Zerohedge

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Employees working in coal mining and firefighter safety who had been slated for termination have been asked to return to work, according to a U.S. senator and a union that represents them.

The workers are employed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

As part of an HHS overhaul, hundreds of NIOSH employees were placed on administrative leave and set to be fired, union officials say.

Employees who work for the Coal Workers’ Health Surveillance Program and the Fire Fighters’ Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program are being reinstated temporarily, the American Federation of Government Employees Local 3430 said on Wednesday. The reinstatement action “allows these dedicated professionals to return to their critical roles in advancing worker safety and health across the country.”

The exact number of affected workers is unclear.

The workers are still on the list to be fired as part of mass terminations scheduled for June 2, the union said.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who has been in conversations with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about reversing some of the cuts, also said she understood the reinstatements to be temporary.

“I am encouraged that some NIOSH functions for coal miner and firefighter safety are slated to resume with some select staff returning to work this week. But my understanding is that this is temporary, so my focus will continue to be on working with HHS on permanently restoring these functions and personnel in the most efficient and effective manner,” Capito wrote on social media platform X.

HHS did not respond to a request for comment.

Kennedy said on X this week that “Firefighter health and safety programs remain a top priority” and that, as HHS works on streamlining operations, “critical services of NIOSH will remain intact.”

A West Virginia coal miner who sued the government in federal court over the cuts said in a recent filing that HHS cannot carry out programs detailed in federal law, such as a screening program for Black Lung, without the workers who were set to be fired.

The government has not yet responded to the legal action. A judge ordered the government to respond by May 2 and to appear in court on May 7.

Kennedy in March announced that HHS would slash about 10,000 jobs in a bid to make the agency more efficient and effective. After many workers were fired, Kennedy told reporters that some of the layoffs were mistakes and that certain employees were being brought back.

The Kremlin has called out the US and Ukraine, for what looks like an emerging trend of Washington essentially dragging Zelensky by the ear toward a peace deal. Russia is saying that ultimately it cannot sign a deal with the United States – but that for the war to end, a legitimate settlement must be made bilaterally with Kiev.

Putin spokesman Dimitry Peskov said Wednesday that even though Russia welcomes the Trump administration’s mediation efforts, the reality remains that “A peace deal should be done with the Ukraine, not with America.”

“Unfortunately, we haven’t heard any statements in this context from Kiev, so we don’t know whether Kiev is ready or not,” Peskov emphasized, strongly suggesting that the Ukrainian side isn’t really seeking peace.

The Kremlin reiterated that currently contacts with Ukraine are only at the military level, to broker things like POW exchanges and returns of the wounded and deceased.

President Trump has of late been expressing frustration, somewhat lashing out at both sides – though he’s seemed especially frustrated with Zelensky. Ukraine and the US were expected to finally sigh a minerals deal on Wednesday, but a “last minute hurdle” prevented that.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin actually had harsher statements, filling in more details beyond Peskov’s exchange with reporters.

“Not a single attempt to declare a ceasefire has in practice been supported by the Kiev regime, which continued to violate the truce. This shows that the regime is staking everything on war,” Galuzin told Izvestia, adding: “moreover, Kiev’s self-imposed legislative ban on negotiations with Russia remains in effect.”

And separately, Russian roving diplomat for the Donbass, Rodion Miroshnik, said “There is no basis to suggest that Ukraine is ready to alter its actions on the ground in any way. We do not see this happening. All we observe is erratic, pseudo-peacekeeping rhetoric. Hollow declarations of peace are not enough, we do not see any indication that Ukraine is demonstrating or confirming a willingness to pursue a ceasefire.”

