If you're the kind of McDonald's fan who likes their Big Macs extra big‚ take heart. The fast-food giant is bringing back the Double Big Mac for a limited time.

Grocery chain Harris Teeter was known for its bakery section's free cookies‚ but the pandemic changed that. Now‚ the treats are back‚ and shoppers are ready.

Almond milk and oat milk are popular alternatives for dairy milk when it comes to coffee but which of those is the absolute best for getting a frothy texture?

Exit Eden has released “Femme Fatale” the third single from “Femme Fatales‚” the band’s sophomore album‚ that will arrive January 12th. The set mixes originals and covers. The song “Femmes Fatale‚” was composed by the band’s Anna Brunner along with Hannes Braun. “Femmes Fatales” Track Listing: 01. Femme Fatale02. It’s A Sin (Pet Shop Boys cover)03. Run! (featuring Marko Hietala)04. Separate Ways (Journey cover)05. Buried In The Past06. Désenchantée (Mylene Farmer cover)07. Dying In My Dreams08. Poison (Alice Cooper cover)09. Alone (Heart cover)10. Hold Back Your Fear11. Kayleigh (Marilion cover)12. Elysium Exit Eden: Clémentine Delauney  Anna Brunner  Marina La Torraca  All three are vocalists. Exit Eden was a quartet until Amanda Somerville left last October to spend more time with her family. The post Exit Eden Present “Femme Fatale” appeared first on RockinTown.

With addition vocalist Jeff Scott Soto (ex-Journey) and bassist Tony Dickinson‚ Art Of Anarchy will release their third studio album‚ “Let There Be Anarchy“ on February 16th. Art Of Anarchy also includes founding members Jon Votta (guitar)‚ Ron “Bumblefoot” Thal (ex-Guns N’ Roses) and Vince Votta (drums). The band’s original vocalist‚ Scott Weiland (Stone Temple Pilots) was the subject of a lawsuit filed for calling the band a “scam” and not going on tour. Weiland counter-sued accusing Art Of Anarchy and its agents of unlawfully using his name and image to promote the band. When Weiland died in ’15 legal proceedings halted. Then Creed vocalist Scott Stapp signed on. But he too was ensnarled in legal action with claims he failed to live up to his contract‚ citing that he had not performed with the band in scheduled concerts/tours preferring to focus on his solo career. His two-year run ended in ’18. Bassist John Moyer left in ’22. Tour Dates: Mar. 22 – The Vault – Saginaw MIMar. 23 – Arcada Theater – St. Charles ILMar. 24 – Shank Hall – Milwaukee WIMar. 27 – The Token Lounge – Westland MIMar. 30 – Debonair Music Hall – Teaneck NJMar. 31 – Sellersville Theater – Sellersville PA “This is not yet the ‘tour’‚ just more a chance for us to dip our toes in the water before we commence further with more dates‚” said Soto. The post The Anarchy Of The Art Of Anarchy appeared first on RockinTown.

Liberal media outlet smears conservative concerns about massive sex trafficking industry and defends Clinton involvement with Epstein. Liberal publication Politico accused conservatives of being “obsessed” with “conspiracy theories” surrounding pedophile Jeffrey Epstein‚ the Clintons‚ and child trafficking. Politico published an article Tuesday downplaying details of Epstein’s trafficking enterprise titled‚ “Pizzagate‚ QAnon and the ‘Epstein List’: Why the Far Right Is Obsessed with Sex Trafficking.” The article began by accusing conservatives of misunderstanding the latest court documents from Epstein’s accusers detailing his years-long trafficking racket and individuals who may have been involved. From Pizzagate to QAnon and now the “Epstein list‚” an expert explains why sex trafficking conspiracy theories are so buzzy in MAGA circles👇 https://t.co/EtCm3FI0rM pic.twitter.com/xzD1WiJLVi— POLITICO (@politico) January 9‚ 2024 A day before the so-called Epstein list was supposed to drop‚ far-right conspiracy theorists buzzed with excitement over the expectation that it would crucify prominent figures on the left for their involvement in sex trafficking. It’s a wildly popular notion in that world‚ where Pizzagate and QAnon fantasies run rampant.Save 40% on DNA Force Plus NOW! Try it today and see why so many listeners have made it an essential part of their daily routine!The truth‚ of course‚ was far different: The material made public in federal court last week‚ with more now being released‚ wasn’t some kind of Jeffrey Epstein client list‚ as had been speculated online. It was actually documents from a court case filed by one of Epstein’s victims that did include people’s names‚ but provided little new information on whether they knew of or participated in Epstein’s heinous crimes. Author Mike Rothschild acknowledged in the piece that although Epstein himself was indeed involved in sex trafficking‚ that doesn’t mean that people he surrounded himself with — which included the Clintons — were also involved. Of course‚ most of the people who were associated with Epstein had nothing to do with what he was doing. Some of them may have known about it‚ some of them may have looked the other way. And they certainly have a lot of hard questions to answer about their associations with Epstein and what they knew. But just because a person had a meeting with Jeffrey Epstein doesn’t make them part of sex trafficking rings. But it’s very easy to point at all of these people and say‚ ‘They’re all working together. They’re all hiding the same things. They’re all doing the same horrible things. And we’re the only people who will talk about it.’ Rothschild went on to claim that decades of Republican efforts to “bring down” the Clintons are the reason they’re tied in with Epstein and child trafficking “conspiracy theories.” “I think it really ties back to this industry of conspiracy theories about the Clintons. I think they really feel like this will be the thing that brings down Bill and Hillary Clinton. They’re still obsessed with the Clintons‚” he said. “The Clinton conspiracy industry started in the early 90s. It started with stuff like Whitewater‚ Travelgate‚ stuff that is ancient history now‚” he continued. “But there was a really well-funded‚ very organized and popular effort to bring the Clintons down. And then of course‚ it resulted in the impeachment‚ it resulted in the dump truck full of conspiracies about Hillary Clinton when she ran for president.” “And even though they’re not really in the public eye much anymore‚ it’s so prolific that conspiracy theorists have stuck with them because they know what works. They’re just like a classic rock band playing the hits‚” Rothschild said‚ adding the Epstein files wouldn’t have received nearly as much attention if the Clintons “weren’t involved.” Rothschild also accused prominent conservative figures like Infowars founder Alex Jones and former White House strategist Steve Bannon of perpetuating “misinformation” about Epstein and child trafficking. Twitter and people like Alex Jones and people like Steve Bannon‚ they have an alternative media ecosystem. These are not fringe people anymore. This is not the guy standing outside the football stadium waving a sign about the end is coming. This is a massive industry. You’ve got billions of dollars being pumped into misinformation‚ into these products‚ into these podcasts‚ into these books. It’s a job for a lot of these people‚ and they’re very good at it. They spread this stuff very quickly. They know it doesn’t matter whether it’s real or not‚ their audience doesn’t care. The reality is suspicions about Clinton involvement in child trafficking originated earlier than Epstein or the bizarre WikiLeaks “Podesta Emails” that were leaked in 2016. The following events are documented fact. Hillary and Bill Clinton in 2010 provided assistance to convicted child trafficker‚ Laura Silsby‚ which resulted in a reduced sentence for child trafficking. Silsby‚ founder of New Life Children’s Refuge charity‚ and other members of the group had been caught trying to smuggle 33 Haitian children out of the country without documentation. Silsby’s lawyer Jorge Puello was later arrested in connection with an international smuggling ring accused of trafficking women and minors from Central America and Haiti. Hillary Clinton consulted with Counselor Cheryl Mills and other attorneys in an email discussing the U.S. government’s “options” regarding the arrested Americans. Hillary Clinton emails had mentioned Silsby’s NGO many times in the years prior. But there are also very specific links between the Clintons and Epstein. First‚ flight logs reveal Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s “Lolita Express” at least 26 times. Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre also testified that she saw Clinton numerous times on Epstein’s island in the Virgin Islands‚ and a former White House intern for Clinton corroborated that claim. A painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress was found in Epstein’s Manhattan residence during an FBI raid in 2019. And Epstein’s accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell — who is currently serving 20 years in federal prison for her role in Epstein’s trafficking ring — even attended Chelsea Clinton’s wedding in 2010. These are compelling data points that certainly bolster reasonable suspicions about the Clintons. But rather than probe into Epstein’s trafficking enterprise‚ his ties to powerful individuals‚ and why sex trafficking has ballooned into a $150 billion industry‚ Politico is more intent on smearing conservatives as whackos pushing “conspiracy theories” and running interference for anybody who was associated with Epstein. Blue Anon is now spreading the unfounded conspiracy theory that Epstein himself is a conspiracy theory? Kind of sketchy!— Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 10‚ 2024 Wait theyre baddies cuz they oppose child trafficking ?— Taylor Day (@TABYTCHI) January 9‚ 2024 how is it a "conspiracy theory"?? People were literally travelling to Epstein island to rape young girls. That's FACT.— Scott Stringle (@scott_stringle) January 9‚ 2024 Is it because they keep turning out to be true— HowlingMutant (@Howlingmutant0) January 9‚ 2024 The Left/MSM’s response to the Epstein docs has been telling.They are not outraged that high-profile politicians raped child sex slaves…They are only outraged that people are pointing it out… We knew it was coming‚ yet their shamelessness still boggles my mind. EVIL… pic.twitter.com/SreAw6TUPH— Clandestine (@WarClandestine) January 10‚ 2024 Follow Jamie White on X | Truth | Gab | Gettr | Minds

