risks deepening the scepticism of the public. 

Both the US and Australian drug regulators have been approached for comment.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Canada’s last-minute decision to cooperate with President Trump on border security and efforts to curb fentanyl trafficking was a key factor behind the president’s 25% tariff threat. While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has pledged to strengthen border security, a former US official who led an anti-fentanyl task force under President Trump’s first term has argued that laws in Canada hinder a proper crackdown on the flow of drugs in the US.

“Well, several months ago, you had the biggest lab in the history of the world taken over by (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) in Vancouver… It made Breaking Bad look like minor league,” former State Department official David Asher told Canada’s state-funded CBC News’ chief political correspondent, Rosemary Barton, in an interview last weekend. 

Asher claimed that the fentanyl super lab was “definitely” connected to Chinese organized crime and also pointed to possible connections with Iran and even rogue biker gangs. 

“Definitely there was ties to Chinese organized crime, possibly Iran as well,” he said, adding, “The facts haven’t been released by your government…I think they know they’re sitting on a big scandal here.”

Asher continued, “The fact this thing emerged and it’s tied to these biker gangs, who’ve been hired to go down to the United States, in some cases, and assassinate people like my former boss Secretary (of State) Mike Pompeo, President Trump, and others. You know, this is another whole level of scandal.”

Watch this whole interview segment with David Asher of the Hudson Institute as he schools Rosie
“Well, several months ago, you had the biggest lab in the history of the world taken over by (RCMP) in Vancouver… It made Breaking Bad look like minor league”

“The most of the drugs… pic.twitter.com/MPwqvWRq99

— cbcwatcher (@cbcwatcher) February 9, 2025

“But the key thing to focus on is that someone was making over 100 million doses of deadly fentanyl – right under your noses – so how many other labs do you think you have in your country?” the former State Department official questioned. 

He explained that Canada has “very little border enforcement … most of the drugs are going from Mexico to Canada and then being brought south into the northwest United States on ships. You have almost no port enforcement with police. So we have no idea – except for our sources – what is actually going on. And we hear some bad things.” 

Asher stated that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Canadian Security Intelligence Service are top-notch organizations, “but your problem is your laws: It’s the Stinchcombe law. Basically, every time we try to go up on a phone number in Canada, almost all the money laundering networks are tied to China, which is about 90% of all the money laundering in the US. So when we’re targeting those numbers – the police have to inform that individual that the US is targeting their number. That’s crazy – how can we run an undercover police operation in the country?” 

Latest headlines on the US-Canada border situation:

• Trudeau Bends The Knee: Canada Will Send 10,000 Troops To Border, Name Fentanyl Czar To Delay Trump Tariffs

• Trump Effect: Canada Bends The Knee, Puts $1.3 Billion Into Border Security After Tariff Threat

• US & Canada Unveil Possible Blueprint For Post-Tariff Partnership To ‘Disrupt & Dismantle’ CCP-Fueled Fentanyl Crisis

Let’s rewind to April 2024, when we covered the House Select Committee on China that revealed the Chinese Communist Party used tax rebates to subsidize the manufacturing and exporting of fentanyl chemicals to North America. 

The report stated, “Through subsidies, grants, and other incentives, the PRC harms Americans while enriching PRC companies.” 

Recall this report in August: Chinese Narcos In Toronto Run “Command & Control” Fentanyl Laundering Network Used In TD Bank Case: US Investigator. 

Chinese Narcos In Toronto Run “Command & Control” Fentanyl Laundering Network Used In TD Bank Case: US Investigator https://t.co/X82NgBTohs

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 31, 2024

China hawk Kyle Bass.

The United States seized 43 pounds of Fentanyl at the Canadian border last year alone. That’s enough Fentanyl to KILL 9,700,000 Americans…and that’s what we caught. Imagine what got through…and Trudeau is upset about tariffs? Mexico and Canada KNOW DAMN WELL what to do. pic.twitter.com/msShpAuiEN

— 🇺🇸 Kyle Bass 🇹🇼 (@Jkylebass) February 3, 2025

Meanwhile, on the southern border…

USAF Spy Jet Flies Second SIGINT Operation On US Border With Focus On Narco Hub https://t.co/463lu63JJs

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 8, 2025

A coordinated North American strategy is emerging and essential to stop the drug death crisis in America, killing 100,000 folks (many working-age or military-age men and women) per year. This is hybrid warfare by Beijing – and folks have to start asking why the Biden-Harris regime fueled the crisis with open-border policies. It doesn’t seem like ‘America First’ – more like ‘China First’.