Zerohedge

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

• Workers at the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant construction site in the UK have reported a significant rat infestation, raising health and safety concerns.

• The rat problem is causing disruption to the major energy project and prompting calls for immediate action from trade unions to address the issue.

• Despite assurances about the safety of nuclear power plants, this incident highlights challenges and public perception issues related to nuclear facilities.

The U.K. has ambitious nuclear power plans and is developing several small- and large-scale projects. While opposition, high costs, and other factors have slowed development in the past, EDF has been facing another problem at its Hinkley Point C construction – a rat infestation. 

In early April, the Unite and GMB trade unions for workers at Hinkley Point C in Somerset, in the south of England, informed the developer, French energy giant EDF, that the facility was overrun with rats. The unions said that immediate action was needed as the rodents were “everywhere” and the rapidly expanding rat population prompted health and safety concerns for the workforce. 

One source reported, “They’re all over. You see them just sat there, looking at you. It is worse near the canteens, where I guess it started. But they are everywhere now.” Another source said, “The more men working on the site, the more rubbish on the site – and the canteens are not clean either. It has just become worse over time.” 

The development of Hinkley Point C is expected to support the creation of 15,000 jobs. Once complete, the plant is expected to power around 6 million U.K. homes and contribute 7 percent of the country’s electricity needs. It is planned to launch in the early 2030s, following several years of delays and spiralling costs. However, many believe this is an unrealistic aim. In recent months, workers have complained about poor working conditions and low pay, potentially because of EDF’s financial pressures. Hundreds of project staff also went on strike in November over the inadequate security access to the site. 

A Hinkley Point C spokesperson said, “As is common across all large construction sites, there will be occasions when the presence of vermin is noted. A specialist company has carried out a survey and measures are in place to address the issue. We are committed to working alongside our trades union partners to provide the best environment for all of our workers.”

Even though the U.S. government has previously assured the public that the TV show The Simpsons was wrong about potential rat infestations, this is not the first time the problem has been seen in recent years. The U.S. Department of Energy published an article in 2018 aiming to debunk several nuclear myths. It stated:

“Nuclear power plants are well-maintained.

The Springfield plant is notorious on the show for its safety violations. They range from rat infestations and cracked cooling towers (held together with chewing gum) to leaky pipes that spill out radioactive waste.

This simply does not happen. The nuclear industry is one of the safest to work in and to live near.” 

However, rat problems have been seen in the past, such as during the Fukushima 2013 power cut. In March 2013, the Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco) suspected that rats may have caused a short circuit in a switchboard, triggering the power cut. Tepco announced that it had found burn marks on a makeshift power switchboard and a 15 cm dead rodent nearby. The outage shut down cooling systems for four spent fuel ponds at reactors 1, 3 and 4, however cooling to the reactors was not affected. Following the incident, engineers spent around 30 hours repairing the damage. This came just two years after a giant earthquake-triggered tsunami caused meltdowns at the plant, which was in the decommissioning stage during the rodent incident. 

Despite the rodent infestation in the construction phase of Hinkley Point C and during the decommissioning period of Fukushima, rats are, indeed, not a common sight in nuclear power plants thanks to the enforcement of strict safety regulations. For decades the public perception of nuclear power has been negative, due to three separate nuclear disasters – Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima. However, nuclear experts have repeatedly tried to reassure the public that nuclear power is one of the safest forms of energy. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency says nuclear power plants are among “the safest and most secure facilities in the world”, as they are subject to strict international safety standards. The World Nuclear Organisation reminds us, “In the 60-year history of civil nuclear power generation, with over 18,500 cumulative reactor-years across 36 countries, there have been only three significant accidents at nuclear power plants.” While these incidents stuck in the minds of people worldwide, this ratio is extremely low when compared to other forms of energy. 

Rigorous international standards and regulations, as well as significant improvements to nuclear technology, have helped make nuclear power one of the safest forms of clean energy production. As the public perception of nuclear energy begins to shift to more positive, and countries worldwide look for ways to support a transition away from fossil fuels to green alternatives, we can expect to see a massive nuclear renaissance in the coming years. 

Air pollution remains one of the deadliest environmental threats, contributing to millions of premature deaths each year.

In 2024, only 17% of cities worldwide met the World Health Organization’s annual PM2.5 guideline of less than 5 µg/m3, indicating that the vast majority of urban populations are exposed to unhealthy air.

This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes the 20 most air-polluted cities in 2024, based on fine particulate matter (PM2.5) data from IQAir.

Which Cities Have the Worst Air Pollution?

Below, we show the top 20 cities with the worst PM2.5 levels in 2024.

Rank	City	Country	2024 PM2.5 (µg/m³)
1	Byrnihat	🇮🇳 India	128.2
2	Delhi	🇮🇳 India	108.3
3	Karaganda	🇰🇿 Kazakhstan	104.8
4	Mullanpur	🇮🇳 India	102.3
5	Lahore	🇵🇰 Pakistan	102.1
6	Faridabad	🇮🇳 India	101.2
7	Dera Ismail Khan	🇵🇰 Pakistan	93.0
8	N’Djamena	🇹🇩 Chad	91.8
9	Loni	🇮🇳 India	91.7
10	New Delhi	🇮🇳 India	91.6
11	Multan	🇵🇰 Pakistan	91.4
12	Peshawar	🇵🇰 Pakistan	91.0
13	Faisalabad	🇵🇰 Pakistan	88.8
14	Sialkot	🇵🇰 Pakistan	88.8
15	Gurugram	🇮🇳 India	87.4
16	Ganganagar	🇮🇳 India	86.6
17	Hotan	🇨🇳 China	84.5
18	Greater Noida	🇮🇳 India	83.5
19	Bhiwadi	🇮🇳 India	83.1
20	Muzaffarnagar	🇮🇳 India	83.1

India is home to some of the world’s most air-polluted cities, accounting for 11 of the top 20 in 2024.