To review, Russia has this month put forth the following key demands to end the war:

• an end of Ukraine’s ban on negotiations with Russia,
• for Ukraine to go back to the status of a neutral and non-aligned country in accordance with the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine in the 1990’s,
• an end of the policies of legally and physically destroy everything Russian: the language, media, culture, traditions, and Russian orthodoxy
• the international recognition of Russia’s ownership of Crimea, the DPR, LPR and the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

Trump argues it has been easier to deal with Putin than Zelensky pic.twitter.com/TsajLRSaBB

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) April 29, 2025

The reality remains that neither Ukraine nor Washington seem any closer to accepting all of these terms, despite months of back-and-forth dialogue, and several rounds of US and Russian delegations meeting. Meanwhile, Zelensky has been coming under threat from some of his own commanders as they warn him not to give up territory to Russia for the sake of peace.

Authored by Catrina Barker via The Center Square,

An Illinois appellate court judge says the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan was “reminiscent of King George, Hitler and Mussolini.” An Illinois constitutional attorney disagrees.

Judge James Knecht criticized the Trump administration’s heavy-handed courthouse arrest of Dugan. 

“The administration practiced jack booted, ham handed, procedures to arrest Judge Dugan at the courthouse. Reminiscent of King George, Hitler and Mussolini,” Knecht wrote. 

David Shestokas, a constitutional attorney who ran in the Republican primary for Illinois Attorney General, accused Dugan of defying federal authority by helping an illegal immigrant avoid Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

“The problem is, she just exhibited her own disrespect for the authority of the federal government. In terms of providing her with your typical kind of nonviolent courtesy, you know, we’ll give you a call and you can come and turn yourself in sort-of-thing. She had just demonstrated her own disrespect for the federal officers,” said Shestokas. 

Knecht called the arrest an “overreach.” He suggested the proper approach would have been to contact Dugan’s chief judge, the court administrator, and Wisconsin’s chief justice to clarify how state judges should interact with ICE.

“Am I asking for a judge to receive special treatment? No – Judge Dugan is being used as an example to strike fear into the heart of state authorities, judges included,” stated Knecht. “The state judiciary and the federal authorities are obligated to cooperate. One does not encourage such cooperation by arresting a judge to punish her for what may have been a mistake in judgment, or a reaction to the furor over immigration policy.”

Shestokas said physically arresting the judge is a bit unusual.

“[The federal authorities] were clearly interested in sending a message … that it didn’t matter who you are or what position you hold,” said Shestokas. “If, in fact, you aided and abetted someone who was lawfully to be detained by ICE and you interfered with that, you’ve broken the law and you’re subject to arrest.” 

Dugan allegedly led Mexican national Eduardo Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer out a restricted jury door to avoid ICE agents, a route the judge controls, according to Shestokas.

Knecht said on social media that he usually sleeps peacefully. However, he suggested he was awake thinking about Dugan’s arrest.

“I did not sleep well last night. I usually sleep peacefully. I was thinking about Judge Dugan in Wisconsin,” stated Knecht. “Some states and cities have laws or policies to not assist federal authorities such as ICE or FBI – of course, not assisting is not the same as obstructing. For me, the issue is not what Judge Dugan did (I do not support how she handled this) but how the authorities responded.”

In 2023, Knecht received $249,337 in pension benefits from the Illinois Judges Retirement System. 

Shestokas said Knecht’s social media post reflected a call for judges to be treated with a certain level of respect.

“I have no idea why there was any suggestion that there should be a consultation with the Wisconsin Supreme Court to determine how judges are supposed to do things. We know they’re not supposed to help criminals avoid arrest, prosecution, or detention,” said Shestokas. “It’s not unusual at all to inform the judge that there’s agents of whatever law enforcement agency outside intending to arrest someone when they leave the courtroom.”

Shestokas said no one uses the jury door without the judge’s permission, and despite being courteously informed about the planned arrest, she responded by allegedly breaking the law.

“Judge Duggan was given a heads up that there were agents outside the courtroom preparing to arrest an individual that was in their charge with the crime. And after she was given that heads up, apparently she sent a message to the agents that they should go visit with the chief judge. And then apparently she took the guy they wanted outside the side door, out the jury door,” said Shestokas. 

Knecht served as a law clerk to Illinois Supreme Court Justice Robert C. Underwood from 1973 to 1974, then as an Associate Circuit Judge from 1975 to 1978, and as a Circuit Judge from 1978 to 1986, before being elected to the Fourth District Appellate Court in 1986.

