Persons Of The Year: U.S. Border Patrol Agents

That publication fossil--Time Magazine--selected singer Taylor Swift as its Person of the Year.  The pop diva narrowly beat out stuffy King Charles III and Barbie, a plastic doll.  Apparently, there is a dearth of humans who met the magazine's news-maker criteria. 

How hard can it be to select the person who shook up the world's news? In 1938, the magazine chose Germany's Adolf Hitler.  In view of the conceited editors' shallow standards, it's surprising Time overlooked the Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Sinwar, who dominated worldwide news.  

Since Time bungled its selection, the Diatribe is offering a nominee that few appreciate. 

The top news makers arguably are the 16,878 Border Patrol Agents stationed along the 1,954-mile border between Mexico and the United States. These courageous men and women are on the frontlines of an ongoing war with Mexico's human and drug smuggling cartels.

Their bravery and service is ignored by most Americans who consume news from The Washington Post, New York Times, Associated Press, ABC, NBC and CBS News.  Cartels use social media to peddle fentanyl, so these disinformation platforms are blind to the role of border agents. 

The agents are the last line of defense against criminal syndicates that rake in billions of dollars annually by controlling the tide of drugs and migrants flowing from Mexico into the U.S. Their jobs are made harder by a lack of resources, technology, manpower and support from Homeland Security.

This year in particular has been the most challenging in the 20-year history of the U.S. Customers and Border Protection. Agents were swamped by 2.4 illegal immigrants who crossed the southern border from Mexico.  September saw the highest number of crossings, an 86% increase from June of this year.

Encounters, a sanitized word used by the government, increased 4% over 2022, but it represents a 40% hike since fiscal year 2021.  The numbers are staggering: 7.5 million encounters since January, 2021, at the southwest border.  The data does not include 1.7 million getaways.  

Just this year, agents arrested 35,433 immigrants with criminal convictions, 598 known gang members, including 178 were members of the notorious MS-13 gang, risking their lives to catch these law breakers.  Agents also apprehended 169 illegal immigrants on the terror watch list. 

Agents and their partners in Air and Marine Operations seized 27,293 pounds of deadly fentanyl that was smuggled across the southwest border.  That's enough fentanyl to kill more than 6 billion people. A total of 73,654 Americans died of fentanyl overdoses in 2022, according to the most recent data.

Fentanyl wasn't the only dangerous drug exported into the country. Agents seized a total of 241,000 pounds of illicit drugs this fiscal year.  In a drug bust in Temecula, California, Border Patrol agents stopped a gray sedan, driving suspiciously.

When the agents inspected the cedar, they discovered 62 bundles of the blue fentanyl pills concealed inside its door panels and seats. The pills weighed 81.4 pounds with an estimated street value of $3.6 million. Often, seizures follow dangerous high-speed car chases as the drug mules flee from agents.

Agents are in harm's way every day on the job.  In two separate instances, Customs and Border Protection agents were shot at by cartel members on the Mexican side of the border.  In May agents tended to a four-year old child dropped from a border barrier by smugglers.  

As agents rushed to aid the injured boy, cartel members opened fire on the agents.  Fire and rescue first-responders on the scene were forced to take cover.  An Air and Marine Operations helicopter came to the rescue, providing cover for the agents transport the boy to the helicopter.

In another incident, agents patrolling the San Isidro Mountains at nightfall came under heavy fire.  Remote surveillance camera operators captured video of an individual, armed with a rifle.  The shooter was firing from the Mexico side of the border.

One border agent was killed in 2023.  Since January 2021, 43 Customs and Border Protection agents have died in the line of duty, according to Homeland Security.  Likely, this may be the first time you are reading about this tragic death toll.   

The media cabal only covers the border patrol if there is an activist group accusing an agent of abuse. The deaths of agents apparently don't warrant a mention on the national news.  Perhaps, it's because Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas keeps assuring Americans the border is secure.

The unprecedented flood of drugs and immigrants is overwhelming the agents, who protect Americans.   They are the unsung heroes of 2023. The women and men of the Border Patrol deserve to be recognized as the Persons of the Year, despite the lack of news coverage. 

Warehousing America's Elderly

More than 1.4 million Americans reside in nursing homes. A few go voluntarily.  Most are placed in facilities by spouses or family members no longer able to provide around the clock assistance, despite their heroic dedication.  Costs are steep, the quality of care varies and abuse can be a problem.  

There are more than 15,500 Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing homes nationwide. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates there are 1.7 million beds in licensed nursing homes.  The majority are small facilities with 61 beds are fewer.  About 70% are for-profit operations.

Typically, nursing homes provide assistance with daily living, including preparing meals, bathing, dressing and assisting residents to the toilet, managing medications and feeding residents. Skilled nursing is often available on site.  

Costs are an added stress for families.  A 2021 study by Genworth Financial, the most recent data available, found the average nationwide cost of care in a private room at a nursing home costs $108,405 annually, versus $94,000 for a semi-private room.  Costs vary by state but prices are towering. 

An estimated 80% of aged adults lack the financial resources to pay for two years of nursing care, reports a study by the National Council on Aging. The data shatters the myth that most seniors, especially Baby Boomers, have the financial resources to pay for nursing care.    

Only 12.6% of seniors have long-term care insurance to cover the cost. Medicare pays for the first 20 days at a skilled nursing facility. Many seniors are forced to sell their homes, cash in insurance policies, drain savings and bank accounts.  Often the money runs out while they are in the nursing home.  

A report by the National Center for Health Statistics documented that 83% of nursing home residents are 65 or older.  However, 38% are 85 or older and 26% are between the ages of 75 and 84.  Nearly one-half (49.1%) have Alzheimers or another form of dementia. 

About 818,000 Americans reside in assisted living facilities, which offer less care than nursing homes because patients are usually mobile and able to perform general hygiene.  About 18% of assisted living facilities have a dementia unit and 11% serve only patients with dementia or Alzheimers.  

Research published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) found patients in long-term care settings are at high risk for abuse and neglect.  Physical abuse may include hitting, slapping, pushing or striking patients with objects, according to the research. Incidents of theft too often occur at a facilities.

Oversight of facilities is spotty at best.  The Centers for Medicare and Medical Services (CMS) is tasked with broad oversight. State regulators, licenses and inspects skilled nursing homes. Significant  violations of standards, may result in a state rescinding a facility's license.

Statistics are a sterile view of the nursing home industry.  Your reporter has seen first-hand the level of care at facilities where family members were housed.  These observations are admittedly unscientific, but most have been collaborated by others with loved ones in nursing homes.

A heartbreaking issue for patients being warehoused: About 7 in 10 receive no visitors. Ever. These poor souls are lonely, frail and virtually shackled to their beds.  They stare vacantly at a small television.  It is an existence in name only.  

It is gut-wrenching to watch patients waiting to be fed, their heads slumped down on tables.  Staff is too busy with other patients, which means some residents wait an hour or more for a meal.  Even those who can feed themselves, are not served in a timely manner in the dining area.  

The meals may include the minimum daily calories and dietary proteins but at the expense of appetizing food. Patient complaints about meals are disregarded as the ramblings of a grumpy old people. If staff were forced to eat the same meals, it would make a difference in quality and variety.

Patient rooms, even the private ones, are spartan and void of color. Wafer thin mattresses on the beds and lumpy pillows are standard. Some patients have televisions, but in many facilities the TVs are provided by the family.  The smell wafting from some rooms testifies to the lack of constant cleaning.

These conditions exist, despite dedicated, trained staff. Facilities are nearly always understaffed.  COVID dealt a devastating blow to nursing homes, killing more than 200,000 residents and staff, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. 

Isolation protocols forced staff to work excessive long hours, which caused burnout, triggering a worker exodus at many facilities.  As of the fourth quarter of 2022, the annual turnover rate at a nursing home was 53%. One-quarter of facilities reported turnover rates greater than 64%. 

Industry experts estimates there is a shortage of 200,000 nurses at long term care facilities. Recruiting firms forecast it may take five years or longer to reach pre-2020 staff levels.  The workforce problem must be addressed to improve care at nursing facilities.

Another issue is economic.  Although Medicaid pays for most patients' care, the government program reimburses facilities only 86% of the costs for a patient.  Nearly half of nursing homes are losing money, according to the American Health Care Association (AHCA).

As a result, the number of nursing homes is dwindling. An estimated 300 closed in 2020 and a combined 400 went out of business from 2021 to 2022.  This year already 135 facilities shuttered their doors.  These statistics were culled from reports by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid.   

Understaffing and economics aren't the only problems. With so many aged adults unable to afford more than two years of nursing care, Medicare and Medicaid are ill equipped to provide the safety net for the elderly. Both programs face financial shortfalls and prospects are dim for a short term fix. 

Nothing short of an overhaul of the nursing home model is required for America to meet the needs of a population living longer.  By 2030 more than 73 million Baby Boomers will be 65 or older. In 2035, the number of Americans 65 and older will outnumber those 18 years old and younger. 

Congress can help, but often Washington's heavy hand leads to regulations that add costs and disincentivize the adoption of technology and innovation. Throwing money at a problem without a coordinated plan leads to wasteful spending, fraud and misapplication of funds. See COVID spending. 

This issue requires an all hands of deck approach.

Solutions must involve the long term care industry, state governments, Medicare, Medicaid, nursing schools and organizations that represent seniors.  The technology industry has a role to play also. One solution to the staffing shortage is to use wearable devices to monitor patients. 

Alarm bells are sounding. Urgent action is required to prevent long term care from erupting into a national crisis. Up to now, the siren call is being ignored, putting in peril millions of elderly Americans.   

Unimaginable Savagery of Hamas Terrorists

Hamas terrorists unleashed a barbaric attack on Israel, murdering 1,300 ordinary civilians, including 30 Americans.  The sheer scale of the horror shocked most of the civilized world. Babies decapitated. Elderly gunned down in their beds. Families burned alive in their houses. Women raped and kidnapped. 