Byrnihat, a city in northeastern India, recorded the worst air pollution globally last year, with a PM2.5 concentration of 128.2 micrograms per cubic meter—over 25 times higher than the World Health Organization’s recommended limit.

Delhi, a metropolis of over 30 million people and the capital territory of India, recorded the second-worst air pollution levels in 2024.

The city experiences the worst winter air pollution of any major city, driven by crop burning in nearby states, stagnant cold air, and weak wind patterns that trap and concentrate smog over the capital.

Many Indian cities struggle with severe air pollution due to a mix of industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and reliance on fossil fuels, all worsened by weak regulation and seasonal weather patterns.

Most of the cities with the worst air pollution in 2024 are located in India, Pakistan, or other parts of Asia. N’Djamena, Chad, was the only non-Asian city to rank among the top 20.

To see which countries have the worst air pollution, check out this graphic that visualizes the world’s most polluted countries by their annual average PM2.5 concentration.

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

The scandal over the alleged corruption of the founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos would be just an anecdote were it not another example of what has happened recently with many international institutions. The Financial Times reveals that the WEF founder faces accusations of manipulating the organization’s analysis to gain favour with governments.

For years, many of us have watched with sadness as an important forum like Davos shifted from being a centre for debate and confrontation of ideas in defence of free enterprise to becoming a loudspeaker for the most interventionist ideas, the most damaging statism, and a whitewasher of authoritarian governments, spreading the destructive ideas of inflationism, socialism, and wokeism— which, in reality, are all the same.

Davos went from being a forum for debate to a congregation for repeating interventionist dogmas and whitewashing a single, extractive mindset; those who defended economic freedom, attractive taxes, and control over public spending were gradually ostracised. We have heard enthusiastic applause for those demanding more taxes and greater assaults on job creators, and one-sided debates in which all participants repeated clichés and words like “resilience” and “sustainability” as Trojan horses for predatory statism, where the idea of creating value and wealth was repudiated.

Do you remember the aberration of “you will own nothing and be happy”, abandoning profit generation as a goal, or the suggestion that coffee cultivation should be banned because it contributes to climate change? With phrases like “equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, and natural resources”, the most absurd and obsolete collectivism was being sold.

It hasn’t just happened in Davos. This week, Scott Bessent, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, confronted the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, exposing their complicity in selling the flawed products of socialist interventionism.

“The IMF and the World Bank have enduring value, but their mission has drifted off course.”

It was very frustrating to see how these institutions whitewashed the constant increase in the weight of governments in the economy, confiscatory taxes, and inflationism through fiscal and monetary excess. They have forgotten their role as guarantors of economic logic, defenders of wealth creators, enforcers of fiscal responsibility, and enforcers of tax prudence. Instead, they became increasingly permissive with authoritarian, exploitative, and wasteful governments.

Bessent stated:

“The IMF has suffered from mission creep. The IMF was once unwavering in its mission of promoting global monetary cooperation and financial stability. Now it devotes disproportionate time and resources to work on climate change, gender, and social issues.”

Just like other institutions, such as the European Central Bank, which also set climate change as a goal while abandoning its true aim of price stability, they focus on cosmetic and ideological issues unrelated to monetary policy, financial stability, and fiscal responsibility, as these are matters for government social policy. Moreover, many of these supposed social concerns only serve to hide the whitewashing of a constant increase in government excesses, uncontrolled spending, debt, and rising taxes.

Bessent added:

“The International Monetary Fund should be a brutal revealer of the truth. Instead, it is ‘whistling past the graveyard.’”

This statement from Bessent mirrors the perception of any freedom defender in many of the IMF’s reports: it acquiesces as governments push their countries, companies, and self-employed workers towards financial ruin.

Do you remember the IMF’s 2020 call to “do whatever it takes and keep the receipts”? Governments happily rushed to spend without control, printing money recklessly, leaving poverty, inflation, runaway debt, and suffocating taxes in their wake. However, in 2024, when over seventy countries were spending uncontrollably due to elections and the public debt was rapidly increasing, the IMF declared a strategy of “safe but slow growth: resilience with divergence”. Incredible.

Regarding the World Bank, Bessent stated:

“The bank should no longer expect blank cheques for vapid, buzzword-centric marketing accompanied by half-hearted commitments to reform.”

If the institutions that should guarantee financial stability, economic logic, fiscal responsibility, and business growth focus on disguising fiscal and monetary imbalances or ignoring attacks on private property, financial and monetary stability, or free enterprise in countries with totalitarian regimes and interventionist governments, they cease to fulfil their functions and become the orchestra on the Titanic.

It is time to abandon propaganda, excuses, and cosmetics. It is time to stop whitewashing interventionism and recover the essential role these institutions play in preserving and strengthening growth. It is time to stop justifying wasteful governments and return to defending businesses and wealth creators.

We cannot forget the importance of the IMF, World Bank, ECB, or WEF as guarantors of economic and financial stability and monetary soundness.

Their work is essential. Do not forget it. They must return to defending what creates wealth, reduces poverty, and improves the lives of citizens: business growth, the free market, economic freedom, and fiscal and monetary prudence. Their association with predatory authoritarian governments has led to a significant loss of their former prestige.

If Davos, the IMF and mainstream economists had been half as blunt about China and other nations’ tariffs and trade barriers in the past decade as they are today about US trade policy, we would not need forced negotiations to level the playing field.