It is impossible to know the degree to which this is typical conflict propaganda, but Pakistan is claiming that India is planning a military strike on its territory, and that this is coming within less than one to two days.

“Pakistan has credible intelligence that India intends to launch a military strike within the next 24 to 36 hours, using the Pahalgam incident as a false pretext,” Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar wrote on X Tuesday evening.

“Any act of aggression will be met with a decisive response. India will be fully responsible for any serious consequences in the region,” Tarar added.

India has charged that Pakistan harbored the terrorists responsible for the attack on Indian-administered Kashmir which came one week ago and left 26 dead. They were mostly tourists from India visiting the popular and picturesque spot, and the gunmen chose them for execution on the spot because they were Hindu.

Gunfire has already been exchanged between the nuclear-armed rivals over the last several days, with neither side reporting any casualties or major incidents.

The last time there was a major terror attack targeting Indians in Kashmir, the Indian Air Force did respond:

The worst attack in recent years in Indian-run Kashmir was at Pulwama in 2019, when an insurgent rammed a car packed with explosives into a security forces convoy, killing 40 and wounding 35.

Indian fighter jets carried out air strikes on Pakistani territory 12 days later.

Pakistan has meanwhile welcomed China and Russia’s efforts to mediate de-escalation, also as the United Nations has urged restraint.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said he is holding dialogue with officials from both sides. “We are reaching out to both parties, and telling, of course, them to not escalate the situation,” a statement from the State Dept said.

The only significant military action so far is that Pakistan’s military said Tuesday it shot down an Indian spy drone over Kashmir, alleging that the UAV breached Pakistani-administered territory.

Pakistan has credible intelligence that within the next 24 to 36 hours, India is planning military action against Pakistan based on baseless and fabricated accusations related to the Pahalgam incident. – Information Minister Attaullah Tarar#IndiaPakistan #PakistanBehindPahalgam pic.twitter.com/8juDCkUFCJ

— Noor Fatima (@Fatima_Zahra120) April 30, 2025

The drone reportedly breached the Line of Control (LOC), Pakistani state-run media said, and it was subsequently shot down amid the air space incursion. Pakistani defense officials described to The Associated Press that the drone flew hundreds of feet into Pakistani-administered Kashmir.

And alarmingly, a Pakistani minister, Hanif Abbasi (though he’s not in defense or security) days ago warned that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal of more than 130 missiles was “not kept as models” and was aimed “only for India … these ballistic missiles, all of them are targeted at you” – as cited in The Guardian.

Authored by Rachel Acenas via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday announced he is scrapping a women’s leadership program implemented during President Donald Trump’s first term.

The program is operated by the United Nations and is “pushed by feminists and left-wing activists,” according to the defense secretary.

“This morning, I proudly ENDED the ‘Women, Peace & Security’ (WPS) program inside the [Department of Defense],” Hegseth wrote in a statement on X. “WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops—distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING.”

Hegseth said that “politicians fawn” over the program but troops “hate” it.

The WPS program was developed in response to the Women, Peace, and Security Act, which Trump signed into law on Oct. 6, 2017. The Trump administration at the time said it recognized that women are important agents of change in preventing and resolving conflicts, countering violent extremism, and building peace and stability.

The law, outlined by the U.N. Security Council and adopted as in a resolution in 2000, had been championed over the years by various members of Congress. The cause was then taken up by Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and former advisor, after it was signed into U.S. law.

Ivanka said in a June 2019 statement that good defense policy requires women’s participation and empowerment. She also stated that women are “critically underrepresented in conflict-resolution and post-conflict peace building efforts” and women only make up 2 percent of mediators, 3 percent of military personnel, and 9 percent of negotiators globally.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem co-sponsored the WPS Act when she represented South Dakota in Congress.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who co-wrote the 2017 bill with then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), wrote on X that Hegseth’s latest move was “short-sighted.” She disagreed with Hegseth’s assertion that troops hate the program and argued it’s supported by military leadership and has proven to give the country a strategic advantage.