Young concert goers were senselessly slaughtered after killers floated from the skies on paragliders.  Two Holocaust survivors were shot in cold blood. Terrorists on motorcycles sprayed cars with bullets and then kidnapped the occupants.  More than 4,500 Hamas rockets exploded in a quiet residential area.

For perspective, the massacre of 1,300 people in Israel is the equivalent to more than 35,000 civilians casualties in the U.S. That's ten, 9/11 attacks.  After 9/11, Americans united in support of military action against the terrorists. The same national resolve is fueling Israel's strategic preparations for war.   

Unlike past Hamas incursions, this surprise invasion was meticulously planned and executed with military precision. Hamas killers breeched a virtually impenetrable concrete barrier separating Gaza and Israel. Some 1,500 heavily armed Hamas thugs invaded Israel, creating mass panic. That was their goal. 

Terrorists videotaped their heinous butchery and posted the images on social media.  The invaders also sent photos and videotapes to friends and families of victims. These sadistic killers are not "militants" or "soldiers" as portrayed by some media.  They are terrorists.  Period. 

News organizations self-censored the most gruesome images. Palestinian defenders and Hamas jihadists complained Jewish leaders were exaggerating the carnage.  An outraged Benjamin Netanyahu was compelled to release graphic photos and videos online to rebuke the deniers and propagandists.

The attack bears the fingerprints of Iran, although the State Department used parsed language to point out there was no "direct evidence" the Islamic Republic was involved.  Yet U.S. officials readily acknowledge that Iran is complicit in funding Hamas and providing it weapons and training. 

It strains credulity to suggest the Iran's ruling Islamic mullahs did not green light the attack. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard, the Islamic Republic's elite military arm, regularly trains state-sponsored terrorist groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah, according to intelligence sources.

Recent U.S. policy towards Iran has favored rapprochement and diplomacy in an effort to bring stability to the Middle East. The pursuit of peace is always preferable but Iran's malevolent words and its behavior make it clear the regime will never change under the current extremist leaders. 

The United States must course correct and implement every means possible to isolate Iran.  Deny the regime any funding.  Cut off its oil shipments, especially to China, the main buyers of Iran's crude. Launch a maximum campaign to pressure China to stop supporting the Iranian economy. 

Credit the Biden Administration for sending a flotilla of carriers and warships to the Mediterranean to deter a widening war against Israel. Hezbollah, which operates in Lebanon, is stepping up rocket attacks and shelling in the north of Israel.  Lebanon's military has missiles that can reach Tel Aviv. 

One of the first priorities must be the release of potentially 13 Americans held hostage in Gaza. Terrorists have threatened to murder hostages.  President Biden should announce America will hold Hamas responsible and will hunt down and kill any terrorist who harms a U.S. citizen.    

Even in these darkest of times, the ugly face of Antisemitism has been unmasked, both in the U.S. and abroad.  It is a reprehensible,  grim reminder of the Nazi's campaign to demonize Jews, paving the way for public acquiescence to the Holocaust.  Leaders must condemn those who applaud Hamas's attacks. 

Black Lives Matter chapters across America manufactured an image of a Hamas paraglider descending over Israel with the caption: "We stand with Palestine."  Not one corporate funder of BLM condemned the organization.  African-American leaders need to hold BLM accountable.

Four congresswomen criticized accusing the U.S.  of aiding and abetting "apartheid",while condemning Israel's response to Hamas violence.  Not one castigated Hamas for its inhuman brutality. The Hamas apologists are: Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocascio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib. 

College students at campuses across the country rallied behind Palestine, which amounts to veiled support for Hamas.  A student group at a Wisconsin college chanted, "Glory to the Murderers." Yes, their numbers were small, but college administrations were slow to denounce their actions.

Billionaire CEO Marc Rowan, a graduate of University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business and a mega donor, demanded the college's leaders resign and rallied donors to shut their checkbooks. He was understandably upset after the UPenn president and provost failed to condemn the "hate filled" student protests at a Palestinian event. 

There were also demonstrations in many America cities, including in New York City, supporting Palestine and blaming Israel for the Hamas attacks. Simultaneous protests broke out in Atlanta, Chicao, Denver, San Diego, Washington, D.C. and other cities. 

New York City Mayor Eric Adams made a powerful speech declaring Israel had a right to defend itself after the unprovoked attacks and said "we are not right" with Pro-Palestinian protests celebrating Hamas  in the nation's largest city. He was a lone voice among mayors across the country.  

In Australia, a crowd of 1,000 rallied near the Sydney Opera House, screaming "Gas the Jews."  In London, thousands of pro-palestinian protestors congregated near the Israeli Embassy, chanting "Israel is a Terrorist State." 

There were scores of demonstrations supporting Israel too.  But inevitably counter demonstrators backing Palestine and decrying Israel showed up at some, spoiling for a confrontation.  Heightened police presence is visible in the U.S. and the world as tensions rise.  

The media, often sympathetic to Palestine, is wringing its hands over Israel's bombardment of Gaza. The media fail to inform Americans the majority of Palestinians support Hamas terrorists and its leaders.  Palestinians regard Hamas as freedom fighters trying to take back disputed territory in Israel. 

The United Nations, a body known for its disdain for Israel, is already trying to head off an Israeli military response to attacks on its soil. Hamas is counting on worldwide condemnation of Israel so it can continue to stockpile weapons for an increasing number of bloody attacks.  

Hamas will resort to its playbook of using human shields once the ground war begins. Weapons, munitions and terrorists will relocated to hospitals, schools and residences.  Hamas wants civilian casualties. They have no regard for human life.  Innocents will be sacrificed in the name of jihad. 

The United States cannot bow to outside pressure.  Leaders must allow Israel to punish the perpetrators, just as the U.S. did after 9/11.  There can be no security for Israel until it roots out terrorists, who have traumatized its citizens for decades by killing Jewish civilians.   

Looting Surging In Major American Cities

A nation was stunned by videos of roving flash mobs smashing store windows and hauling off merchandise in Philadelphia.  Gangs of young adults, working in tandem, roamed the city in a caravan, stealing with impunity last week.  Overwhelmed police could not stop the brazen crime wave.

The rampage occurred after a peaceful demonstration to protest the decision to drop charges against a Philadelphia police officer who shot and killed a young adult.  The mayor and police were emphatic: the burglaries and thefts were unrelated to the shooting and the nonviolent protests.

Philadelphia's nightmare is just the latest in an outbreak of unbridled criminal looting.  Stores in Seattle, San Francisco, New York, Portland and Los Angeles have been victimized by thieves almost daily.  Retail theft has become an epidemic that is prompting businesses to shutter stores. 

Big box store Target recently announced it was closing nine stores in major cities, citing violence, theft and concern for the safety of its employees.  Clothier Lululemon, Walmart, Starbucks, Walgreen's, CVS and Nordstrom have closed stores in areas hard-hit by repeated looting and theft. 

Some businesses, including Lululemon, have ordered employees to take no action as stores are emptied by shoplifters and mobs.  Two Lululemon employees who confronted thieves were summarily fired by the company. The message to thieves is clear: We invite you to steal merchandise.   

The perpetrators for the most part are not individual shoplifters. These are criminal enterprises operated by individuals that steal merchandise and fence the ill gotten goods for cash.   This doesn't reflect tough economic times; it is increasingly a lucrative cash business for crime networks. 

The price tag for retail theft is $112 billion so far this year, according to a retail security survey conducted by the National Retail Foundation.  That figure compares to $94 billion in 2021. Most police departments do not have a separate category to distinguish looting from robbery and larceny. 

New York Congresswoman Alexander Ocasio-Cortez has characterized the thieves as individuals who just want food to eat.  The only people going hungry are the scores of  retail employees who lose their jobs in the aftermath of store closings. 

In Los Angeles, a group of thieves ransacked a Nike store, carting off trash bags full of high-priced shoes. In San Francisco, mobs attached Victoria's Secret and Swarovski a few years ago, leaving a trail of bras and pushed jewelry boxes littering the sidewalks in their getaway.   

Police and retailers blame the lack of prosecution of thieves and the implementation of laws that make shoplifting de facto legal. California's new penal code 459 made pilfering a misdemeanor if the pilfered merchandise was valued under $950.  

California Governor Gavin Newsome recently signed a new law making shoplifting a felony IF it is carried out by a organized ring of criminals intending to resell the goods.  That's a big IF.  The state's prosecutors often decline to bring shoplifting charges or allow individuals to walk free after booking. 

Unfettered looting isn't confined to California, as the scene in Philadelphia testifies.  Criminal looters have struck in New York City, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Tampa, Bellevue (Washington), Portland and others. Looting is likely the fastest growing crime, but no data exists to verify it.    

Looters encourage other young adults to join in, posting on social media live video of their criminal escapades.  The thieves even single out which stores have insurance to cover losses, making the crime appear harmless because after all, theft really doesn't cost the business in the long run.  

Looting sprees are an outgrowth of the George Floyd riots in the summer of 2020, More than $1 billion in damages caused by arson, vandalism, and looting occurred  in the wake of 10,600 "peaceful" demonstrations that erupted in the wake of Floyd's death at the hands of a Minneapolis policeman.

While hundreds were arrested nationwide during the riots, the crime of looting went mostly unpunished.  Some mayors, including Baltimore's chief executive, ordered police to stand down and let the looters vent their frustration at the Floyd killing.  Criminals got the message.  Looting will go unpunished.

Social justice proponents like to blame the pandemic.  That's a coincidence, not a cause.  The Floyd riots ignited during the pandemic.  That was the trigger for violence, arson, attacks on police and looting. Blaming the pandemic for looting lacks credible evidence. 

Executives of retail stores from Walmart to Walgreens are encouraging police and prosecutors to crack down on these organized thefts. Retailers warn they'll be forced to raise prices and close more stores without help to address the growing threat.