Dear institutions: It is time to remind the world that progress comes from saving, economic freedom, and prudent investment, not from political spending, debt, and monetary inflationism. The great institutions have much to contribute, but they must know they face two alternatives: recover their mission as defenders of fiscal and monetary responsibility and economic freedom or disappear.

Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

The world economy is at a major turning point, which is why we should brace for rapid changes in the economy. The world is moving from having enough goods and services to go around, to not having enough to go around. The dynamics of the economy are very different with not enough to go around. The hoped-for solution of higher prices doesn’t fix the situation; after a point, adding more buying-power mostly produces inflation. Other solutions are needed. The world economy is reaching what has been called “Limits to Growth.”

Figure 1. Chart made by Gail Tverberg showing the general pattern of secular cycles based on information given in the book Secular Cycles.

Economies throughout the ages have grown until their populations grew too large for resource availability. Researcher Peter Turchin has studied the general pattern of overshoot and collapse scenarios. The chart shown in Figure 1 is based on analyzing eight such cycles in the book Secular Cycles. The fossil fuel age began over 200 years ago, and it now seems to be reaching its end.

I doubt that President Trump thinks in terms such as secular cycles or overshoot and collapse. But tariffs and government cutbacks engineered by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) seem like they might be approaches that will allow the world economy to contract in a way that could be helpful in keeping the collapse from taking place excessively fast.

In this post, I will try to explain the situation further. The issue we are facing is really a physics problem. Governments can print money, but they cannot print resources, especially energy resources. Our bodies are accustomed to having a certain amount of cooked foods in our diets. This, by itself, encourages population growth and eventual overshoot of the resource base. The self-organizing system somehow chooses its own downward path, not falling further or more quickly than necessary, under the Maximum Power Principle. This is what we are encountering now.

[1] In physics terms, the economy is a dissipative structure. Dissipative structures are self-organizing structures that require energy to grow but are only temporary.

The universe is filled with dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures, as are all plants and animals. Hurricanes are dissipative structures, as are star systems. Ecosystems are dissipative structures. All these things are temporary. Even economies are temporary, but no one tells us this detail.

The kind of energy that is required varies with the dissipative structure. Green plants use sunshine. Animals require plant or animal food. Humans have evolved to eat a mixture of cooked food and raw food. While a few raw food enthusiasts can get along using a blender to break up food into small particles, the general pattern is that our modern brains require the nourishment that cooked food can provide. Thus, humans need both food and some type of fuel for cooking at least a portion of the food. Fuel is also helpful for heating homes, ridding water of pathogens, and providing transportation.

Many things that we think of as man-made are dissipative structures. Governments are dissipative structures. Governments grow and often become too expensive for their citizens to support. The energy governments use is indirectly obtained through the use of taxes. A little of the energy used by the governments is purchased directly by governments to power their vehicles, and to heat and light their buildings.

Much more of the energy required by governments is indirectly consumed. For example, a portion of the taxes collected goes to pay public officials. This pay is used for things the public officials use, such as food, transportation, and housing. All three of these things require energy at many places in their “lives.”

• Food – Sunshine to grow; oil to cultivate and transport it to the store; electricity for refrigeration; natural gas or electricity for cooking; human labor for many tasks.

• Transportation – Fuel to make the metal and other materials used in making the vehicle; human labor to construct the vehicle; fuel to operate the vehicle.

• Housing – Diesel to prepare the lot where the house is built; energy of many kinds to create and transport materials such as lumber and wiring; human energy to put the pieces together; electricity for lights after it is built; natural gas or electricity to heat the home after it is built.

In fact, every part of GDP requires energy. In some cases, this is “only” human energy. Of course, human energy requires food, some of it cooked (or broken into tiny pieces with an electric blender).

Businesses in general are dissipative structures. So are international organizations of any kind. Cities seem to be dissipative structures. Religious organizations are dissipative structures. Any organization that seems to grow, pretty much on its own, is a dissipative structure.

[2] If the energy sources needed by a dissipative structure become scarce, this can badly disrupt the dissipative structure.

Hurricanes that pass over warm water tend to maintain their strength, but if they go over land, they quickly dissipate. If an animal is deprived of food, it will become weak and eventually die. If a government is deprived of revenue (and the energy sources that this revenue indirectly buys), it will no longer be able to provide the services it has promised. It may default on its debt or collapse.

[3] Many dissipative structures seem to be programmed to eventually go downhill and collapse, even when plenty of energy seems to be available.

Obviously, running out of energy isn’t the only way a dissipative structure comes to an end. Most humans don’t starve to death. Instead, when humans get to be 70 or 80 or so years old, they lose some of their strength. They more easily succumb to illnesses. Other animals are similar. Tomato plants in our gardens seem to be more prone to infestation by pests after a month or two of bearing fruit.

[4] Even economies seem to be programmed to go downhill and collapse.

Economies have a problem with their populations becoming too large for available resources. For many years, it appears that added debt (money supply) can be used to temporarily work around a resource problem. For example, a dam purchased with debt may allow irrigation so more food can be produced for a given population.

The problem with this approach is that the benefits of added debt reach diminishing returns. At some point, an economy discovers that adding debt doesn’t add much energy supply; instead, it simply leads to inflation (and, indirectly, higher interest rates to compensate for this inflation). Also, for governments, the interest on debt becomes a greater and greater burden.

The US government seems to have reached the point of having too much debt. The US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently published this chart related to US debt:

Figure 2. Figure from page 10 of The Long-Term Budget Outlook 2025 to 2055, published in March 2025 by the CBO.

US taxes need to keep rising, as a percentage of GDP, just to repay US government debt with interest. This is a path that can lead to hyperinflation. This seems to be the underlying reason for DOGE and the tariffs.