Amy McGrath, the first woman to fly a combat mission for the Marine Corps, argued in a statement on X that the program brought women to the negotiating table to end conflicts around the world. McGrath added that more sustainable peace is likely when women are included.

Hegseth later Tuesday appeared to push back on any criticism of his move on X.  He doubled down on his decision to scrub the program, suggesting that the Biden administration “distorted and weaponized” the women’s initiative that was meant to be “straight-forward and security-focused” after it launched in 2017. Hegesth did not further elaborate how Biden allegedly “ruined” the program.

Tuesday’s announcement aligns with the Trump administration’s efforts to end federal diversity initiatives across the government. It also aligns with the efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency to slash government waste and abuse.

Hegseth declared he would “fight to end the program for our next budget.” The Pentagon did not provide specific details on how much the initiative costs.

From NTD News

In our preview of META’s Q1 results this afternoon (ahead of which Goldman’s desk had positioning as a 7 out of 10), we said that it feels like centuries ago that META had that 20-day winning streak in Jan/Feb with the name now nearly 30% below YTD highs, which put tactical positioning in cleaner spot into today’s print relative to recent META prints (bear case focused on macro/tariff-related risks to Revenues vs elevated capex/expense burdens). Well, the bulls can exhale because the results which META just reported will give them another taste of what that meltup felt lik,  because the stock is surging 5% on a big top and bottom line beat, coupled with an increase to the capex guidance.

Here is are the blowout results which META reported for Q1:

• EPS $6.43 vs. $4.71 y/y, beating estimate $5.25
   
• Revenue $42.31 billion, +16% y/y, beating estimate $41.38 billion
  • Advertising rev. $41.39 billion, +16% y/y, beating estimate $40.55 billion
  • Family of Apps revenue $41.90 billion, +16% y/y, beating estimate $40.89 billion
  • Reality Labs revenue $412 million, -6.4% y/y, missing estimate $496 million
  • Other revenue $510 million, +34% y/y, beating estimate $498.6 million
     
• Operating income $17.56 billion, +27% y/y, beating estimates of $15.52 billion
  • Family of Apps operating income $21.77 billion, +23% y/y, beating estimates of $20.04 billion
  • Reality Labs operating loss $4.21 billion, +9.5% y/y, above the estimated loss $4.54 billion
• Operating margin 41% vs. 38% y/y, beating estimate 37.5%

 

• Ad impressions +5% vs. +20% y/y, missing estimates of +6.87%
  • Average price per ad +10% vs. +6% y/y, beating estimates of +6.75%
  • Average Family service users per day 3.43 billion, +5.9% y/y, beating estimates of 3.33 billion

Here are some of the key charts from the quarter, starting with Revenue by geography:

EPS:

Segment results:

Expenses continued to shrink:

Users are growing…

… as is revenue per user

Meta needs its advertising business to continue growing in order to fund an expensive expansion in artificial intelligence, which is driving the future of the business through improvements to ads, algorithms and personalization. Sure enough, the guidance was solid, if harldy stellar:

• For Q2, META expects revenue to be in the range of $42.5-45.5 billion, in line with the estimate of $44.1 billion.
• For the full year, META expects total expenses to be in the range of $113-118 billion, down from the prior outlook of $114-119 billion.

But perhaps most important, at a time when everyone was freaking out about sliding capex, Meta boosted its capex forecast, and now sees it be in the range of $64-72 billion, increased from our prior outlook of $60-65 billion. 

This updated outlook “reflects additional data center investments to support our artificial intelligence efforts as well as an increase in the expected cost of infrastructure hardware. The majority of our capital expenditures in 2025 will continue to be directed to our core business.“

This is important because while META once again missed on its actual capex, spending $12.94BN on property and equipment in Q1, well below the $14.239BN expected…

… the company is once again hockeysitcking its capex forecast, and is clearly backloading spending in the second half of the year, when at least according to most nevertrumper eceonomists, the US will be in a deep recession.