Some sates are enacting tougher laws to make looting and shoplifting with intent to sell a felony.  Others are beefing up police presence in retail districts.  That's a start.  Law enfacement needs real time data, which means tracking retail theft as a separate category at the national level.

Retailers also need to do their part.  Their warnings about store closings are ignored by the mobs.  Don't just wring your hands about the losses and pass on the increase to consumers in the form of higher prices. Issue ultimatums to cities: Stop the looting or we are leaving.

In light of America's other deeper crime issues, this one is imminently solvable.    

  

Scrutinizing Those US Economic Numbers

Flurries of numbers shower Americans each month when the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) unveils the latest economic data. The blizzard is left to the media and financial experts to interpret.  Too often, Americans are fed headline numbers and little else, instead of contextual clarity. 

Confusion has persisted about U.S. economic numbers since the Bureau of Labor began collecting and publishing employment and payroll data in October, 1915.  Over time, the methodologies and terminology have changed, adding to the public bewilderment.  

A looming presidential election likely will turn on economic issues, underscoring the importance of understanding the data.   Wall Street and the media appear to have little interest in peering beyond the numbers, based on current reporting and the rose-colored economic forecasts.

Amid the dizzying amount of economic data, here are some current headline numbers that are ripe for interpretation  

The pace of inflation is cooling.

The BLS reported inflation for August rose 0.6%, based on the Consumer Price Index.  The monthly increase follows 0.2% upticks in July and June. August numbers indicate that inflation may be heating up again. The government is quick to point out gasoline prices accounted for the lion's share of the gain.

The media dutifully reports the monthly data in headlines without the same attention to the 12-month change in inflation.  Prices have increased 3.7% since last August. That is higher than the 3.2% increase in July and 3.0% in June.  Clearly, inflation is proving to be stickier than experts forecast.

To justify the narrative that inflation is slowing, the media and Wall Street remind Americans the current inflation is lower than the 8.0% inflation rate for calendar year 2022.   True but hardly comforting to consumers. 

Whenever the CPI drives up inflation, the media and Wall Street turn to so-called core inflation, the preferred measurement for the Federal Reserve. Core inflation excludes prices for food and energy because of volatility.  Core inflation inched up 0.3% in August, which is 4.3% higher than August, 2022.

For average Americans, the core inflation number might as well be an unlisted telephone number.  Americans don't have the luxury of excluding energy and food from their budget.  

For further context, consider that inflation has risen 16% since January 2021, when prices roared at historic levels.  Most consumers cannot quote that number, but they know their household budgets have been impacted more than the 0.6% August increase.   

Workers wages are continuing to rise.

Americans' wages are riding an upward trajectory.   Beginning in April of 2021, wages and salaries have risen steadily more than 3.4% every month,  hitting 6.7% in July of 2022.  That same month inflation was 8.5%.  The latest available data for June shows wages and salaries climbed 4.7%.

February marked the first month since 2021 that wages grew faster than inflation, according to data compiled by Statista. 

For hourly workers, the wage growth has failed to keep up with inflation for most of this year.  June marked the first month weekly earnings rose faster than inflation.  The latest data from July revealed average hourly wages are up 1.1% on an annual basis.  

Hourly workers are falling further behind the inflation rate, which is the reason there are mushrooming demands from unions for higher wages.   

Rising wages is usually a positive sign, but inflation has made today's dollar worth less.  The BLS calculates that a dollar today only buys 88.6% of what it did in 2021. Inflation is sapping Americans purchasing power.  

Job growth points to a healthy economy.

The economy added 6.7 million jobs in 2021, the largest annual total in U.S. history. That was followed by an impressive gain of 4.5 million last year.  Year-to-date the economy has created 1.6 million jobs. That's a total for 12.8 million jobs in less than three years. An estimated 72% of the job growth represents jobs lost during the pandemic.   

Average monthly job growth has moderated this year, despite the addition of 1.6 million jobs.  The average monthly growth rate this year is 258,000 compared to nearly 400,000 last year.  In the most recent report, the economy added 187,000 jobs in August.  Job growth is decelerating.   

Last year's booming job market wasn't as robust as the monthly numbers published by the media.  That's because the BLS adjusts the figures each month.  The trend has been that the adjustments wind up reducing actual job growth.  The media usually downplays the data or ignores it.

For example, in March the BLS revised the job growth downward by 306,000.  Do you recall reading or hearing that number?  June and July numbers were reduced by a combined 110,000.  Over the last three months, the economy recorded a modest average monthly gain of 150,000 after adjustments. 

Unemployment is at historic lows.

In the latest report, the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.8%.  The rate inched up from July's 3.5%.  That still reflects a healthy job market.  However, the BLS headline number for unemployment rate is just one indicator of employment.  And it may not be the best. 

A person out of work may not be counted as unemployed. The BLS unemployment figure does not include the following: 1. Millions of so-called discouraged workers. 2. The underemployed--part-time workers who prefer a full-time job. 3. Those who don't have a job but claim they have looked for one in the past four weeks.

To get an honest picture of the employment landscape, the BLS publishes a U-6 unemployment figure that measures the total number of employees who are part of the labor force, but without a job. For example, the U-6 rate was 7.2% in August, slightly higher than the July figure of 7.1%. 

However, you will never read or hear about the U-6 data because it is entombed  in rows of tables that are included in the monthly BLS unemployment report. 

By now, you may be shaking your head and asking: "Does any of this really matter?"  This writer believe it does.  We are a nation of economic illiterates, unfortunately.  (Excluding of course you dear reader.) That matters when the economy is the top issue with voters in most years.

Americans don't have to be economic experts.  But an informed voter is best for our democracy. And the media and Wall Street are flubbing their responsibility to provide context and interpretation to help Americans digest the government data.

Wray's Federal Bureau of Intimidation

The FBI's already tarnished public image is deteriorating. Recent incidents are shining a light on the agency's increasing targeting of Americans for activities the bureau has labeled as domestic terrorism. In the latest revelation, the FBI spied on Catholics in a clear violation of the First Amendment.  

During the last 18 months, the FBI has used its assets to go after Americans speaking out at school board meetings, coordinated with social media companies to suppress speech, illegally spied on a political campaign and surveilled black activists. The conduct is taking a toll on trust in the FBI.

The latest NBC News Poll, conducted in July, found that only 37% of registered voters surveyed had a positive view of the FBI.  In the same poll in October of 2018, more than half of Americans (52%) viewed the FBI favorably.  That's a precipitous fall that should concern FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Apparently, it doesn't.

How else can you explain Wray's testimony before a Congressional committee about reports the FBI targeted so-called "radical traditionalist" Catholics as potential domestic terrorists? 

The director testified in July before the House Judiciary Committee about the disturbing allegation.  A smiling Wray under withering interrogation assured members the FBI's action was limited "to a single office" in Richmond, VA. He claimed it was a regrettable blunder that he immediately halted.  

The clamor died down until House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan requested an un-redacted copy of the Richmond office's memo.  The agency document divulged the Richmond office relied on information from field offices in Los Angeles and Portland for contributions to the threat assessment.

The new information proves that Wray's statements  were inaccurate. And that's being overly charitable. The agency's actions were not limited to a single office.  If multiple offices were involved, how could the FBI director be so ill informed about his department's probe?

The FBI memo reviewed by the committee reveals "radical traditionalist" Catholics" were targets over concerns their beliefs may be interpreted as violent views.  Volatile issues cited in the memo include views on "abortion rights" and "LGBTQ protections," writes the National Catholic Register.

The FBI memo appears to imply that being pro-life or holding beliefs that there are only two genders (male and female) are tangentially related to violent, extremest views, which threaten public safety. This  appears to criminalize the doctrine of the Catholic Church.  

Included in the memo is an Orwellian recommendation that FBI agents attempt to recruit traditionalist Catholics to keep tabs on so-called "radical traditionalists" in their congregation.  The FBI conduct smacks of Soviet-style efforts to intimidate houses of worship that don't embrace government dogma.    

Let's make it clear what is going on at the highest levels of government in Washington. If your beliefs run counter to government doctrine, then the FBI considers you a potential terrorist threat. The chilling inference is that religious theology must align with the federal government's doctrine.   

The FBI's action is a direct threat to the First Amendment guarantee of the free exercise of religion and sends a frightening message about the practice of faith.  Whatever your political affiliation, this is a stunning abuse of power.  Do you want the FBI criminalizing Americans religious beliefs? 

What's ironic is the FBI appears to have no interest in investigating the rise in attacks on Catholic Churches. Last year there were at least 272 incidents in 43 states, including arson, vandalism, the beheading of statues, smashed windows and gravestone defaced with swastikas and anti-Catholic slurs. 

The spike in violence appears to have escalated after the leak of the Supreme Court's draft proposal to overturn Roe V Wade. In anticipation of the final decision, abortion activists unleashed a wave of angry protests against pro-life pregnancy centers and Catholic Churches. 

The result was an increase in anti-Catholic rhetoric from politicians, government officials and activists. It is ironic, since Pew Research polls have shown 56% of Catholic believe abortion should be legal. That is almost the same percentage of all Americans (61%) who support abortion. 

Instead of snooping on Catholics, the FBI should be dedicating resources to address the rising attacks against all churches.  A recent Hostility Against Churches report, authored by the Family Research Council, found that incidents in the first three months of this year are three times higher than last year. 

The research council study identified 420 incidents, including gun-related incidents and bomb threats from January 2018 to September 2022.  The FRC warns the "anger and division" in American society endangers not only churches but erodes religious freedom.

Christians aren't the only ones being targeted. Antisemitic incidents skyrocketed 36% last year. A report from the Anti-Defamation League found there were 3,697 incidents of harassment, vandalism and assaults targeting Jewish people and communities.  