Adding infrastructure such as roads, pipelines, and railroads can be helpful in the beginning. The additional infrastructure enables new businesses to be built that make use of this infrastructure. Initially, the tax revenue from new businesses makes it easy to repay the debt with interest.

But additional roads, pipelines, railroads and other infrastructure are not nearly as helpful. They may add capacity, but they don’t materially change the transportation options. The tax revenue added is less.

At some point, simply maintaining and replacing all the infrastructure becomes burdensome. Adding debt for the replacement of infrastructure becomes burdensome because the new replacement infrastructure adds no new functionality. It just maintains the old functionality. The interest on the debt must come from somewhere, but it is not built into the system the way it was when totally new infrastructure was built. Today’s approach is simply to increase the debt level and hope that the revenue will come from somewhere else.

A related issue is that old factories tend to be less productive than newly built ones that benefited from the latest advances. This allows new factories (perhaps in another part of the world) to make goods in a more cost-efficient way. An older factory is likely to lose out in price competition against a newer, more productive factory elsewhere.

[5] The analysis of Turchin and Nefedov in Secular Cycles suggests that economies often go through the pattern shown in Figure 1.

Economies discover a new resource. Perhaps they have conquered a new land, and they have eliminated the old inhabitants. Or they have cut down trees, allowing more area for farming. At a given level of technology (and fuel for the technology), a given area of arable land can support a particular number of inhabitants. If the population gets too high, the size of farms tends to fall too low to support the farmers and their families. This pattern happens if families allow multiple sons to each inherit a share of the family farm.

Alternatively (and more likely), if the population gets too high, the younger sons don’t inherit any farmland. They start working in services and or on crafts of various kinds. But these alternatives to farming generally don’t pay very well. The many workers with low wages become less able to pay taxes, creating a problem for government funding.

As the population rises, wages of these lower-paid workers become increasingly less adequate to cover the necessities of life. With inadequate nutrition, populations become more subject to epidemics.

According to Secular Cycles, as these problems arise, debt is increasingly used to work around the problems. Slow population growth and increasing debt are characteristics of the Stagflation period shown in Figure 1.

Eventually, economies fail. Governments can fail due to a lack of adequate tax revenue or by being overthrown by unhappy citizens. Alternatively, they may lose a war against another country with better weapons (made with energy supplies). All governments, as dissipative structures, can be expected to eventually fail, one way or another.

[6] The world economy now seems to be headed on a path similar to that shown in Figure 1.

The world economy now seems to be reaching the end of the age of fossil fuels. I believe that the world first entered the stagflation era in 1973, when oil prices first rose dramatically. At that time, it became clear that oil must be used more sparingly. To help economize on oil, smaller, more fuel-efficient cars began to be imported from Japan and Europe. In some places, oil was being burned to generate electricity; this electricity could sometimes be replaced by electricity from nuclear power plants.

In the 1980s, added debt became more important. Companies were told to use “leverage” to become more competitive with producers around the world. Instead of fearing credit, it should be embraced. Computers were increasingly used, and world trade was expanded. World trade very much facilitated the production of complex goods, such as automobiles and computers, because it allowed a very wide array of raw materials to be used in manufacturing.

Figure 3. World trade based on World Bank data. Amount shown are the average of (worldwide imports/world GDP) and (worldwide exports/world GDP). Amounts shown are through 2023.

Figure 3 suggests that world trade stalled in 2008. There has been a slight downward trend since that date. With tariffs, world trade will likely fall more quickly in the future.

Figure 4. Energy consumption per capita, separately, for oil, coal, and nuclear based on data of the 2024 Statistical Review of World Energy, published by the Energy Institute.

One of the underlying problems facing the world economy is the fact that major types of energy supply have been falling relative to world population for a long time. The high points seem to have been in 2004-2007 for oil, in 2011 for coal, and in 2001 for nuclear (Figure 4).

Figure 5. World middle distillates consumption per capita, based on data of the 2024 Statistical Review of World Energy, published by the Energy Institute. Middle distillates are diesel oil and jet fuel.

Middle distillates (diesel oil and jet fuel) are particularly important in world trade. Middle distillates are plentiful in heavy oil, such as that found in Russia, the oil sands of Canada, and Venezuela. Diesel is important for operating farm equipment, large trucks and ships, and construction equipment.

Middle distillates are in short supply because it is hard to get the price up high enough, for long enough, to compensate for the high cost of extraction, distillation, and transport. If the price of diesel rises much, the price of food tends to rise. Voters don’t like high food prices. This seems to be a major reason that both Russia’s oil exports and Venezuela’s oil exports are subject to sanctions.

Without an adequate supply of middle distillates, world trade needs to be scaled back. I believe that this shortfall is the physics reason underlying the push for increased tariffs. The fact that these tariffs are particularly high against China means that long distance transport across the Pacific Ocean will be scaled back. Shelves in US stores will increasingly lack goods made with Chinese inputs.

[7] Modeling of the overshoot and collapse problem has been done since the 1950s. A recent model suggests that world industrial output is likely to fall quickly, about now.

In 1957, US Navy Rear Admiral Hyman Rickover gave a speech explaining the importance of fossil fuels to the economy and to the military. He then explained that we could not expect fossil fuel extraction to last very long:

 It is an unpleasant fact that according to our best estimates, total fossil fuel reserves recoverable at not over twice today’s unit cost are likely to run out at some time between the years 2000 and 2050, if present standards of living and population growth rates are taken into account.

Much modeling has been done since that time. Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology did a series of analyses which they published in 1972 in the book, The Limits to Growth. The most recent update to this analysis shows the following summary exhibit.

Figure 6. Output of the recalibrated Limits to Growth model by Arjuna Nebel and others, published in 2023, with Gail Tverberg’s labels showing which lines are “Industrial Output” and which are “Population.” Source.