Mises here is concluding open borders work in some context but not in others. At the same time‚ Mises did not deny that open borders are always preferable when arguing as an economist. In the debate over immigration among laissez-faire liberals and libertarians‚ one aspect of the open-borders side becomes quickly apparent: the debate generally ignores problems related to geopolitics such as international conflict‚ ethnic strife‚ and expansionist states. Rather‚ the libertarian advocates of open borders tend to focus overwhelmingly on why rich countries should open their borders to migrants from lower-income countries. These open-border arguments generally stick to listing the practical benefits of immigration in terms of domestic economic factors like productivity and per capita GDP. It is assumed that open borders will necessarily lead to a rising standard of living for the residents of the host country. Yet‚ we rarely see these open-border arguments convincingly applied to contexts outside the developed world.  One example of this is Bryan Caplan’s book The Case for Open Borders‚ which might as well be called The Case for Open Borders for Wealthy Countries. The reader will find very little in this book about the global geopolitical aspects of immigration. Similarly‚ the CATO Institute’s summary of the general case for open borders makes no mention at all of the potential problems migration poses to territorial ethnic minorities‚ small states‚ or targets of larger expansionist states. Only slightly more nuanced is an article by Christopher Freiman and Javier Hidalgo titled “Only libertarianism can provide a robust justification for open borders.” Yet‚ even here‚ the authors quickly dismiss as an “extreme case” the concern that large-scale migration could overwhelm and subjugate the local host population.  Instead‚ the open-borders advocates quickly retreat to familiar and domestic territory‚ discussing only the economic effects on immigration on first-world social benefits programs and employment. This amounts to a lot of dismissive hand-waving about the relationship between migration and geopolitics. It suggests open-borders advocates have little to say beyond immigration policy in a narrow sliver of the developed world. The economic arguments also assume a static political situation. But‚ as we will see‚ large scale migration changes political institutions substantially.  Consider some of the issues that crop up once we look beyond North America and western Europe. Small countries next to large countries face sizable existential challenges related to migration. Demographic asymmetries among bordering countries of different sizes means that in many times and places open borders between two states can lead to the end of majority status for a regional or national population in the smaller country. This in itself is not a problem in strictly economic terms. In the real world‚ however‚ experience suggests a loss of majority status within a political system also brings a loss of rights and prerogatives such as self-rule‚ self-determination‚ and private property protections. This is especially the case in Europe‚ Asia‚ and Africa where divisions among religious‚ ethnic‚ and language groups are often pronounced.  Thus‚ a large demographic change brought about by migration is not politically neutral‚ and we cannot assume “ceteris paribus” in the economy as migration occurs. Rather‚ as former majorities are reduced to minority status‚ it cannot be assumed that those in the former majority will share in the bounty that‚ ceteris paribus‚ more foreign workers would have produced. The arguments of open-borders advocates may indeed be applicable in some corners of the developed world. But when it comes to the geopolitical effects of migration‚ it’s one thing to be the United States‚ which contains one of the world’s largest native-born populations and shares a land border with two countries. Things are quite different in Botswana and Lithuania and Vietnam. Introducing Next Level Foundational Energy from Dr. Jones Naturals starting at 30% off! This cutting-edge dietary supplement is designed to elevate your energy levels and support your overall well-being. The Big Country/Small Country Problem  Most of the open-border discussion is framed within the context of wealthy countries opening up their borders to migrants from poorer countries. Moreover‚ many of these wealthy countries in question—i.e.‚ the United States‚ Canada‚ the United Kingdom‚ and Sweden—do not border any low-income countries with larger populations. These factors in themselves help to significantly limit migration into these states.   These mitigating factors are not universal‚ however. In contrast‚ we can find many cases in which a small higher-income country is next to a much larger lower-income country. Open borders would present an entirely different challenge in these countries than they would in‚ say‚ Canada. For example‚ Latvia has a GDP per capita of $21‚267 and is adjacent to Russia with a GDP per capita of $12‚259. Latvia’s resident population is 1.8 million‚ and it is estimated nearly nine percent of these residents are non-citizens. Meanwhile‚ Russia’s population is 144 million.  Now‚ let’s suppose that Latvia implements an open-border policy. In this scheme‚ anyone who wants to reside in Latvia may do so. Since Latvia has a much higher standard of living than Russia‚ we can assume that many Russians would be open to resettlement. (We can even assume a minimal border control that refuses passage to known criminals.) In this scenario‚ however‚  Latvia opens itself up some big geopolitical risks with open borders. For example‚ less than 1.5 percent of Russia’s population would need to emigrate to Latvia for ethnic Russians to outnumber Latvians. This would be a sizable undertaking in the short term‚ but spread out over over a dozen years or so it is far from impossible. It is especially feasible if the migrants are subsidized by the Russian state and essentially “paid to leave.”  