The report concludes that public officials, including some in Congress, famous artists and social media stars have been "instrumental in normalizing longstanding antisemitic tropes."  To some, lack of action by federal law enforcement implies the threats do not rise to level of FBI concern.  

Christopher Wray needs to be hauled before Congress and questioned about what the FBI is doing to stop the rising violence against religions and religious people.  The FBI's mission is to uphold the Constitution, which guarantees the right to practice religion free from intimidation.

Americans religious beliefs are not subject to FBI oversight.  Period.  

A Nostalgic Trip Back To The Golden 50's

The age odometer on the dashboard of my life clicked to 77 in June. When you've clocked that many years, it's natural to peer into life's rearview mirror.  As people of a certain age understand, you are prone to experience waves of nostalgia even as you appreciate today's advantages.

The year I was born, 1946, marked the starting point of the largest baby boom in U.S. history.  In a 19-year stretch from 1946 to 1964, more than 76 million births were recorded.  Population data estimates there are 65 million boomers still celebrating birthdays. Congratulations if you're in that exclusive club.

My earliest memories, although somewhat hazy, go back to 1950.  My parents and my oldest sister Charlene were living in a two-bedroom home in Jennings, Louisiana, population 9,663.  America's small towns were its beating heart. Only five cities topped 1 million in population. 

I have no idea what our two bedroom home cost, but the average home in 1950 sold for $23,450.  That was a princely sum, considering average annual wages were $8,450.  My Dad purchased our first new car, a Ford, in the 50's. Cars sold for an average of $1,510.  Gas cost 18 cents a gallon and a station attendant pumped your gas.

When Mom shopped for food, the price she paid for groceries would shock today's younger generations. The average cost of a loaf of bread was 12 cents. A pound of hamburger meat was 30 cents.  The average American family spent about $800 on food... in an entire year.  

The buying power of $1 in 1950 would equate to $12.66 today.  Do the math and it means $500 would be the equivalent value of $6,330.06 today.  If you find yourself yearning for the good old days, today's comforts we take for granted were either nonexistent or unaffordable for most families.

Our home was cooled by a window fan in sweltering, sticky Louisiana summers. No one complained because at least we had a fan.  There were only 76,000 air conditioners installed in the 1950's.  It wasn't until 1973 when the majority of U.S. households had central air conditioning or a window unit.

Schools opened windows during early fall and some rooms had an oscillating fan. Flies were frequent visitors to our class. It didn't impact anyone's ability to learn. Mom packed a lunch every day, because it was cheaper than paying to eat in the cafeteria. There was no such thing as a free school lunch.  

Every school day began with the Pledge of Allegiance, a tiny hand over your heart.  Students weren't the only ones saluting the flag. America was awash in patriotism.  There was a good feeling about the country, a belief they God had blessed the USA.  Will America every be like that again? 

Our home was equipped with a social network: a black telephone.  It wasn't uncommon in 1950 to share a line with another home or two. Most folks were polite enough not to interrupt a conversation on their party line.  About two-thirds of the 43 million households in America had at least one phone. 

Historians refer to 1950 as the golden age of crime because there were so few offenses.  FBI data does not go back that far, while other sources date to 1960.  In a sign of few crimes, no one locked the doors to their homes or cars. Today's generations will never know the tranquility of that era.   

In 1950, only nine percent of households had a television set. Families streaming service was free: programs on radio.  I listened to cowboy stories over the airwaves.  My favorite was "The Lone Ranger," which debuted in 1933 and ran until 1956. You needed an imagination to "see" horses, cattle and holstered pistols. Television robbed future generations of their cognitive imagery ability.  

At some point in the late 50's, a black-and-white television the size of a small refrigerator graced our living room.  Reception was always dicey.  Those rabbit-ears--two long antennas--captured the airwaves and turned it into sound and picture.  The picture often was fuzzy, a hazard of nascent technology.

Despite the poor quality, each home with a television attracted neighbor kids, who soon begged their parents to buy one of those new fangled devices.  Neighbors often dropped by to take a peak to see what all the fuss was about.  By 1960, 90% of homes had a black-and-white magic box.

With seven kids to clothe, the Roy family annual fashion budget wouldn't touch the cost of an iPhone.  Most clothes coast below $5, while a men's world suit cost $45, impractical in the South. My brothers and sisters often wore hand-me-downs.  As the oldest, I escaped that predicament. 

However, I do remember wearing jeans with patches to school.  And I was one of the lucky kids.  Some boys wore pants with more holes than a West Texas oil patch.  Searching through my memory bank, I think I owned two shirts. That was my wardrobe for the entire school year in the early 50's.

When I spin tales about my growing up experiences, my four grandkids find my description hard to fathom.  No internet. No Nextflix. No Nintendo.  No cell phone.  Less anxiety. They can't imagine it.  (And no, I don't tell them I walked 5 miles in the snow to get to school.) But I did ride my bike to classes for a few years.

Once our 11-year-old granddaughter Megan playfully asked: "PaPa, did you ride a dinosaur to school?" I think she was joking, but perhaps not. With age and experience, you appreciate the memories of the way things once were. But I don't want to return to a time without air conditioning. 

But honestly, I'm sad that today's younger generations will never experience what's it's like to have less in life and still be content. That might give pause to those who believe having more brings happiness. Hardships help you appreciate today's standard of living. That's why I will always value the 1950's.

Artificial Intelligence Heralds Profound Changes

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a disruptive technology that offers the promise to usher in the next industrial revolution.  However, despite the boom in AI applications,  there are deepening concerns that the technology may negatively impact jobs, national security, privacy and spread misinformation. 

AI is the next evolution in machine learning.  AI technologies enable computers to perform a variety of advanced functions, including the ability to understand and translate written language.  It is capable of creating new content such as text, images or audio as well as analyzing vast amounts of data.  

That's a laymen's definition of the technology.  AI is a board field that encompasses many different disciplines, including computer science, data analytics and statistics, hardware and software engineering, linguistics, neuroscience and even philosophy and psychology.  

AI burst into the American consciousness with the release of ChatGPT, free app developed by OpenAI, an AI and research company.  The app facilitates an almost human-like conversation with a chatbox that answers questions and can assist with tasks such as composing emails, essays or even creating poetry. 

Released in November of last year, CatGPT is the fastest-growing app in history, garnering more than 100 million active users.  Nearly every teenager has downloaded the app on his or her wireless phone.  This writer has been experimenting with the app for months.  Think Apple's Siri on steroids.

One measure of the AI boom is the stock price of firms operating in the AI space, including tech giants Microsoft, Goggle and Open AI.  No firm has benefited more than Nvidia, which has ridden the wave to a 222% increase in market value.  Nvidia makes a powerful chip that's become the workhorse for AI.

AI has attracted the interest of Congress and a legion of critics and champions.  Yet there is no denying there are many innovative applications for AI to automate workflow and processes, reduce human errors and eliminate repetitive tasks.

AI is being deployed in the healthcare industry at a dizzying rate. Since health cost are nearly one-fifth (19.7%) of the total U.S. economy, the potential value of AI in healthcare from the administrative side to the delivery of healthcare has enormous potential to reduce costs and improve efficiency.  

The technology is already being used by the Centers for Disease Control to analyze public health data.  Increasingly, AI is being deployed to assist in analyzing imaging data from MRI's and CT cans. AI can handle some tasks preformed by radiologists, a profession in the throes of declining specialists.

In one example, AI is being used to analyze cell images to determine which drugs are most effective for patients with neurodegenerative diseases.  Conventional computers are too slow to spot changes in neurons when patients are treated with different drugs.

That's just for starters.  AI is being deployed in medical training, to assist medical professionals in clinical settings, remote monitoring of patients and for diagnostics.  One AI software can detect current issues and predict the patient's likelihood of developing the breast cancer in the next several years. 

Beyond healthcare, virtually every industry is looking at ways to incorporate AI into their business. Microsoft and Google are working to integrate cutting edge AI into their search engines.  Engineering firms are finding ways AI can make their teams more effective.  

The software industry is exploring ways to use AI can eliminate the need for certain tasks generally performed by early career or junior programers. Digital news platforms are employing AI to create stories, edited by news people.  Schools are eyeing ChatGPT as a tool for students and teachers.

There is no question AI potentially will replace some workers, especially with accelerated advancements in the technology and industry's rapid integration of AI into their businesses. 

Another issue virtually unreported is the energy and resource drain that will be created with the growth of AI. A report rom the School of Engineering and Applied Science at University of Pennsylvania raises concerns as AI applications begin to scale up exponentially.

An estimate from the Semiconductor Research Corporation predicts the increasing deployment of AI will "soon hit a wall where our silicon supply chains won't be able to keep up with the amount of data created." Computer memory is stored on components made from silicon.

Companies operating AI systems store data in massive facilities all over the country.  These facilities carbon emissions doubled between 2017 and 2020.  These centers consume on the order of 20 to 40 megawatts of power, roughly enough to power 16,000 households with electricity. 

Like many technologies, there is a dark side to AI.  Google's CEO Sundar Pichai is among a growing number of business leaders flagging the capability of the technology to fabricate imagines of public figures and average Americans that are nearly indistinguishable from reality.  

Imagine in a political election AI is used to produce a video and audio fake of a candidate making racist or anti-American statements.  What if the forgery goes viral on social media before it can be detected? These so-called deepfakes have nabbed the attention of the Department of Defense.

In the context of national security, a fake could dupe military or intelligence personnel into divulging sensitive information to an adversary, posing as a trusted colleague.  The Pentagon recently awarded a contract to a startup DeepMedia to design a deepfake detection computer. 

Many in Congress have been calling for guardrails to regulate AI. Before Congress could act, the White House announced  that seven of the nation's top AI developers agreed to guidelines aimed at ensuring the "safe" deployment of AI.  

Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Anthropic and Inflection agreed to the outline. The guidelines are voluntary and there are no penalties for violating the open-ended agreement.