The 1972 model and its update both look at the world economy from an engineering point of view. The analyses ignore the roles of governments, debt, and many other things important to the economy. The original authors of the 1972 Limits to Growth analysis said that they didn’t have much confidence in the accuracy of their forecasts after the decline had begun because of the many omitted factors.

The disturbing thing from the 2023 analysis is that it shows industrial output dropping about now. This is what I would expect to happen if there is a big drop in world trade.

[8] The world economy is self-organizing. It doesn’t seem to depend on the actions of any one person or group.

The Universe keeps growing and expanding. Many people believe that the Universe spontaneously sprang out of nothing and began to grow. I believe that there was a Creator.

An intricate system of evolution is taking place, with new dissipative structures arising and old dissipative structures coming to an end. The dissipative structures that last are the ones best adapted to the Earth’s ever-changing environment at that time.

Somehow, the world economy (and other ecosystems) maximize the total output of each part of the system, under the Maximum Power Principle. This isn’t dependent on any one system being more efficient or working better than another. Instead, the world economy tends to maximize the total output of the system, given the energy supplies (and other resources, such as water) available. Thus, the world output of goods and services is unlikely to fall so catastrophically that it quickly wipes out most of the world’s human population. For example, if industrial output is limited, it may be concentrated especially on replacement parts for current machinery and on machines needed for food production.

The intricate nature of evolution and the many dissipative structures formed, together with the Maximum Power Principle, leads me to believe that the Creator is still active today.

It seems to me that the self-organizing economy utilizes whatever leaders are available. They don’t need to have good motives for their actions. It isn’t that Donald Trump is a better leader than others, or that his ideas, as promulgated, will take a hold. The system works through many leaders of various political parties. Each leader is somewhat replaceable by other leaders. The underlying physics of the system is what leads to the changes that take place.

Religions seem all to be created by the same Creator. They seem to have many functions, including binding groups together, teaching “best practices” regarding getting along within a group here on earth, and (when resources are short), fighting against other religious groups. Religious organizations seem to be part of the self-organizing economy, as well.

[9] What I see ahead.

(a) Recession seems likely, starting out as being barely perceptible, but getting worse and worse over time.

(b) World output of physical goods and services will begin to decline almost immediately. In particular, products manufactured in the US using inputs from China will become difficult to obtain, as will goods imported into the US from China.

(c) I expect that commodity prices will fall. Deflation seems more likely than inflation. If inflation does take place, I expect that it will take the form of hyperinflation, with central banks issuing huge amounts of money, but there not being very many goods and services to purchase with this money.

(d) I expect that many banks, insurance companies, and pension plans will fail. I expect that governments will not be able to bail them all out. If governments do try to bail out all these failing institutions, the result is likely to be hyperinflation, with not much to buy.

(e) Many governments have plans for digital currencies to replace the currencies we have today. I am doubtful that these plans will work. For one thing, intermittent electricity is likely to become an increasing problem. For another, government organizations, such as the European Union, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the United Nations are likely to start falling apart. Even the United States is likely to become less “united,” or it may comprise fewer states.

(f) I do not see gold as being very helpful for the long term. It seems like small silver coins will be much more tradable in the future. What we will really need is food, water, and shelter. I expect that these will go mostly to workers producing these essentials, rather than to hangers-on to the system.

(g) A few businesses may do well. Figuring out how to produce food in quantity, locally, may be helpful. Converting unused buildings to shelters for poor people may also be helpful. Private “protection” services may also do well.

(h) The stock market provided great returns for US investors in the 2008 to 2024 period, but this cannot be expected to continue. A likely result is that returns will fall very low or will turn negative.

(i) Borrowing is likely to remain challenging, or get worse. Lenders will increasingly recognize the default risk. Some lenders may go out of business.

(j) Over a period of years, trade will change to be more local. The US will lose its status as the holder of the reserve currency. It will no longer try to be the policeman of the world.

[10] There are a lot of things we really don’t know.

The Creator may be creating a religious ending that we are not aware of. In fact, such an ending could come very soon.

Otherwise, dissipative structures are very often replaced by other dissipative structures. New economies may gradually grow up in different parts of the world. Perhaps the new economies will figure out new energy sources that we are not aware of, or make better use of declining energy types. According to Physicist Eric Chaisson, the long-term trend is toward more complex, energy-intense dissipative structures being formed.

Figure 7. Image similar to ones shown in Eric Chaisson’s 2001 book, Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature.

“Societies” in Figure 7 seem to be similar to today’s economy.

New York Times opinion writer David Brooks suggested Friday that Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan’s alleged assistance of an illegal alien in evading federal immigration authorities was justified, despite his (albeit tepid) acknowledgment that her actions were illegal.

“Especially on the issue of immigration, there are a lot of people who are appalled by what the administration is doing,” Brooks said on PBS’s NewsHour regarding President Trump’s fulfill his campaign promise of cracking down on illegal immigration. “And there will be times for civil disobedience. And to me, let’s say she did escort this guy out the door. If federal enforcement agencies come to your courtroom and you help a guy escape, that is two things. One, it strikes me as maybe something illegal, but it also strikes me something heroic.”

🚨NYT’s David Brooks doesn’t “know the specific details” of the Judge Dugan case — but says she was “heroic.”

“If the federal enforcement agencies come to your courtroom and you help a guy escape, that is two things…”

“One, it strikes me as maybe something illegal, but it… pic.twitter.com/1Ia7BaxW7R

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) April 27, 2025

“And in times of trouble, then people are sometimes called to do civil disobedience. And in my view, when people do civil disobeying, they have to pay the price,” Brooks added. “That’s part of the heroism of it, frankly. And so you can both think that she shouldn’t have. Legally done this, and that morally protecting somebody against, maybe not even in this case, but in other cases, frankly, a predatory enforcement agency, sometimes civil disobedience is necessary.”