In response to the blowout earnings, shares rose as much as 5.6% in after-hours trading, after closing at $549. Meta stock was down more than 6% year-to-date before the company reported earnings, still performing better than most of America’s biggest technology companies amid the recent market selloff.

The full META presentation is below (pdf link).

On the heels of Microsoft’s decision to walk away from discussions to lease new server farm space and slow construction on land it already owns, all eyes are on the giant tech company’s fiscal third-quarter earnings tonight for any signs of slowing on data center spending plans when it reports Wednesday.

“We believe that the Azure results and guidance as well as Microsoft’s commentary on capex are going to be the keys to the quarter,” wrote Kirk Materne, an analyst at Evercore ISI.

Investors watch these expenses closely for a glimpse of long-term cloud and AI demand expectations from the world’s largest software maker.

So, what’s the score?

MSFT beat on EVERYTHING…

Microsoft beat on the top line with Q3 revenues of $70.07 Billion (well above the $68.48 billion consensus) and the bottom line (EPS $3.46 vs $3.22 consensus)

• Microsoft Cloud revenue $42.4 billion, estimate $42.22 billion

• Intelligent Cloud revenue $26.8 billion, estimate $25.99 billion

• Azure and other cloud services revenue Ex-FX +33%, estimate +31%

• Productivity and Business Processes revenue $29.9 billion, estimate $29.65 billion

• More Personal Computing revenue $13.4 billion, estimate $12.67 billion

Cloud revenue surged more than expected with revenues of $42.4 billion (above the $42.22 billion consensus),

“We delivered a strong quarter with Microsoft Cloud revenue of $42.4 billion, up 20% (up 22% in constant currency) year-over-year driven by continued demand for our differentiated offerings,” said Amy Hood, executive vice president and chief financial officer of Microsoft.

Azure & Other Cloud revenue up 33% (better than the 31% consensus).

…AI growth making up 16ppts of that 33% (exp 15.6ppts)…

“Cloud and AI are the essential inputs for every business to expand output, reduce costs, and accelerate growth,” said Satya Nadella, chairman and chief executive officer of Microsoft. 

“From AI infra and platforms to apps, we are innovating across the stack to deliver for our customers.”

Operating income was also a solid beat: $32.00 billion, estimate $30.31 billion

But the much-watched CapEx picture was mixed: 

• Capital expenditure $16.75 billion vs. $10.95 billion y/y, estimate $16.28 billion

• Capital expenditures including assets acquired under finance leases $21.4 billion, estimate $22.56 billion

As a result of all this, MSFT shares are soaring after hours…

…and we can’t help but wonder if someone ‘knew’ about this ‘early’ given the moves in the market in the last minutes before the bell.

All eyes now on the call for any signals of a reduction in CapEx (expected at $88 billion for the fiscal year ending in June and $100 billion for the following fiscal year).

Authored by Ted Galen Carpenter via The Libertarian Institute,

Today, April 30, 2025 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the final, definitive defeat of the U.S. military crusade in Vietnam. The images of U.S. helicopters desperately flying American diplomats and Washington’s high-level South Vietnamese collaborators from the roof of the U.S. embassy in Saigon effectively captured not only the chaotic environment, but also the extent of Washington’s overall policy debacle. The outcome of the war was a humiliating defeat for the United States in every respect. Vietnam’s reunification under a communist government was now an indisputable reality. Indeed, the United States finally succumbed to the pressure to establish diplomatic relations with that government in 1995.

Washington’s failed effort over more than two decades to prevent that outcome was extremely expensive financially to the United States, with more than $141 billion expended. Measured in terms of 2025 dollars, that amount would be approximately $838 billion. Even worse was the terrible cost in blood. The war took the lives of more than 58,000 American soldiers and caused an estimated 3.8 million casualties, both civilian and military, in South Vietnam, North Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.