Regulation often can restrain new technologies in the U.S., while foreign competitors are unleashed to push forward and leapfrog American companies. However, in this instance, there needs to be some rules to prevent the misuse of a relatively new technology by a few bad actors. 

Once AI becomes embedded in every business, it will be too late to govern the technology's applications without major business and political upheaval.  

Democrats Plot To Demonize Justices

A Supreme Court ruling overturning race-based college admissions has reignited smoldering Democrat attacks on the nation's conservative justices.  The incendiary offensive, mobilized by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, aims to delegitimize the court and undermine its decisions.    

Democrats are threatening impeachment against Justice Clarence Thomas while calling for ethics rules stricter than the ones that apply to Congress. A Schumer disciple, Sen. Ed Markey, is championing expanding the size of the Supreme Court to allow President Biden to pack the court with leftist judges.  

Although President Biden has been lukewarm to increasing the number of justices, nonetheless he blasted the court's decisions  as "not normal" and criticized the judges "values system as different."  The outrage is calculated to make the Supreme Court a voter issue in the upcoming presidential election.

The simmering hostility was sparked last year when a leak of a preliminary draft court decision on a case to overturn Roe v. Wade. Even before the court's official ruling, Schumer stood outside the Supreme Court building and railed against Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

"You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.  You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions," Schumer hectored.    

Abortion activists, clearly motivated by Schumer's bombast, released the home addresses online of conservative justices.  Protestors showed up at residences, shouting obscenities and brandishing menacing signs. 

The marshal of the Supreme Court pleaded with officials in Maryland and Virginia to enforce state and local laws that "prohibit picketing outside the homes" of justices and their families.  The two governors punted the decision to federal law enforcement, which never acted to end the unruly protests. 

It was shameful to allow such intimidation of justices.  It nearly boiled over when police arrested an armed man near the home of Justice Kavanaugh who had traveled to Maryland with the intent of harming the jurist.  Democrats never made any apologies for their role in fueling the threatening tactics. 

Imagine if the court was considering a challenge to gun ownership and protestors showed up at the private residences of the three liberal justices.  Does anyone believe that the FBI would have failed to disburse the crowd?  Agents would have removed the protestors post haste. 

It is even more preposterous that the marshal for the court was never able to identify who leaked Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion.  This was a major breach of court decorum.  The leak had to be initiated by a sitting justice or a court clerk.  Yet no one could identify the leaker? That's not credible. 

Once the abortion decision was handed down overturning Roe v. Wade, Democrat surrogates initiated a smear campaign against against Justices Thomas and Alito. The hatchet job has been carried out by ProPublica, an obscure leftwing publication. 

The muckraking online news site is the brainchild of Herb and Marion Sandler, billion former mortgage bankers of Golden West Financial Corp., which collapsed during the subprime mortgage meltdown. The two Democrat donors pledged $10 million a year to fund ProPublica in initial funding.  

Billionaires George Soros and Paul Steiger are also financial backers of the slandering website, headquartered in New York City.  On its IRS disclosure form in 2021, the nonprofit listed $35 million in donations. Financials for 2022 show more than $9.9 million came from two undisclosed donors.    

With that background, it is hardly a surprise ProPublica placed a bullseye on Thomas and Alito, revealing the justices accepted private trips with wealthy patrons and had alleged financial entanglements. Their investigation claimed these same patrons had cases before the Supreme Court.

Neither justice recused themselves, the website reported. ProPublica's allegations were amplified across the mainstream media echo chambers. Democrat Senator Dick Durbin said the revelations were cause for possible impeachment of the justices.  

(Parenthetically, members of Congress indulge in the same sort of behavior that ProPublica accused the justices.  They regularly take trips on donors private planes, vote on legislation that donors advocate and own stock in companies with a vested interest in legislation.)

ProPublica's vilification strategy worked until The New York Post broke a story pointing out that Justice Sonia Sotomayor didn't recuse herself from multiple cases involving book publisher Random House and its subsidiaries, which paid her more than $3.6 million for her 2013 memoir. 

Justice Sotomayor's liberal colleague at the time, Justice Stephen Breyer, recused himself from the case.  He also had received money from Penguin Random House.  Whoops.  And just like that--BOOM--the mainstream media's interest in justices' ethics momentarily fizzled.

But the media campaign against the justices is picking up steam again as senate Democrats are plotting an impeachment strategy with an eye toward invigorating their base prior to the presidential election. Courts are certainly fair game for  legitimate criticism of their decisions.  

But the constant drumbeat of belligerent verbal aggression undermines the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and ignites an open hostility to individual justices, threatening their safety.  This behavior regularly happens under authoritarian governments.  It has no place in America's democracy.  

Social Media's Tragic Impact on Teens

Amid years of mounting evidence of the negative impact on teenagers, social media Goliaths continue to peddle their addictive platforms, placing profits ahead of young people's mental health.   Tech firms operate with legal impunity, ignoring the studies documenting the harm caused by social media.

At the outset, let's stipulate that social media also has positive aspects.  Platforms have facilitated communications, enabled social connections and provide access to a myriad of information and perspectives. However, tech giants have failed their responsibility to clean up the content sewage. 

Teen social media usage soars every year, turning casual usage into an addiction. A Pew Research Report shows the top social media platforms used by young people 11-to-17 years old are:  Youtube, 95%; TikTok, 67%, Instagram, 62%;  Snapchat, 59%; Facebook, 32%; and, Twitter, 23%.

A study by Jean Twenge, psychology professor at San Diego State University, discovered that students who spent five or more hours a day online were 71% more likely to have a least one suicide risk factor. Those include depression, thinking about suicide or attempting suicide.  

Research shows that the average young person spends an average of three hours a day on social media.  The study by Twenge found that the overall suicide risk factors rose "significantly after two or more hours a day of time online."  

A 2018 Children's Mental Health Report documented the negative effects of social media on  adolescents, aged 11-to-17.  Thirty-five percent of participants were classed as poor sleepers and 47% were classified as anxious.  Higher levels of anxiety correlated with increased usage.

While social media companies argue there are benefits to their platforms for teenagers, actual research underscores the dark side of social media.  A Common Sense Media survey of social media users found 70% of teens "feel left out or excluded when using social media."  

The evidence is unequivocal.  

It is no coincidence that teen suicides and depression are rocketing higher.  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that suicides in females aged 15-24 have spiraled 87% over the past decade.  Suicides jumped 30% among males in the same age group.

Overall, 22% of high school students in a recent survey said that had seriously considered suicide; 18% admitted they had a suicide plan; and, 10% reported they had attempted suicide at least once.  Female students were at higher risk with 30% claiming they had considered attempting suicide.

Social media apologists will point out there is no direct link between suicide and social media usage.  However, a previously unpublished study from Facebook found Instagram to have harmful effects among a portion of its millions of  users, particularly teen girls.  

Findings indicated that Instagram makes body image issues worse for one in three teen girls. Among teens who reported suicidal thoughts, 6% traced them back to Instagram.  Instagram and Facebook are both owned by Meta.  

Congress has hauled the likes of Meta Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other social media bosses to Washington for hearings. Senators and representatives pound tables, haranguing  the executives. Yet there is never any legislative action to hold social media firms accountable.

Zuckerberg hired an army of lobbyists to influence senators and representatives. Since 2017, Meta has poured $100.6 million dollars into lobbying efforts.  As added protection, Zuckerberg funneled an unprecedented $419 million into non-profits aimed out turning out Democrat voters in 2020.

Other big tech firms have parachuted into Washington, reinforcing their lobbying activities.  That's why no legislation will ever be passed to rein in Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat or TikTok. Spreading money like fertilizer in Washington turns antagonists into allies.  

Who will make the profiteers change their algorithms that feed an addiction that is killing teenagers?

Turns out the parents of teens are the ones fighting back against steep odds.  The number of families pursuing lawsuits against social media titans has soared to more than 2,000.  Another 350 lawsuits are expected to move forward this year, according to reporting by CBS News "60 Minutes."

Kathleen and Jeff Spence, interviewed on the program, recounted a harrowing story of how their 12-year-old daughter sank into depression and developed an eating disorder after opening at Instagram account.  The teen logged on at age 11, although Instagram requires users to be 13.

The daughter searched instagram for fitness routines that sent her into the ugly underbelly of social media.  Her feed was bombarded with photos of very thin, sickly girls promoting eating disorders.Those disturbing images were delivered by Instagram's algorithms, which push content. 

Her life began a downward spiral by 12 when she began spending five hours a day scrolling through anorexic body images.  Her weight dropped and she drew a picture of herself in her diary, surrounded by her laptop while writing:"stupid, fat....kill yourself."

She began struggling with mental health, depression and her body image. "It made me hate myself," she confessed to a "60 Minutes" reporter.  Her sophomore year she posted on Instagram that she didn't deserve to exist. A friend shared her post with a school counselor who called her parents.

Her parents got help for their daughter.  But in some cases plaintiffs lost their child to suicide. The previously noted Facebook internal document reveals employees knew Instagram was pushing girls to dangerous content, the "60 Minutes" investigative reporter revealed.

If Congress won't protect vulnerable teens, then perhaps the lawsuits will finally force social media platforms to reform their algorithms, built to force feed inappropriate content to users. However, the social media platforms have buildings full of attorneys to protect their profits. 

And the parents' cause suffered a blow when the Supreme Court handed social media titans a major victory in a recent decision.  The justices unanimously rejected two cases aimed at piercing the legal shield adopted 27 years ago to protect internet companies from liability lawsuits.  

That leaves the parents' lawsuits against big tech as the last, best and likely only chance to hold social media firms accountable for their actions.  

Backlash Against Corporate Social Activism

Burgeoning numbers of companies are bombarding consumers with social issues in business and product advertising. But one company, Anheuser-Busch InBev, waded too far, triggering a rebellion that has damaged the brand, torpedoed sales and torched millions of dollars in shareholder value.