FBI Director Kash Patel shocked both the left and right Friday when he announced the arrest of Dugan, charging the judge with two felonies on allegations of trying to help an illegal aliens avoid arrest after he appeared in her courtroom.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:

According to a 13-page complaint, Dugan, 65, is accused of obstructing a U.S. agency and concealing an individual to prevent an arrest. The two charges carry a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine, but sentences in cases involving nonviolent offenses typically are much shorter.

Specifically, the complaint says Dugan assisted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented Mexican immigrant, avoid being arrested by federal immigration officials at the Milwaukee County Courthouse after he appeared in her courtroom for a pretrial conference on April 18. Flores-Ruiz is facing three misdemeanor battery counts.

Dugan’s arrest unsurprisingly drew sharp criticism from Wisconsin Democrats, who labeled the FBI’s actions as government overreach. Conversely, Wisconsin Republicans stressed accountability, asserting that breaking the law leads to consequences.

“I would advise everyone to cooperate with federal law enforcement and not endanger them and the public by obstructing their efforts to arrest criminals and illegal aliens,” Sen. Ron Johnson said.

Rep. Tom Tiffany, eyeing a gubernatorial bid in 2026, said bluntly: “If you help illegal aliens evade arrest, you will be arrested.”

Legal expert Jonathan Turley had this to say: “Judges have to reinforce respect for the judiciary in their own conduct. That includes showing restraint and respect in relation to the countervailing powers of the Executive Branch. It certainly includes avoiding actions that could be viewed as criminal or unethical in resisting this Administration.” 

The Cradle

The Israeli army has announced that it will extend mandatory service by four months due to a growing manpower crisis, coinciding with an intensification of battles in Gaza and the resurgence of deadly resistance operations against invading troops. 

The additional four months will be classified as reserve duty, allowing soldiers to complete a total of three years of military service. The military will also cancel pre-release leave for soldiers. Troops will have to serve a full three years before being discharged.

This decision follows months of intense fighting and rising casualties, which have strained troop levels.

The extra four months will provide benefits for the soldiers, given that reserve duty is usually compensated by the Israeli government. The army states that its decision is temporary and aims to help alleviate the current troop shortages. 

“At the moment, we are short 10,000 troops, 7,000 of them in combat units,” the army said. Israel announced on Saturday the death of Staff Sergeant Neta Yitzhak Kahana, an undercover operative with the Southern Border Police, who was killed during clashes with militants in Gaza. 

His death marked the second Israeli soldier to be killed over the weekend. Both were killed in Gaza City’s Shujaiya neighborhood. 

Israel has said that it will launch a major offensive across Gaza if no progress is made in truce negotiations. According to Tel Aviv, current operations in Gaza – which have seen the army seize at least 50 percent of the strip’s territory – aim to pressure Hamas in talks, not bring about a complete defeat of the resistance group. 

An expanded assault on Gaza would include a massive call-up of reservists and operations in new areas of the strip, the army has said. 

Last month, Israeli media reported that the army is facing a crisis in its reserves as a growing number of soldiers have indicated a lack of motivation and an unwillingness to serve. A senior commander in the reserves told Haaretz that there are numerous cases of reservist soldiers refusing to report for duty. 

According to estimates, the response rate for the upcoming reservist call-up is expected to be no more than 50 percent. This would mark a 50 percent drop since the start of the war in 2023.

Meetings of the Israeli Security Cabinet revealed “major disagreements” between the political and the military ranks regarding the policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government on the genocidal war against the Gaza Strip.

Read: https://t.co/RSWsBIiV95 pic.twitter.com/HbtZuXxnVH

— Middle East Monitor (@MiddleEastMnt) April 27, 2025

The manpower crisis Israel is facing coincides with growing tension between Israel’s political and security establishments. Former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon called for civil disobedience against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu following his dismissal of Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar. This came during a protest in Tel Aviv on Saturday. 

Israeli protesters have also taken to the streets to demand an immediate exchange agreement in Gaza, where relentless airstrikes are endangering the lives of captives still held by the resistance.

New York Times bestselling author Peter Schweizer is once again speaking out against China’s sinister role in fueling America’s deadly fentanyl crisis, as President Donald Trump seeks to punish the communist regime for its involvement.

“There are 2000 Chinese nationals in northern Mexico working for the Sinaloa drug cartel,” Schweizer, citing DEA data, told The Cats and Cosby Show on Friday. “They’re basically chemists.“

“They take the precursor chemicals that, of course, arrive from China and they turn it into the deadly cocktail, which is what people are dying from. They produce pills. People who die of fentanyl overdose, they think they’re talking a Vicodin or Adderall,” he added.

Although fentanyl-related deaths in the U.S. are declining, the crisis remains a grim reality. According to the CDC, a staggering 76,226 Americans died from overdoses involving synthetic opioids—primarily fentanyl—in 2022, delivering a gut-punch to communities nationwide. Provisional data from 2023 shows a slight decline, with 74,702 deaths linked to these powerful substances. Even more striking, the latest CDC and DEA figures estimate approximately 55,126 deaths from synthetic opioids in the 12 months ending September 2024—a significant and hopeful drop, but still a sobering reminder of fentanyl’s ongoing toll.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly pointed the finger at China as a key culprit in America’s fentanyl crisis, accusing Beijing of fueling the epidemic by allowing precursor chemicals to flow to Mexican cartels. In a February 2025 White House statement, Trump accused China of subsidizing companies to export fentanyl-related chemicals, describing the crisis as a “national emergency” killing “approximately two hundred Americans per day.” He’s tied this to his trade agenda, imposing a 20% tariff on Chinese imports—on top of a 10% base tariff—explicitly to pressure Beijing on fentanyl. On April 24, 2025, Trump posted on Truth Social, “Fentanyl continues to pour into our Country from China, through Mexico and Canada, killing hundreds of thousands of our people, and it better stop, NOW!”