To say that this would be politically destabilizing for Latvians would be an understatement. It would quickly change the geopolitical situation between Latvia‚ the EU‚ and Russia. It would also subject Latvia’s political institutions to a potentially hostile ethnic Russian population. Many within the new majority may have little concern for protecting the property rights of ethnic Latvians—especially given the long history of hostility between the two countries.  In cases like these‚ the ethnic group that finds itself relegated to minority status would soon face a far more uncertain future. Even if open borders somehow produced a higher per capita GDP within the borders of Latvia‚ new political realities make it less likely that Latvians will enjoy these gains into the longer term.  We can see similar problems with demographic asymmetry in other parts of the globe. We might ask if high-income South Korea should have an open border with medium-income China. South Korea’s current population is 52 million‚ one-sixteenth the size of China. China would hardly have to empty itself to make an ethnic Chinese migrant population an influential and powerful minority within Korea.  Not Just Rich Countries Nor does a country need to be wealthy to face similar situations. A country need only be wealthier than its neighbors. Botswana‚ for example‚ is a low-mid-income country with a population of only 2.6 million. It is nevertheless one of the wealthiest nations in sub-Saharan Africa. Foreign immigration is a perennial concern there. Botswana shares a border with Zimbabwe‚ an impoverished and unstable country to the northeast. Would Botswanans benefit from opening the border to 16 million desperately poor Zimbabweans right next door? Possibly. But experience strongly suggests many Botswanans‚ should they be subject to a new Zimbabwean majority‚ would be risking their property rights and human rights in the process.  Nor does this demographic situation depend on the destination country being higher-income than the country sending the migrants. The situation becomes even more complex in areas where two adjacent countries are experiencing growing levels of international conflict. We might point to Ukraine‚ for example‚ where the per capita GDP is only a fraction of Russia’s. Had Ukraine adopted an open-border policy in the decades leading up to the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine war in 2014‚ the situation could have been quite different. The Russian regime could have subsidized new migrants to Crimea strengthening the Russian ethnic majority there. This‚ of course‚ would also have the benefit—from Moscow’s perspective—or shoring up de facto Russian control in the region. Meanwhile‚ Russian nationalists could have taken advantage of Ukraine’s open border by entering the Donbas region in the pre-war period‚ strengthening local resistance to the Kiev regime while paving the way for future Russian annexation in the east. This does not require “invasion”—as many anti-immigration activists are fond of describing any large migrant flow. Under an open-borders regime‚ ethnic Russians would be free to move to Ukraine as peaceful workers and residents. When the situation turns more hostile—as it did in 2014—there would not necessarily be anything stopping these migrants from expressing their pro-Russian sentiments at the ballot box‚ in public demonstrations‚ or as new recruits among the Donetsk and Luhansk militias.  We might make similar observations about the border between middle-income China and low-income Vietnam. Border disputes between the two countries continue today in the South China Sea. The two countries only finalized their land border in 1991‚ after decades of conflict. China’s population is ten times the size of Vietnam’s. Would an open border benefit the Vietnamese? It’s difficult to know‚ although an influx of ethnic Chinese into the far north of Vietnam could certainly assist China in “renegotiating” the location of the border.  This method of gradually adjusting international borders via migration has been pioneered in modern times by the “passportization” process sometimes employed by Moscow in eastern Ukraine. In this way‚ ethnic Russians living near the Russian border in foreign countries are granted Russian citizenship and given Russian passports. Under an open -borders regime‚ these newly naturalized foreigners could easily be augmented by new arrivals.  Some have suggested that China may eventually employ a similar tactic along the Russia-China border as described in the Hudson Institute’s report “The Great Siberian War of 2030.” Extrapolating from the report’s observations on the Siberian borderlands—dividing Russia from a far-more-populous China—it becomes apparent that a Russian open-border policy would quickly expand Chinese geopolitical influence in the region at the expense of the Russians.  Backdoor Colonization Some astute readers might conclude that small countries next to large countries could face a type of backdoor colonization were they to implement open border policies. This is quite possible. Outright colonization is a slightly different case‚ however‚ because it involves an open border imposed by one polity on another. This is more characteristic of the borders around Indian reservations in the United States or the borders between metropoles and their colonies. One example is the Algerian border under French rule. In cases of traditional non-democratic colonization‚ however‚ demographic imbalances don’t matter as much because the metropole’s power is employed to prop up minority populations in the face of larger indigenous populations. Consider‚ for example‚ how a small Anglo minority ruled in Kenya for decades.  