The Belgian-based firm's Bud Light marketing vice president  unveiled a tribute to Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender "influencer" who was invited to the White House by President Biden. Not only did Bud Light tout Mulvaney's transition, but the ad guru preceded to bash its customer base.

The veep insulted Bud Light's top consumers, calling them too "fratty," an apparent reference to beer swilling males. The marketing veep gushed that attracting transgender males would expand the customer base, boosting sales.  The decision may go down as the greatest marketing blunder ever.

Compared to last year, retail sales of Bud Light nosedived 25% in the week ending May 13,  That surpassed the 23.3% slump in April. Anheuser-Busch InBev shares plunged 5%, leading to a loss of $6 billion in market value.  Several financial analysts downgraded the stock as sales skidded.

Anheuser is in full retreat. The V-P marketing is on leave as is her boss.   Executives are labeling the Mulvaney linkage "just one influencer, one post and not an ad." Bigwigs all the way to the top of the corporate ladder are making like Pontius Pilate, washing their hands of this smelly muck. 

In a retrenchment, A-B is wrapping itself in the flag.  The company is set to launch a line of camouflage aluminum bottles that promotes the "Folds of Honor" program, which provides scholarships for families of fallen and disabled military service members and first responders.  

For good measure, another A-B brand, Budweiser, is planning a launch of limited edition beer cans featuring images inspired by motorcycle manufacturer Harley-Davidson.  The LGBTQ activists are now threatening their own boycott of the firm for backing away from Mulvaney.  

The usual media suspects--NPR, The New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times--are serving up baloney calling out current Bud Light drinkers for being trans-phobic.  The media echo chamber pompously downplays the loss of market share as trivial to discourage product boycotters.

You could surmise the Bud Light kerfuffle might dissuade other consumer firms from embracing social issues.  Never underestimate corporate herd mentality.  Within weeks, Adidas debuted a transgender model posing in a women's bathing suit. There is a noticeable bulge in the crotch area.

The reaction has been swift among women who are increasingly angered by what they view as misogyny.  Transgender males are increasingly usurping female roles. Why deliberately alienate the people who buy your product?  Sound marketing has been scrapped for social issue signaling.

This is clearly not about sales. Transgenders are not a large, lucrative market. A Pew Research poll conducted in May, 2022, found that 0.6% of American adults are transgender. That is not a typo: 0.6%. Including non-binary adults inches the needle to 1.6%.

These firms are appealing to those who embrace the transgender ideology. Many are being cajoled by big investment firms such as BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard. Others are influenced by activist groups whose clout exceeds the number of members.  

In other cases, a corporation's employees  are increasingly goading leadership into supporting a social cause.  When the Florida legislature passed a bill prohibiting teaching sexual orientation and gender identity to elementary children, employees within Disney insisted the firm take a public stance.

Disney management acquiesced and stirred up a political hornet's nest.  An acrimonious war-of-words has ignited an ongoing feud between Disney and the state's Governor Ron DeSantis and the Republican legislature.  In the process, Disney has lost some of its family entertainment sheen.

Corporate political interference is nothing new.  A case in point: The CEO's of Delta Airlines and Coca-Cola, both based in Atlanta, voiced strong opposition a Georgia voting law in 2021, Despite the corporate pressure, the Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed it into law.

Allegations of the law's effort to suppress voting proved to be patently false when Georgians turned out in record numbers to vote in the 2022 midterm elections.  Don't expect Coca-Cola or Delta Airlines to issue a mea culpa.  Corporate cowards never admit they were wrong.

Not too long ago corporate America was assiduously apolitical. Businesses lobbied state legislatures, Washington's politicians and local officials, often outside the public's view.  Corporate advertising was reserved for selling products or buttressing the firm's image with its customers.

The larger the firm today the more likely it will be fronting social and political issues.  CEO's feel insulated because few customers ever complain and boycotts have proven short-lived.  However, the Bud Light episode may serve as a red flag that the tide may be turning, if only slowly.

That would be a refreshing development for our democracy. Unelected corporations today carry as much clout as political parties to advance social and political positions.  Consumers hold the power to vote with their dollars against corporate influence. Now they need to use it.    

Opinion: America's Alarming Surge in Bad Behavior

What has happened to civility?  Fisticuffs erupt on airline flights. Rowdy fans are booted from sporting arenas. Road rage turns violent. Classroom scuffles are no longer rare. Office behavior ruffles workers. Online bullying spirals out of control.  Americans are seemingly seething with anger.

As personal conduct has cratered, the establishment blames our political divisions.  Stop and think.  America's politics are a reflection of its voters.  Not the other way around.  American history its replete with political nastiness.  What's changed is the behavior of its citizens.  

Another convenient scapegoat is the pandemic.  Social scientists claim Americans were cooped up so long that it was inevitable that once we emerged from our masked cocoon we would forget our manners. This theory hardly explains the rudeness that pervades our society.

While we are dismissing excuses, quit faulting the frenetic pace of everyday living.  Give me a break. Americans have never earned more, acquired more, spent more, traveled more, felt more entitled and indulged themselves more.  Somehow we believe that previous generations never faced a lick of stress.  

So let's dispense with any justification for incivility.  There is no legitimate reason for disrespectful, aggressive, harassing behavior.  At this point, you might be thinking, "Oh come on, some people have always acted up."  You're right.  But it has become all too common and too widespread.

When a flight attendant gets two teeth knocked out by a furious passenger, that does not reflect behavior even a decade ago.  The Federal Aviation Administration documents that complaints about airline passenger misbehavior is at an all time high.  And it's not improving. 

Just a few weeks ago, a grown man yelled and threatened flight attendants because a baby was crying.  Who gets enraged by an infant that cannot be soothed to your personal expectations?  An angry individual.  One who feels entitled to a flight cabin devoid of humans or at least little colicky ones.

Fan behavior at indoor and outdoor sporting events is turning uglier every day.  People, almost exclusively men, spit on players, throw water bottle missiles at their heads or dump a beer on an unwary player.  Assault and battery charges are a part of an increasing number of games.

Even company offices have evolved into dens of incivility.  A Harvard study conducted over the past 14 years has documented a steady rise in disrespect.  A total of 98% of workers reported experiencing harassment, rudeness, bullying and crude interactions.  The work culture is toxic.

In a strange dichotomy, a recent survey found 62.3% of workers report they are satisfied with their jobs.  Go figure.

Even neighbors get into ugly fights that escalate into violence. A San Antonio man accidentally dumped tree limbs in a neighbor's yard. A argument ensued and ended with a neighbor being stabbed.  Once neighborhoods were safe harbors.  Now ordinary disagreements detonate conflict.  

By comparison, neighborhoods are less intimidating than schools.  A recent report in Education Week counted more than 200,000 assaults by students against teachers in a two-year period.  In the most recent, a middle schooler cursed and attacked his teacher after she confiscated his cell phone.  

These are not isolated incidences.  Such outbursts have been reported in schools across America.  When youngsters feel emboldened to assault their teachers, there should be unholy outrage.  It is an indictment of parenting and schools.

And college age students are not much better behaved.  Speakers on campuses are hectored, shouted down and cursed for expressing viewpoints they consider offensive to their tender sensibilities. What's mystifying is this behavior is tolerated by administrations, which just invites more outrage.

Some experts link these spike in incivility at schools to the sewage known as social media.  Study after study has for years documented the aggressive, disrespectful behavior and harassment on Facebook, Twitter, TikTok and Instagram.  Youngsters rancor toward others online feeds anger offline.

Road rage has reached epidemic proportions.  The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety released data that 80% of drivers "expressed significant anger, aggression or road rage" at least once during the previous 30 days. Road rages deaths have doubled in the last four years. What's fueling the rage?

Pent up fury is unleashed daily as human beings kill other humans. The media focuses on the instruments of death, failing to consider what roils a person to end the life of another.  More often than not irrational hatred, resentment and revenge motivate the slaughter of innocents, including children.

It is evil by any other name.  Yet society and the media sometimes paint the killers as victims.    

Why doesn't society care more about this simmering violent temperament that percolates the lives of many Americans?  It is a question that goes begging for answers and analysis.  We can't keep blaming mental illness for every killing.  What triggers a "normal" person to murder another?  

The root cause for these madness is elusive and complex.  There is no simple answer.  But one thing is certain, there is no longer a fear of punishment.  Young people and adults appear to be oblivious to the consequences of their actions.  The perpetrators act first without regard for the ramifications.

We live in an era when shared values are tearing asunder.  Society preaches personal values with no norm.  Individualism trumps common societal behavioral expectations. Another person's values are of no concern to an increasing number of Americans. They consider their values more righteous.  

Likewise, society renounces morality as a personal compass.  Our secular world rejects moral guideposts because it suggests a religion or a God controls our lives.  In fact, it is considered immoral to impose any morals on anyone. We each decide for ourselves what is moral and what is not.

Whatever your view on causes, we cannot ignore the alarm bells that our society is descending into chaos.  America can no longer dismiss worsening civility as some phase that will pass.  We need a national conversation about the breakdown of civility.  It it has to start with us. 

Biden's Plan To Takeover Auto Industry

In one breathtaking regulatory fiat, the Biden Administration revealed its plan to seize control of the nation's automobile industry. General Motors and Ford will no longer be free to sell cars and trucks consumers want.  The government will compel the auto firms to manufacture and sell electric vehicles. 

The industry takeover is disguised as new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission standards for automobiles and trucks.  The proposal authored by unelected bureaucrats would effectively force automakers to increase their sales of electric vehicles, while eliminating gasoline powered models.

Under the EPA directive, the agency anticipates that the emission standards will result in two-thirds of the vehicles sold in the U.S. to be electric by the 2032 model year.  The federal bureaucrats forecast the stringent standards will mean 46% of medium duty trucks would be electric.