China has consistently denied accusations that it is a primary driver of the U.S. fentanyl crisis. Chinese officials argue that the crisis is a U.S. domestic issue rooted in demand, not their supply of precursor chemicals. In March 2025, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated the root cause of the fentanyl issue lies in the United States itself. Lin also criticized the U.S. for imposing tariffs under the pretext of the fentanyl issue, calling such actions unjustified and counterproductive. 

Authored by Rudy Blalock via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced on Thursday that it is withdrawing a proposed rule that would have required poultry companies to limit the presence of salmonella bacteria in their products, ending an effort by the past Biden administration to reduce foodborne illnesses linked to contaminated meat.

The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) said the decision follows the review of more than 7,000 public comments submitted in response to the proposed rule, which was published in August 2024.

The department stated it will “evaluate whether it should update” current salmonella regulations, according to a Thursday notice from FSIS, which is pending publication in the Federal Register.

The withdrawn rule would have required poultry companies to keep salmonella bacteria below a specific threshold and test for six strains most associated with it, with three found in turkey and three in chicken. Any products exceeding the standard or containing any of those strains would have been forbidden from sale and subject to recall.

The proposal was intended to reduce an estimated 125,000 salmonella infections from chicken and 43,000 from turkey each year, according to USDA data. Salmonella is responsible for approximately 1.35 million illnesses and 420 deaths annually in the United States, most of which are linked to food, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

FSIS explained that the proposed framework targeted raw chicken carcasses, chicken parts, comminuted chicken, and comminuted turkey products contaminated with certain salmonella levels and serotypes, which would have been classified as adulterated under the Poultry Products Inspection Act, according to the agency’s April 24 notice. The agency also proposed stricter monitoring, sampling, and recordkeeping requirements for poultry processors, according to the same notice.

The agency said it received 7,089 comments on the proposal, including feedback from industry trade associations, small and large poultry processors, consumer advocacy groups, academics, and state officials.

Decision to Withdraw

Key issues raised included questions about FSIS’s legal authority, the scientific basis for the proposed standards, economic impacts, and the potential burden on small producers, according to the FSIS notice.

“While FSIS continues to support the goal of reducing Salmonella illnesses associated with poultry products, the Agency believes that the comments have raised several important issues that warrant further consideration,” FSIS stated in its withdrawal notice.

The decision to withdraw the rule was welcomed by the National Chicken Council, an industry trade group. “We remain committed to further reducing Salmonella and fully support food safety regulations and policies that are based on sound science, robust data, and are demonstrated to meaningfully impact public health,” said Ashley Peterson, the council’s senior vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs, according to the group’s statement on Thursday.

Peterson criticized the proposed framework as “legally unsound,” based on “misinterpretations of the science,” and likely to have “no meaningful impact on public health.”

She added that it would have led to “an extraordinary amount of food waste” and higher costs for producers and consumers, according to the National Chicken Council.

“We appreciate today’s announcement by FSIS and share their goal of protecting public health,” Peterson said, adding that the council looks forward to working with the agency on future policy.

Sandra Eskin, a former USDA official who helped draft the plan, said the withdrawal “sends the clear message that the Make America Healthy Again initiative does not care about the thousands of people who get sick from preventable foodborne salmonella infections linked to poultry,” according to the Associated Press.

Sarah Sorscher of the Center for Science in the Public Interest compared the proposed rule to the 1994 ban on certain E. coli strains in ground beef, calling it a missed opportunity for a significant food safety victory. “Make no mistake: Shipping more salmonella to restaurants and grocery stores is certain to make Americans sicker,” Sorscher said, according to the Associated Press.

Earlier this month, the USDA delayed enforcement of a separate rule regulating salmonella in breaded and stuffed raw chicken products by six months, pushing the start date from May 1 to Nov. 3. Such products have been linked to at least 14 salmonella outbreaks and over 200 illnesses since 1998, according to the CDC.

From NTD News

President Donald Trump doubled down Sunday on his plan to use tariff revenue to slash – and possibly eliminate – income taxes for millions of Americans.

The former president took to Truth Social to tout his vision, claiming that his sweeping tariffs could lead to big tax breaks for workers making under $200,000 a year.

“When Tariffs cut in, many people’s Income Taxes will be substantially reduced, maybe even completely eliminated. Focus will be on people making less than $200,000 a year,” Trump wrote.

The bold pledge comes as public anxiety grows over the economic fallout from Trump’s aggressive trade policies, which have rattled global markets and fueled fears of higher prices at home.

In the weeks since Trump slapped so-called reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries – including a staggering 145% levy on Chinese goods, economists have sounded the alarm that the tariffs could backfire, hurting American consumers more than foreign rivals.

That said – not everyone’s excited after Trump told TIME Magazine in the April 25 edition that he “love[s] the concept” of raising taxes on millionaires as a means of paying for an extension of the 2017 tax cuts.

“I certainly don’t mind having a tax increase,” Trump told TIME. 

“I would be honored to pay more, but I don’t want to be in a position where we lose an election because I was generous, but me, as a rich person, would not mind paying and you know, we’re talking about very little.”

He said it would involve raising taxes on the wealthy to “take care of [the] middle class.”

“But I don’t want it to be used against me politically, because I’ve seen people lose elections for less, especially with the fake news.”