Widespread disillusionment about Washington’s armed crusade in Southeast Asia was evident in the United States, and for a few years, the disastrous experience seemed to inoculate the American public against supporting any similar adventures. When Ronald Reagan’s administration flirted with providing military backing for corrupt client regimes in Central America, there was noticeable pushback, especially from Democrats in Congress. “No more Vietnams” became a popular mantra throughout the country.

However, a closer look at public attitudes, especially the views of political elites in both parties, would have suggested that the change in Washington’s overall foreign policy orientation was less substantial than it seemed at first glance. There was little resistance to pro-war adventurism elsewhere in the world, as long as U.S. military personnel were not directly at risk. For example, Washington’s policy of using Islamist rebels in Afghanistan to harass Soviet occupation forces received extensive bipartisan support.

Even direct U.S. military involvement received little push back, as long as an American victory was quick and decisive. That point was confirmed when U.S. forces invaded Grenada in 1983 and promptly ousted a pro-communist regime that had recently seized power. The Reagan administration’s meddling in Lebanon’s civil war, though, showed that there remained an extensive public and elite aversion to American casualties. The loss of 241 Marines in the bombing of the U.S. barracks outside Beirut immediately caused the administration to move the remaining troops to ships off shore, and that step was just a prelude to the departure of all U.S. forces from Lebanon.

Although the bruising experience in Vietnam had apparently induced a somewhat greater level of caution—at least temporarily—among Washington’s political and policy elites with respect to a few specific cases, it had not caused any reconsideration of the foundational assumptions of U.S. foreign policy. In particular, the “1930s model” still dominated elite perceptions about world affairs and America’s proper role in the international system: American opinion leaders were still obsessed with preventing the rise of “another Hitler.” Closely related assumptions were that “appeasement” never works, “aggression” had to be stopped in its tracks as soon as signs of it appeared, and that complex, murky geopolitical struggles could be portrayed as stark conflicts between good and evil. Despite the negative consequences of the Vietnam War, those attitudes remained intact.

The continuing ability of such propaganda to sway public opinion in favor of war became apparent during the Persian Gulf crisis in 1990-1991. The simplistic “good versus evil” narrative was especially tenacious. George H.W. Bush’s administration, with the active assistance of a hawkish news media, succeeded in convincing the American public that not only was Iraq’s Saddam Hussein a monstrously evil ruler, but also that he posed a threat to world order comparable to Hitler’s.

It was a preposterous notion for multiple reasons. First, Washington had viewed Saddam as a valuable client throughout Iraq’s multi-year war of aggression against Iran’s revolutionary government. The Iraqi leader got into trouble with Washington only when he failed to win the fight against Tehran and then had the temerity to seize Kuwait (a longstanding Iraqi territorial claim) without Washington’s permission. Bush administration officials and their media allies exaggerated Iraq’s military capabilities and invented inflammatory atrocity stories to justify a war against Iraq waged by a U.S.-dominated international coalition.

The surprisingly easy victory by coalition forces largely erased the lessons of caution remaining from the Vietnam experience.  Administration officials and other members of Washington’s pro-war elite gloated that America had finally overcome the “Vietnam Syndrome.” When the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991 left the United States as the sole remaining global power, that development eliminated the last restraint on U.S. military adventurism.

The painful lessons of the defeat in Vietnam have been largely forgotten, and the current generation of U.S. policymakers is at least as reckless as any of its predecessors. The prevailing approach to international conflicts has a dreary, formulaic aspect: exaggerate the severity of the threat to both international peace and America’s security; portray Washington’s adversary as the epitome of evil; and portray any beleaguered U.S. client as both an innocent victim and a proponent of freedom and democracy. Washington’s dishonest propaganda regarding the war between Russia and Ukraine—both corrupt autocracies—is almost a caricature of that strategy.

🇻🇳 #Vietnam held a military parade to mark 50 years since the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, ending the Vietnam War.