The EPA directive, styled after California's punitive edict, stops shorts of outlawing gas-powered vehicle sales.  California's policy bans gasoline trucks and cars sales in the state by 2035.  The Draconian measure will lead to higher prices for electric vehicles and fewer consumer choices.  

Agency administrator Michael Regan bragged his proposal exceeds the administration's own 50%EV  target by 2030.  Environmentalists cheered the ambitious target but others warned the goal is unrealistically achievable.  Electric cars represented less than 6% of the total new vehicle sales in 2022. 

In nine years, the $1.53 trillion automotive industry will have to retool manufacturing and supply chains while building an ecosystem that doesn't exist at scale today.  But Washington's desk jockeys likely have never set foot in an automobile manufacturing plant.  They don't see any flaw in their scheme.

Office bureaucrats are impatient with the free market auto industry. Although the transition to electric vehicles is moving relatively fast, they believe auto makers are making too many gas models to satisfy customers.  Consumers are just too dumb to embrace electric, the bureaucrats surmise.

The feds are growing restless after offering generous tax credits for years to seduce customers into scrapping their gas vehicles for electric cars.  Taxpayers are footing the bill for this benevolence, which currently includes subsidies ranging from $2,500 to $7,500 depending on the electric model. 

The average cost of an EV in 2022 was $61,448 compared to $49,507 for a gasoline powered vehicle, according to GreenCars, an EV industry source.  The cost disparity would have been even more if Tesla had not lowered some prices by up to 24% last year.  Price remains a barrier to wide adoption

Administration officials claim there are 3 million EV's on the roads today, but data indicates the number is closer to 2 million.  In addition, there are currently 6.8 million hybrid (gas and electric) vehicles. EV's are a tiny number of the nation's 284 million vehicles. The average age of a vehicle is 12 years.

If the EPA successfully reaches its electrification sales goals, it will create a challenge for the nation's already stressed power grid. Experts believe a complete transition to electric vehicle will require as much as 1.25 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity each year. It means increasing grid capacity by 30%.

Not to worry claim the green car crowd.  The government will issue rules on what day and at what time you can charge your shiny EV. This will ease the strain on the grid while ending the pretense of freedom of choice for consumers.  This should concern even New Green Deal activists.

The Biden electric revolution is a gift to China. The Communist nation has cornered the market on most of the rare minerals required to make electric car batteries.  The key minerals include copper, graphite, nickel, cobalt, manganese and lithium.  China has built a global dynasty of battery metals.

The World Bank estimates supplies of these key metals would need to increase by 500% by 2050 to meet the global electric vehicle forecasts.  That works out to 3 billion tons of these rare metals.  Mining those metals creates an environmental nightmare that Biden's troops never talk about.  

China already accounts for nearly 75% of global EV battery production.  Tesla will manufacture 40% to 50% of its cars in China this year, according industry sources. Ford announced earlier this year that it would collaborate with a Chinese supplier on building a $4.5 billion electric battery plan in Michigan.

It is beyond ironic that China, the world's top emitter of greenhouse gases, will reap the most benefit from the administration's top-down management of the electric vehicle industry.  Let that sink in.  

As if those obstacles are not steep enough, consider millions of electric vehicles traveling America with a sparse network of charging stations to provide juice for the batteries. Tesla years ago began building its own charging network with its own money.  How quaint--a private sector initiative.

Now the federal government has appropriated $7.5 billion of your tax dollars to build out a national network of EV chargers.  Democrats are already clamoring for $85 billion more. It will take more than several decades to match the ubiquity of gasoline stations on highways and roads in America.

The media echo chamber, led by The New York Times and The Washington Post, are in full throated support mode.  The media giants are publishing articles assuring skeptics that solutions will be found to solve the electric grid, rare mineral scarcity, charging stations and dependence on China.

Never bet against American ingenuity to create technological solutions to solve conundrums. But it will require years of research and development.  There are no magic bullets or shortcuts. Mandating electric cars before these issues can be solved is a recipe for an epic boondoggle.  

But if you say it out loud the New Green Deal activists will accuse you of denying climate science and wanting to end life as we know it on planet Earth.  Government has never been better than private industry at producing anything.  Which is why the Biden prescription needs a dose of reality.   

Trump Indictment: Justice Is Partisan Not Blind

Christmas came early for Democrats with the indictment of former President Donald Trump.  The party's irrational obsession with jailing Trump knows no legal or ethical bounds.  Proof is the feeble case cobbled together by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

Most honest legal scholars, liberal pundits and even the left's media darling The New York Times have labeled the case flimsy.  Bragg, who campaigned on prosecuting Trump, fashioned his case on a dubious legal theory. The indictment is littered with prosecutorial holes  and sidesteps the statute of limitations.

Bragg, who owes his election to George Soros, let the case against Trump lay fallow for nearly 18 months before unveiling the 34-count felony indictment. Bragg burnished his Democratic Party political credentials with the first ever criminal prosecution of a former president in the 245-year U.S. history. 

The news media salivated at the prospect of a Trump mug shot.  But they were disappointed after the former president appeared in a Manhattan court to plead not guilty to falsification of business records without ever being photographed in an orange jumpsuit.  

Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney, who twice voted to impeach Trump, awkwardly sided with his nemesis. "The prosecutor's overreaction sets a dangerous precedent for criminalizing political opponents and damages the public's faith in our justice system." You have to work hard to make Trump a martyr.

UCLA campaign finance law expert Richard Hasen was quoted in Politico as writing: "In this vein, it is very easy to see this case tossed for legal insufficiency or tied up in courts well past the 2024 election before it might go to trial."

Bragg's prosecution is strictly political. His predecessor, Cyrus Vance, Jr., reviewed Trump's alleged hush-money payments and opted not to indict.  The prosector for the Southern District of New York chose not to pursue the case in 2019.  The Federal Election Commission reviewed the allegations in 2021 and did not take action.

A member of the Manhattan DA office resigned in February, 2022, after Bragg refused to charge Trump with financial crimes.  The attorney, Mark Pomerantz, was championing the investigation into the former president.  Bragg deemed the facts did not support an indictment.

Six years have passed since the underlying conduct alleged in the indictment, exceeding the statute of limitations. More puzzling is how Bragg elevated the "falsification of business records" charges into felonies, a move that required evidence Trump attempted to conceal a second crime. 

Bragg left the question of the second crime dangling without explanation. He  refused to offer specifics.  Instead he promised reporters to reveal "more evidence made available to the office and the opportunity to meet with additional witnesses."   In other words, he has nothing.   

So what changed Bragg's mind about prosecution?  The view here is Bragg was pressured by Democrats to file charges.  The timing of the indictment is suspect.  With the presidential campaign drawing closer, Biden's handlers have made it clear they are frothing over a rematch against Trump.

What better way to hamstring Trump than the public spectacle of an indictment?  The former president already faces the prospect of a host of legal problems.  But those may take months or longer to reach fruition.  Democrat political calculations favored a Bragg action, far removed from Washington.

The Department of Justice is investigating Trump's handling of secret documents. But a DOJ indictment would have smacked of partisanship. Better to have an administration outsider deliver the judicial coup. This charade smacks of a banana-republic style political vendetta.    

Most Americans had never heard of Alvin Bragg until his bombshell indictment.  He was elected Manhattan DA in 2021, riding to victory by outspending his opponents.  Billionaire Soros funneled at least $500,000 to one Bragg's political action committee and donated $1 million for voter turnout. 

Bragg is just one of a bevy of Soros district attorney serfs financed by the Hungarian-born businessman.   Soros has backed candidates who coddle criminals in the name of judicial system reform. It's no coincidence that Soros also was a mega donor to the Biden presidential campaign. 

Bragg has earned the moniker of a soft on crime district attorney. The data backs up that sobriquet. Bragg in 2022 downgraded 52% of the felony cases to misdemeanor, compared to his predecessor's rate of 39%. Even the cases Bragg prosecutes end in not guilty verdicts.

Records show that his office's conviction rate is 17%.  There have been high profile instances of repeat offenders committing felonies after Bragg granted bail. No wonder crime is soaring in Manhattan this year. Crime rates are up 38% in Manhattan South and 17% in Manhattan North. 

Bragg bellowed no one is above the law in justifying the Tump indictment.  In Bragg's Manhattan, some convicted felons receive better treatment than a former president. 

The non-stop, one-sided coverage of the indictment is succor for Democrats.  But using a Manhattan DA as a Trump foil may backfire. Republicans also can find friendly district attorneys willing to bring indictments against Hunter Biden, for instance.

Politically motivated prosecutions of campaign opponents by either party is a bad idea. Anyone who claims to want to preserve democracy should be the first to condemn Bragg's prosecutorial hijinks.   

An Anatomy of a Banking Crisis

The abrupt collapse of the nation's 16th largest bank sent shudders throughout the industry.  Fears escalated after the crisis spread to other institutions, raising the specter of a banking contagion.  The instability is raising questions about the safety and liquidity of all banks, both in the U.S. and overseas.

The chain reaction began after Silicon Valley Bank received a visit from Moody's Investors Service on March 2.   Moody's team informed the bank it was considering downgrading the bank's rating.  SVB moved quickly, announcing it was raising $1.75 billion in capital on March 8.

The news sent the bank's stock in a tailspin as investors worried about the institution's solvency. Panicked customers began withdrawing deposits at lightning speed. In a last ditch effort to save the bank, executives sold $21 billion worth of long-term securities at steep discounts.

Less than two weeks before the looming failure, SVB executives sold millions of dollars in company stock, according to filings. Chief Executive Officer Greg Becker unloaded $3.5 million in SVB stock.  He wasn't the only top brass to act. Chief Financial Officer Daniel Beck dumped $575,180 in shares.