Former White House strategist Steve Bannon told News Nation’s “CUOMO” on Friday that he supported the idea.

“This is being fought behind closed doors right now, and I’m telling you, with the massive tax cut, in addition, he’s going to give the working class and the middle class, the math only works out if you actually increase taxes on the wealthy,” Bannon said.

The former White House strategist said it could help Trump politically if he decided to run again in 2028, despite the Constitution preventing a third term in the Oval Office.

However, on April 23, the day after he sat down with TIME, Trump told reporters at the White House that raising taxes on the wealthy could be “very disruptive” and could lead to a loss of money for the United States.

House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the idea in an interview with Fox News.

“I’m not in favor of raising the tax rates because our party is the party that stands against that,” Johnson said on April 23.

He acknowledged that the proposal had been discussed as one of many possible ways to permanently implement personal income tax cuts in the Republicans’ final funding package.

“There were lots of ideas thrown out on the table along this process over the last year, but I would just say for everybody, just wait and see,” Johnson said.

A CBS News poll released Sunday found 69% of Americans believe the Trump administration isn’t focused enough on lowering prices. Approval of Trump’s handling of the economy dropped to 42%, down from 51% in early March, Bloomberg reports.

Still, Trump’s team insists their strategy will pay off – eventually.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” defended the president’s approach, saying consumers are still spending and talks are underway with 17 key trading partners to hammer out bilateral deals.

“We have a process in place, over the next 90 days, to negotiate with them,” Bessent said. “Some of those are moving along very well, especially with the Asian countries.”

Bessent also insisted China would have no choice but to return to the negotiating table under pressure from Trump’s new tariff wall.

“Their business model is predicated on selling cheap, subsidized goods to the US,” Bessent said. “And if there’s a sudden stop in that, they will have a sudden stop in the economy, so they will negotiate.”

Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent on China: “Their business model is predicated on selling cheap, subsidized goods to the U.S., and if there is a sudden stop in that, they will have a sudden stop in the economy. So they will negotiate.” https://t.co/DDuPIh4dI1 pic.twitter.com/VZ8WvUno91

— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) April 27, 2025

Bessent also explained America’s “barbell” economy – in which there is a “financial system and tech sector that is the envy of the world” on one hand, and “a natural resource-economy led by energy” on the other end.

The U.S. has a barbell economy.

On one end, we have a financial system and tech sector that is the envy of the world.

On the other end, we have a natural resource-economy led by energy.

In between is where working-class Americans have lost out—and we want to fix that. pic.twitter.com/ysVxibNIQ7

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) April 27, 2025

Trump has claimed that talks with China are ongoing – a claim Beijing has flatly denied. Bessent admitted he didn’t know if Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had spoken directly, noting that Chinese officials he saw during a global finance summit last week stuck to safer topics like “financial stability” and “early warnings.”

Despite the rocky start, Bessent said he’s optimistic that a path forward could emerge, starting with a “de-escalation” and leading to an “agreement in principle” – even if a full trade deal takes longer.

Meanwhile, Trump is eyeing sweeping tax changes at home. His 2017 tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2025, and he has vowed to not only extend them but expand them, exempting workers’ tips, slashing the corporate tax rate to 15%, and possibly wiping out income taxes for working-class Americans.

The House GOP’s early-April framework allows for up to $5.3 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade. Trade adviser Peter Navarro has suggested tariff revenue could more than cover that – a claim most economists dismiss as wildly optimistic.

Reports already show that Trump’s tariffs are expected to hit lower-income Americans harder than the wealthy, potentially complicating the president’s pitch to working families.

But Trump, undeterred, appears ready to bet that tariff-fueled tax cuts will give him a powerful message heading into the 2026 midterms, even if voters are feeling the pinch now.

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump said on April 26 that America’s military and commercial ships should be allowed to pass through the Panama and Suez canals “free of charge.”

“Those Canals would not exist without the United States of America,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

“I’ve asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio to immediately take care of, and memorialize, this situation!”

Stretching across the isthmus that connects North to South America, the Panama Canal allows ships to quickly traverse between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, carrying roughly 40 percent of U.S. container traffic yearly.

American and British leaders and businessmen discussed plans for building the canal throughout the 1800s as a way to quickly and cheaply transport goods without having to travel around the southern tip of South America to get between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. The United States built the canal between 1903 and 1914.

President Jimmy Carter negotiated the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, ratified by the Senate in 1978, that would set in motion the relinquishing of control of the canal to Panama. 

That finally came to fruition in 1999.

Trump has previously said that he wants to “take back” the canal and bring it under U.S. control, suggesting that he would not exclude economic or military force from regaining the shipping passageway.

Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the United States was partnering with Panama to secure the Panama Canal while countering China’s “malign influence.”

“The Panama Canal is key terrain that must be secured by Panama, with America and not China,” Hegseth said at a joint press conference with Panamanian Public Security Minister Frank Abrego.

The two nations signed a memorandum of understanding on bilateral security matters in the region that will see an expansion of joint training exercises between the United States and Panama while improving interoperability between their militaries, the secretary said.

The Suez Canal, which connects the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, was constructed in the late 1800s after plans to build the shipping corridor had been discussed since the time of Ancient Egypt.

However, recent military conflicts and terrorist attacks in the area have disrupted shipping traffic moving through the Suez Canal, forcing some ships to reroute around Africa’s southern Cape of Good Hope instead of using the corridor.

The Houthi terrorist group, backed by Iran, have caused repeated shipping disruptions in the area, according to the Atlantic Council, which estimates that the canal generated roughly $9.4 billion in revenue for Egypt in 2022–2023.

The Trump administration has approved multiple targeted strikes on the Houthis this year. Trump said the strikes would continue until the group no longer disrupts shipping between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.