Open borders present a separate and distinct problem when we are looking at democratic countries that are in close proximity to much more populous countries. Small countries like the Baltic states‚ were they to implement open borders‚ would face immediate and potentially devastating demographic changes followed by political changes implemented via the ballot box.  Yet‚ many advocates of open borders act as if this phenomenon is of trivial importance. Freiman and Hidalgo‚ for instance‚ grant that perhaps a liberal polity could legitimately implement a policy designed to prohibit “the entry of a billion foreigners to prevent its own destruction.” The implication here is that only an absurdly large number of migrants—i.e.‚ a billion people—would justify a border-control regime. Yet‚ for many countries‚ the number necessary to bring about drastic demographic and political changes is far smaller than a billion. There is certainly nothing novel about this observation. The free-market libertarian economist Ludwig von Mises recognized this issue nearly 100 years ago when he wrote about the same phenomenon‚ but in the context of a period when it was Europe that was exporting migrants:  In the absence of any migration barriers whatsoever‚ vast hordes of immigrants from the comparatively overpopulated areas of Europe would‚ it is maintained‚ inundate Australia and America. They would come in such great numbers that it would no longer be possible to count on their assimilation. If in the past immigrants to America soon adopted the English language and American ways and customs‚ this was in part due to the fact that they did not come over all at once in such great numbers. … One of the most important reasons for this rapid national assimilation was the fact that the immigrants from foreign countries did not come in too great numbers.  Mises notes that in the twentieth century‚ changes in global demographics and technology facilitates rapid demographic changes in levels not previously possible. He concludes that large-scale migration could fundamentally change the liberal nature of many western regimes—potentially for the worse. He notes many anti-immigration advocates fear this‚ and he continues:  These fears may perhaps be exaggerated in regard to the United States. As regards Australia‚ they certainly are not. Australia has approximately the same number of inhabitants as Austria; its area‚ however‚ is a hundred times greater than Austria’s‚ and its natural resources are certainly incomparably richer. If Australia were thrown open to immigration‚ it can be assumed with great probability that its population would in a few years consist mostly of Japanese‚ Chinese‚ and Malayans.. . . . The entire nation [not just workers] is unanimous‚ however‚ in fearing inundation by foreigners. The present inhabitants of those favored lands [the U.S. and Australia] fear that some day they could be reduced to a minority in their own country and that they would then have to suffer all horrors of national persecution to which‚ for instance‚ the Germans today [1927] are exposed in Czechoslovakia‚ Italy‚ and Poland. Mises here is concluding open borders work in some context but not in others. At the same time‚ Mises did not deny that open borders are always preferable when arguing as an economist. And he is right. There are no good economic arguments in favor of border controls. On the other hand‚ Mises also observed the political realities tend to intervene in ways that prevent us from benefiting from laissez-faire economic policy. In much of the world‚  geopolitical realities often tend to mean that open border policies end up being laissez-faire only in the very short term. In the longer term‚ open borders tend to create new political realities that are often used against the very people who intended to improve economic growth and property rights by embracing free and open migration. BREAKING: UN Planning New Pandemic To Establish Planetary Dictatorship

The new year will offer plenty of surprises As we enter 2024‚ a convergence of robust economic activity and waning inflationary pressures has shifted the prevailing market narrative towards the likelihood of a soft landing. The past year has been marked by unforeseen developments‚ deviating from the trends anticipated by many. Contrary to widespread predictions‚ the expected recession in the US did not materialize. Economic growth showcased remarkable resilience across global economies‚ surpassing projections. Additionally‚ inflation‚ which had surged to multi-decade highs‚ has since subsided. Against this backdrop‚ international markets have made a significant recovery‚ regaining more than half of the lost ground from the market’s peak in late 2021 to the low point in October 2022. The global economy’s performance in 2023 not only met but exceeded the most optimistic forecasts. Predicted global GDP growth is set to surpass consensus estimates from a year ago by 1 percentage point worldwide and by 2 percentage points in the US. Moreover‚ core inflation has decreased from its peak of 6% in 2022 to a