Insiders knew the bank was doomed. Likely, bank chatter leaked to major depositors who spurred the run.  On a single day, March 9, clients withdrew $42 billion in deposits.  When SVB ran out of funds, regulators stepped in and shuttered the 40-year old bank, making it the largest bank failure since the 2008 financial upheaval.    

Silicon Valley, a darling of the tech start-ups, catered to venture capitalists, entrepreneurs and the wealthy. Newly minted businesses looking for investors ran into the welcoming arms of SVB bankers. The bank featured a blue-ribbon board, many with political connections to Democrats.

Unlike traditional commercial banks, nearly 95% of SVB clients had deposits of more than the $250,000 limit guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).  The bank's dependence on outsized, uninsured deposits meant a turbulent run would put the institution in jeopardy faster than most banks. 

After regulators assumed control of the bank, it became clear mismanagement wrecked the institution.  Executives stowed deposits in long-term assets, including U.S, Treasury notes and bonds.  Asset values plummeted as interest rates rose. The sinking values created a classic asset-liability mismatch.

Bank executives failed to hedge the risks inherent in their low yielding asset holdings.  This would have given the bank some protection on its bond portfolio.  But the bank's chief risk officer, who presided over the bond-buying spree, left in 2022 with a $7.1 million severance package, according to SEC filings.

For eight months, the bank operated without a risk officer, whose responsibility includes analyzing the institution's exposure to portfolio risks and assessing the bank's ability to weather adverse scenarios. As current market value of the bank's bond portfolio dipped, executives should have acted quicker to bolster capital. 

The FDIC swooped in and announced it would guarantee clients deposits, including those that exceded the government insured $250,000 limit.  This was good news for large tech clients, such as Etsy, Rocket Labs and Roku.  However, bailing out uninsured deposits set a worrisome precedent. 

Following the SVB demise, Signature Bank in New York crumbled. At the time, the FDIC had a total of $128 billion in its insurance fund. Those reserves could not accommodate many more bank hiccups.  

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen hoped the bailout of depositors at both institutions would stem the banking turbulence. She stepped into the breach, assuring the country the banking system was safe.  Yellen appeared to signal the FDIC would continue to bailout uninsured deposits before later hedging.    

As bank stocks and the overall markets nosedived, President Biden tried to soothe the public's growing fears about banks. Then Silvergate Bank, a crypto friendly institution, succumbed.  Panic soon ensnared regional banks, including First Republic Bank.  Eight banking behemoths, led by JP Morgan Chase, shipped $30 billion in cash to avoid a liquidity catastrophe at First Republic. 

Republic's upheaval triggered anxiety among customers of regional and community banks. Federal Reserve data shows that deposits at small banks--defined as those smaller than the biggest 25--dropped $119 billion. Meanwhile, deposits at large institutions soared $67 billion in the week ended March 15.  

Fleeing clients forced Charles Schwab, which operates the nation's tenth largest bank, to reassure its client base.  The move was critical after Schwab  disclosed it had $11 billion in unrealized losses on its bond portfolio. It was a sign that size no longer matters when 20% of your customers yank deposits. 

Frantic bank customers plowed $5.4 trillion in deposits into money-market mutual funds, the fastest pace since the start of the pandemic.  As deposits dwindled at a rapid clip, a stampede of banks borrowed an average of $117 billion each day for a week from the Federal Reserve's discount window. 

When the crisis spread overseas to 167-year-old Credit Suisse Bank, Switzerland, and Germany's largest bank, Duetch Bank, it heightened concerns of a full-blown global banking pandemic.  Reassurances are being drowned out by the realities of banks failure to adjust for portfolio risks.

Jittery Americans with bank deposits began to wonder aloud: "Could this contamination spread to my bank?"

"No bank is immune from a deposit run.  I can say that unequivocally," says Howard Manning, a former Federal Reserve bank examiner whose career in the banking industry spans five decades.  "Banks cannot turn illiquid assets fast enough regardless of size.  We're going to see more turmoil."

Some in Congress, most notably Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, are blaming the bank debacle on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, who has overseen a regime of steady interest rate hikes.  Manning calls the senator's criticism disingenuous, since Warren voted for trillions in federal spending, fueling runaway inflation,

"The Fed signaled in 2022 that it would have to begin raising interest rates," Manning reminds. "From that point onward, banks and financial institutions should have been hedging their long term assets.  Bankers should have written down the value of bonds as interest rates rose.  It was total mismanagement."

Whether you agree with the pace and timing of Powell's interest rate hikes, the Fed can hardly be blamed for addressing blazing inflation. Trillions of dollars in federal spending forced the Fed's hand. All that money sloshing around the economy triggered too many dollars chasing too few goods.

The fallout of the banking plague will hit every American.  With FDIC reserves dwindling, banks will be on the hook for higher insurance premiums.  Institutions will pass along those costs in the form of increased fees to customers. You will be paying for the bailouts, irregardless of the claims to the contrary by Yellen and Biden.

Americans, especially small businesses and entrepreneurs, will find it more difficult to secure bank loans on favorable terms.  Banks inevitably will implement more stringent lending standards to protect capital.  The result will be a slowing of an already wobbly economy.

Management mistakes usually are the culprit when financial institutions go belly up. Blaming the Federal Reserve is a cop out. Bank examiners, especially those at the San Francisco Fed, also are accountable for not raising alarms sooner.  But the financial system is showing some cracks.    

Biden's Bloated Budget and Massive Tax Grab

• Biden's fiscal 2024 budget will increase deficits and hike the national debt
• His tax proposals for business will result in offshoring of operations
• The president's plan targets energy production which will drive up prices
• The tax scheme includes a dubious effort to tax phantom income 

The most shameless political gimmick is to shriek: "Tax the rich!" Pandering politicians know few Americans will argue with the logic. Taxpayers dream soaking the wealthy will lower their own taxes. It never does. Still bashing billionaires is a sure-fire re-election gambit.

President Biden recently unveiled his massive $4.7 trillion tax plan with an eye toward his 2024 campaign. His complex proposals are designed to roll back President Donald Trump's tax cuts while daring Republicans to oppose a tax blood-letting of big businesses and billionaires

The president's strategists are counting on Americans tax illiteracy. The top one percent of America's wealthiest earners paid 42.3% of all federal income taxes, according to the most recent data.  The top 50% paid 97.7% of federal individual income taxes.  The bottom half paid 2.3%. Facts matter. 

Despite Biden's rhetoric, America's most prosperous are paying their fair share.  It is disingenuous and not factual to claim otherwise.  If the president was honest with Americans, he would simply admit his   massive tax hikes are needed to fund his deficit-busting $6.5 trillion federal budget for fiscal year 2024. 

Biden's claims his budget will cut deficits is a sham. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects deficits will average $2 trillion per year from 2024 to 2033. Since his first budget, Biden's spending will increase the nation's public debt to $50.7 trillion by 2033, nearly 106.3% of GDP.

Under the Biden tax plan, American businesses and high-earners would pay among the highest taxes in the developed world.  Although the president tosses word salads about going after those filthy rich billionaires, his tax increases are aimed at Americans earning $400,000 and up.   

The non-profit, independent Tax Foundation weighed the impact of the proposals against tax rates of member countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. The comparisons underscore the titanic nature of Biden's tax regime. 

America's corporate marginal rate on corporate income would increase from 25.7% to 32.2%. The OECD average, excluding the U.S. is 22.8%.  The combined integrated rate on corporate income would climb from 47.3% to 66.9%, compared to the OECD average of 41.%.

This means U.S. firms will be at a competitive disadvantage with companies in other countries.  As past history shows, American corporations will be incentivized to move operations offshore where taxes are lower.  The result will be job losses in the U.S. at a time when companies are already cutting payrolls.

The plan raises the current top marginal rate on individual income to 45.4%, compared to the OECD average of 42.6%.  Many households earning $400,000 and over will face top tax rates of 50% when the federal rate is combined with state income taxes. 

The marginal tax rate is the amount of additional tax paid for every additional dollar of income. As an example, a 10% marginal rate means that 10 cents of every additional dollar earned is confiscated by the government.  An average tax rate is the total tax paid divided by the total income earned.  

The Biden tax scheme includes nearly doubling the tax on capital gains income from 29.1% to 49.8%.    Americans who sells stocks, bonds, real estate or other investments will have to give Uncle Sam almost one-half of any gains.  That will discourage individual investments in stocks. 

Perhaps, the most odious part of the Biden blueprint is a tax on phantom income.  This contrivance calls for taxing unrealized capital gains with a 25% minimum tax.  What this means is that if you hold investments that have increased in value, that amount will be taxed even though you haven't sold any.

Biden's daft plan also punishes the oil, gas and coal production sectors with $100 billion in tax increases. For example, his deal with the tax Devil includes repeal of expensing tangible drilling costs for labor, equipment, surveys and other items.

Those are just the highlights.  There are a myriad of other taxes aimed at businesses, the economic engine of the American economy.  Higher taxes on business are always paid by the corporation's customers through higher prices on products and services. 

The gross (pardon the pun) total of all those tax increases is $4.7 trillion.  That is the largest tax hike in history in terms of dollars.  Media fact-checkers are trying their best to cover up for Biden by claiming it is not the largest if you compare the new taxes as a percentage of GDP.  

However, even if you accept the fact-checkers skewed logic, the only plan that ranks higher as a percentage of GDP is the Revenue Act of 1942.  Those taxes were needed to pay for the military buildup after the U.S. declared war on Japan and Germany.  That makes the comparison unreasonable.

If President Biden is serious about tax fairness, he should offer a plan to simplify taxes. His reform does the opposite. Even worse, the tax hikes on businesses will cripple economic growth, encourage U.S firms to ship jobs overseas, raise energy prices and burden consumers with even higher prices.

The president's political budget and tax stunt deserve an ignominious burial in the halls of Congress.  Then serious work can begin on a bipartisan fiscal budget that maintains tax equity, reduces deficits and supports a prosperous economy for all Americans.