🎖️ The event celebrated national unification and the victory of North #Vietnamese forces. pic.twitter.com/sUgab6mvEF

— FRANCE 24 English (@France24_en) April 30, 2025

The litany of Washington’s military interventions and proxy wars since Vietnam—Afghanistan, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan (again), Libya, Syria, Yemen, and most dangerous of all, Ukraine—all convey the extent to which U.S. policy elites and much of the U.S. public have remained impervious to the deeper meaning of the Vietnam debacle. As one cynical observer said to me, “The only enduring lesson from the Vietnam War appears to be ‘don’t go to war in a country called Vietnam.’” Such a pervasive failure of policymakers and the American people to learn more substantial lessons may be that horrible conflict’s most tragic and lasting legacy.

Last week we highlighted the next economic shock; a student loan default wave that could cause a $63 billion hit to GDP.

And here it comes. During Wednesday’s Cabinet meeting, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said “We’re going to start getting it back,” adding “For those people who have borrowed money and have not been paying — that’s just not to be punitive, there are many ways that they can go online to understand how they can get back into the right payment structure. Because when they’re in default, they can’t buy a house, they can’t buy a car, their credit scores go down.” h/t Jennifer Jacobs

As we reported last week (full note available to premium subscribers), student-loan delinquencies began climbing after the pandemic-era forbearance on repayment ended in September 2023. The Biden administration allowed a year for payments to fully ramp back up, which temporarily suppressed delinquency rates. Now, though, missed payments are crossing the 90-day threshold and showing up on borrowers’ credit reports.

The New York Fed estimates 15.6% of federal student-loan balances —  more than $250 billion — were past due by the end of the ramp-up period, affecting 9.7 million borrowers. As these delinquencies hit credit reports, borrowers face steep declines in their credit scores and, more importantly, sharply reduced access to credit.

That said, delinquent borrowers could still enroll in income-driven repayment plans offered by the Department of Education, and the scale of past-due loans may have shifted since the end of the on-ramp period. Some borrowers who were past due may have come back into compliance since.

Overall, if 9.7 million borrowers default and face declining credit scores, BBG estimates a drag on annual PCE spending of 0.1% point to 0.3%. In the worst-case scenario, it could reduce PCE spending growth by as much as 0.4% by year-end… an outcome that is extremely deflationary, just in case Jerome Powell is still debating whether or not to pull the plug on rate cuts.

Submitted by Gord Magill for American Truckers United: 

The Trucking Industry in America received a major boost from President Trump on the night of Monday, April 28, when he signed an Executive Order titled “Enforcing Commonsense Rules of The Road for America’s Truck Drivers”. The primary aim of the order is to overturn an Obama-era memorandum that waived enforcement of English Language Proficiency requirements as required under 49 CFR 31.11 (b) (2); that waiver having opened a massive loophole, which matched with a program from the Biden Administration, allowed for the insourcing of a great deal of unvetted foreign labor onto America’s roads as ‘truck drivers’.

This move to restrict the insourcing of foreign truckers into America, which was a deliberate attempt to suppress American’s wages for the bidding of massive corporations like Amazon, whom are known and a major client of subcontractors that abuse such labor, is welcomed and acknowledged by the trucking community. We hope that this is only the beginning of a number of reforms which ought to see the return of a healthy, sustainable, and safe trucking industry to our roads.

Another crash… and once again, the driver couldn’t even speak English.

How are companies out here hiring truck drivers who can’t communicate on the road?

Make it make sense.

Should English fluency be required for commercial drivers?

⬇️ pic.twitter.com/6XSXTquULE

— Tony Lane 🇺🇸 (@TonyLaneNV) April 28, 2025

Another Trucker that can’t speak English on Canadian roads causing absolute carnage.

Do you feel safe sharing the road with these guys? pic.twitter.com/bSyLxetL7J

— Bruce (@bruce_barrett) February 9, 2025

Your refugee CDL-licensed, non-English-speaking truck drivers are still all over the highways in America today because MAGA isn’t serious about reversing demographic change. https://t.co/uIGRGQcBqr pic.twitter.com/EsX2TONN3T

— Tom Hennessy (@Tomhennessey69) March 25, 2025

Another major problem coming over the horizon is likewise tied to the same Covid demand spike that saw the Biden Administration make the terrible mistake of allowing the insourcing of all of these excess entrants into the market. Drivers are only one component of the trucking industry; where do the trucks come from for people to drive, and how were they paid for during this period? As it turns out, many of the trucks we see on the road today are “under water assets” that are not being paid for, and a situation akin to the 2008 financial crisis is taking place right now, not with real estate, but with trucks.