consecutive decline to 3% in economies that underwent a post-Covid surge in prices. Despite favorable indicators in growth and inflation for 2023‚ concerns about a potential recession persist among forecasters‚ and this cautious stance is justified. It is essential not to become complacent‚ especially given that the median forecaster still assigns a 50% probability of a recession within the next 12 months. Nevertheless‚ my optimism for 2024 remains intact‚ driven by the belief that central banks‚ in their efforts to manage inflation‚ will endeavor to sidestep a recession. Notably‚ emerging market early adopters like Brazil and Poland have already initiated policy rate cuts‚ signaling a trend likely to continue. While the scope for preemptive easing in developed market economies may be limited‚ there is a clear indication that central banks stand ready to pivot towards rate cuts if the growth outlook significantly deteriorates. An analysis of past hiking cycles underscores the fact that major central banks are twice as likely to cut rates in response to downside growth risks‚ particularly after inflation has normalized to sub-3% rates‚ highlighting the importance of this strategy as an insurance policy against recessionary threats. In the realm of developed market central banks‚ my anticipation is that the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Bank of England (BoE) will embark on rate cuts sooner rather than later‚ with a likely commencement in May 2024. This projection is grounded in the anticipated progress in inflation within the euro area and a less robust growth outlook for the UK. In recent years‚ global inflation led major central banks‚ except in Japan and China‚ to aggressively raise interest rates. While short-term rates responded quickly‚ longer-term yields caught up later. Investors believe inflation will stay higher‚ prompting the rate reset. Despite agreeing with this view‚ I anticipate a near-term decrease in inflation. In the US‚ inflation dropped from over 9% to under 3.5%‚ with encouraging signs in service sectors. Globally‚ inflation is slowing‚ expected to approach central banks’ 2% target by 2024. Improved labor balance in the US resulted in slowed wage growth‚ and I foresee 2% inflation as a baseline‚ with investors expecting 2.0% to 2.5% over the next decade. This shift suggests more variability than the previous decade.Save 40% on DNA Force Plus NOW! Try it today and see why so many listeners have made it an essential part of their daily routine! Looking ahead to 2024‚ the landscape appears set for diminishing interest rates and a rebound in corporate earnings‚ rendering cash a less attractive option. Despite expectations of a prolonged central bank pause‚ there are optimistic signals as economic resilience persists‚ albeit transiently. Encouragingly‚ signs indicate a tapering of inflationary pressures‚ both in headline figures and wages. The labor market is cooling‚ alleviating the intensity of cost-of-living concerns‚ with workers showing less eagerness to switch jobs for higher pay‚ particularly evident in the US and anticipated to extend to Europe. With the interest rate reset concluded‚ it’s a prudent time to lock in yields. The pivotal question now centers on the strategic allocation between fixed income and equity in this evolving financial landscape. AI stocks Is 2024 the year for AI stocks? It may seem like the train has already left the station‚ with the most prominent beneficiaries of the generative AI revolution experiencing substantial market cap growth in 2023. However‚ as we enter the next phases of AI buildout‚ there are still potential opportunities for investors. It’s certainly not too late to tap into the exponential growth of artificial intelligence. While mega-cap tech leaders offer reliable exposure to the AI trend‚ sectors such as semiconductor equipment‚ robotics‚ drug discovery‚ and cybersecurity stand out as clear beneficiaries of the forthcoming integration of AI into everyday business and personal lives. Ultimately‚ aligning investments with individual goals remains paramount. Oil above $100 In 2024‚ it is anticipated that Brent crude oil prices may trade above the $100 mark‚ contingent upon crucial geopolitical factors influencing the market. These factors encompass heightened tensions in the Middle East‚ such as attacks on vessels in the Red Sea and potential escalations from Iran. Additionally‚ the ongoing dispute between Venezuela and Guyana poses a potential threat to oil production‚ potentially resulting in price increases. There is also the possibility of shifts in OPEC+ strategy‚ involving increased oil production‚ which could lead to temporary challenges for energy companies but offer greater flexibility in the future. Fitch Ratings has adjusted its price forecasts higher for oil in 2023-2024‚ as well as for natural gas in Europe for 2024 and 2026. The agency attributes these revisions to OPEC+ maintaining stringent control over supply volumes. The oil market experienced fluctuations in 2023‚ with both price increases and declines influenced by various economic and geopolitical factors. These include the turbulent economic recovery in China‚ the Israel-Hamas conflict‚ OPEC+’s decisions regarding oil production volumes‚ and the impact of the US on the market. Starting in the summer of 2024‚ oil prices are expected to fluctuate above the $100 per barrel mark for a significant part of the year. This forecast is based on the anticipation of a slowdown in raw material demand amid a complex global economic situation.  India’s economic triumph: A beacon of global prosperity “The Indian economy will double in size by the end of the decade” – Jim Reid‚ Deutsche Bank  India is poised for an extraordinary economic resurgence as it approaches elections in April‚ with Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking a third term. A historical economic powerhouse for over a millennium‚ India’s narrative is shifting positively‚ fueled by robust factors that promise to reinstate its global prominence. India’s economic strength is underscored by its remarkable 8% real GDP growth rate over 15 years preceding the pandemic‚ a testament to its resilience and dynamism. With a youthful population forming a demographic dividend‚ India stands as a beacon of innovation‚ investment‚ and increased savings. The nation’s substantial population becomes a strategic advantage‚ offering economies of scale and making it an appealing destination for global businesses implementing the ‘China+1’ strategy‚ a plan that encourages companies to diversify their supply chain and manufacturing activities away from China. Challenges on India’s path to economic ascension are seen as opportunities for positive transformation. Embracing trade globalization‚ expediting privatization‚ and implementing transparent tax reforms are steps that signal a commitment to sustained growth. As the world turns its attention to Asia’s renaissance‚ India’s emergence as a genuine economic powerhouse appears not just plausible but a harbinger of global prosperity‚ marking a triumphant chapter in the global economic narrative. China’s strategic economic shift: Even more stimulus China is in the midst of a profound economic transformation‚ shifting from a sole emphasis on growth metrics to a more nuanced expansion strategy. Projected to close 2023 with a growth rate slightly above 5%‚ China’s recalibration of policy stimulus aligns with broader visions encompassing national security and income equality‚ recognizing challenges like demographic aging and geopolitical complexities. Looking ahead to 2024-25‚ deleveraging emerges as a central growth determinant‚ presenting challenges for Chinese assets post-real estate consolidation in 2021. Fiscal policy maintains moderate expansion‚ targeting a 3.4% headline deficit. Despite initial bearish sentiments from global investors in 2023‚ influenced by concerns over worsening debt and property markets‚ the outlook for Chinese assets in 2024 hinges on initiatives aimed at boosting lackluster growth. There are cyclical weaknesses and concerns over China’s debt burden‚ although evidence suggests that manageable debt and fiscal expansion facilitated by monetary easing could potentially lead to a sustained rebound in Chinese stocks in 2024. The ongoing structural transformation‚ focusing on ‘hard tech’ and industrial migration to interior provinces‚ aligns with China’s broader policy agenda‚ reinvigorating investment growth in high-value manufacturing and high-tech industries. While China’s post-Covid economic recovery has been delicate‚ the structural transformation and aggressive fiscal expansion present long-term investment themes that mitigate cyclical challenges. However‚ with the Chinese economy’s growth by just 5.2% in 2023‚ challenges loom. As an exports-driven economy‚ slow growth in the developed world and trade tensions have impacted the manufacturing sector. The domestic real estate sector continues to grapple with recovery‚ and Chinese consumers are navigating a ‘balance sheet recession’‚ prioritizing debt reduction. The limited stimulus measures offered in 2023 have provided little impetus for significant growth‚ and a much larger fiscal boost may be necessary. The government’s initiatives and the ongoing deleveraging process may keep economic growth subdued at around 4% in 2024‚ although there’s potential for positive surprises. The lack of inflationary pressures allows room for further fiscal and/or monetary stimulus‚ and the focus on ‘Common Prosperity’ underscores the commitment to long-term structural reforms‚ potentially opening up fresh opportunities for investors despite the current challenges. Russia’s economic outlook for 2024: Navigating challenges with positive growth trajectory and ruble dynamics Entering 2024‚ the Russian economy faces a spectrum of inflationary challenges‚ spanning both short-term and long-term dimensions. While demographic constraints and structural easing of budget rules contribute to the latter‚ short-term risks involve credit market overheating and ruble depreciation. Despite these challenges‚ there are positive indicators‚ with GDP expected to grow by 3.4% in 2023‚ surpassing optimistic forecasts. Encouragingly‚ real income growth and robust corporate profits are poised to alleviate credit risks. The population’s inclination toward savings remains relatively high‚ even with the recent rate hike. Although the ruble faced pressure due to a decline in the current account surplus‚ measures such as mandatory export revenue sales provided some support‚ and a potential ruble move toward 80-90 RUB/USD in 2024 is anticipated. While the Russian central bank is expected to maintain a rate above 10% in 2024‚ the positive trends in income and corporate profits may benefit equity market investment flows. Bitcoin aims for $125‚000 in 2024: Bullish trajectory despite market volatility