In an interview (via Autonomous Truck(er)s) with Harvey Beech, President of EOS Trucking in North Little Rock, Arkansas, a number of details about this problem are revealed.

“When you look at what happened with used truck prices, that’s where this started. It’s very similar to the housing bubble, where we had unchecked lust and greed which took over and we started seeing Freightliners with 450,000 miles being retailed out there for well north of $150,000 at 12 to 15% interest. And it went on at scale.

…

We’ve been conditioned to expect downturns in freight cycles. And that’s why so many of us in the first quarter of 2023 …we knew we were going into something … really intense with regards to truck pricing. We knew there was a lot of trucks bought at over inflated prices … and as soon as things turned we knew those would be the first to have their trucks re-possessed.”

Curiously, Beech tells us, those trucks were not actually repossessed.

“We did not expect the banks to allow what has become eternal deferrals … we learned in 2008 … that you have to have cash reserves, and hunker down, and wait on everyone else to have their trucks repossessed. In May of 2023 … we had financing companies say ‘Hey, you might want to think about not making your truck payments.’

As everyone runs out of cash … one of the things you have to do is request deferral which means you’re not making your truck payment, which means you’re going upside down … the banks are supposed to repossess … in 2008 there were oceans of trucks repossessed … they had to rent cow pastures to park the trucks.

November of 2023 I’m hearing of big carriers going into their 6th month of deferrals … 2024 we expect to see a turn, and it doesn’t come …. And the turn of this year it still hasn’t come. No one’s trucks are being re-possessed … never has there been this much widespread non-performance on loans.”

And why wouldn’t financing companies or dealerships want to repossess equipment their customers were incapable of paying for?

“The truck makers and financial institutions that chose to take part in that huge bubble that was created (in 2021- early 22) … now that has caused them to be so far upside down that they can’t repossess trucks … back in 08 it was 90 days, by 120 they were repossessing trucks …the banks failures to repossess trucks has drained the cash reserves of those of us left to compete all this time against carriers on six month to a year or more of deferred payments … the financial institutions will not execute … some truck financing institutions are at 80% in deferral … that is bank failure material … they cannot repossess the trucks .. because they have to record that loss, and this is so widespread, like never before … if they repossessed all of the trucks, they would have had such losses because of the overinflated prices … that it would collapse the financial institutions altogether.”

There are others in trucking reporting similar problems, but unlike Mr Beech, would only report their observations under the condition of anonymity.

“This has been the toughest past 3 years we have experienced in 30 years”

“My fleet received deferrals from four lenders starting in late 2023, following nearly two years of industry downturn. Three deferrals lasted 3 months, with two extended for an additional 3 months.”

“We haven’t taken or asked for payment deferrals from anyone. I did bust the balls of my banker telling him I felt they were complacent in extending terms and letting payments go 6 months in arears for other borrowers. I felt that the reason was they financed trucks and trailers at numbers they didn’t want on their books. Stock prices were really good and moving up so they were better off to not take back a $100,000 truck that was worth $50,000 not because of the write off they could with stand that it was what it might do to stock valuation.”

“We are approaching our bank renewal for the trucking business and I do not know if they will have much confidence in us. 25 months in the red is not something that gives confidence“

As the effects of Trump’s Tariffs begin to be felt, no doubt some carriers who are in dire straits will be wiped out of the market. If not for the Biden administration flooding the trucking industry with insourced labor in 2021, and the greed of financial institutions repeating the same lending mistakes of 2008, many of those carriers would have weathered this storm.

Are we about to face another, perhaps smaller, financial meltdown caused by the malfeasance of lending institutions? How many American trucking companies are they going to take down with them by kicking this can down the road?

Will government leaders and the banks ever learn?