While a minor correction may occur in the first quarter‚ potentially influenced by interventions from regulatory bodies like the SEC or the Fed‚ it’s essential to attribute any fluctuations to typical market dynamics. Despite this‚ my optimistic projection indicates a potential surge for bitcoin to reach $125‚000 in 2024. The cryptocurrency’s recent price stability‚ supported by technical indicators and positive market dynamics‚ suggests a consolidation phase around the $40‚000 mark. Factors such as declining US interest rates and ongoing discussions about a spot Bitcoin ETF (exchange-traded fund) contribute to sustained institutional interest‚ fostering a conducive environment for bitcoin’s growth. My earlier projection of bitcoin trading around the $50‚000 mark this Christmas has been partially realized as it hovers around the $45‚000 level. Positioned for an upward trajectory amidst market dynamics and potential ETF approvals‚ bitcoin demonstrates resilience and strength‚ as emphasized by my reiterated $125‚000 forecast. This highlights bitcoin’s dominant position in the cryptocurrency market‚ indicating a path of continued expansion despite inevitable market challenges. However‚ it’s crucial to note that the journey will be accompanied by 20% fluctuations‚ both upward and downward. The NWO’s 2024 Black Swan Tell

The establishment is unwilling to admit that they are the reason Trump was elected. But‚ ironically‚ by attempting to disqualify him from participating in the election‚ they undermine the illusion of democracy—their main source of legitimacy in the eyes of many Americans. Two weeks ago‚ I wrote an article laying out the political class’s struggle to preserve its legitimacy by fighting to regain control over the digital information space. The piece built on Martin Gurri’s thesis that the wide adoption of the internet has caused an information revolution that‚ similar to the adoption of the printing press‚ has allowed dissent to grow and spread beyond the control of the ruling classes. The results have been political shocks like the Arab Spring‚ the passage of Brexit‚ and the election of Donald Trump. If the twenty-first century has been a war to preserve the establishment’s legitimacy‚ the current battle in the United States is the 2024 presidential election. There’s truth to the familiar cliché that the next election is always the most important in history. As the federal government grows‚ spends more of our money‚ and intrudes more in our daily lives‚ the stakes of elections get higher and higher. That still holds true for 2024‚ but there is much more going on. In Anatomy of the State‚ after defining the state as the “organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area‚” Murray Rothbard dedicates a chapter to how states preserve themselves. In Rothbard’s words:Survival Shield X-2 is now 25% OFF! Treat your body with super high-quality nascent iodine &; enjoy one of nature's greatest essentials! While force is [the ruling class’s] modus operandi‚ their basic and long-run problem is ideological. For in order to continue in office‚ any government (not simply a “democratic” government) must have the support of the majority of its subjects. This support‚ it must be noted‚ need not be active enthusiasm; it may well be passive resignation as if to an inevitable law of nature. . . . Therefore‚ the chief task of the rulers is always to secure the active or resigned acceptance of the majority of the citizens. In the United States‚ the political establishment has for many years evoked democracy to legitimize its actions in the eyes of the public. Doing so transforms any action they take into an embodiment of the people’s will and any opposition into a selfish denial of everyone else’s wishes. But the internet allowed the public to see that many views and beliefs that had been presented as fringe were in fact popular—often even more popular than so-called mainstream ideas. That revelation bolstered the antiestablishment movements of the 2010s—Occupy Wall Street‚ the Tea Party‚ the Ron Paul Revolution‚ and Trump’s 2016 campaign. And it sent the political establishment into a crisis of legitimacy. Tens of millions of Americans sent Donald Trump to the White House in one of the biggest repudiations of the established political class in American history. In response‚ instead of reflecting on why so many Americans were so fed up with them‚ the establishment decided to frame Trump as the root cause of all the nastiness and hostility aimed their way. According to them‚ one man was corrupting America with hate‚ greed‚ and Russian propaganda. That thinking has culminated in years of establishment attempts to remove Trump from power and later to bar him from ever holding office again. First‚ there was discussion of ousting him using the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Then came the attempt to tie him to Russian intelligence. Next‚ they tried to impeach him twice. Finally‚ they charged him with felonies. Now some states are attempting to remove him from the 2024 ballot for a crime he hasn’t even been charged with. The establishment is unwilling to admit that they are the reason Trump was elected. But‚ ironically‚ by attempting to disqualify him from participating in the election‚ they undermine the illusion of democracy—their main source of legitimacy in the eyes of many Americans. It’s hard to see how that will go well for them. The NWO’s 2024 Black Swan Tell