After 223 people died and many are still missing, as the South was devastated by Hurricane Helene, Secretary Blinken boasted that the US is sending $157 million to assist those in need in LEBANON. Lebanon is home to the terrorist group Hezbollah, and Hezbollah will confiscate the money. Last week, the US gave more than […] The post Blinken Just Gave $157M to Hezbollah-Controlled Lebanon Not NC appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Vice President Kamala Harris recorded an episode of the explicit “Call Her Daddy” podcast this week. Harris has not held a formal press conference in 77 days and is criticized for avoiding tough questions while prioritizing appearances on shows like “Call Her Daddy.” The “Call Her Daddy” podcast is infamous for episodes that delve into […] The post While the South Was Devastated, Kamala Starred in the Bawdy “Call Her Daddy” appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The following is an edited transcript of an interview between Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief John Bickley and Heritage Foundation Research Fellow EJ Antoni on a Saturday Edition of Morning Wire. Donald Trump has promised to impose huge tariffs on Chinese imports and American companies who move their production outside the country – while Kamala Harris has declared tariffs a tax on the middle class. We sat down with an economist about the true impact of tariffs on the economy and inflation and which approach will best help Americans. * * * JOHN: Joining us now is EJ Antoni, research fellow at Heritage Foundation’s Center for the Federal Budget. EJ, thanks for coming on.  EJ: My pleasure. JOHN: Can we start at the beginning for the non-economists out there who are not familiar with some of the terminology? What are tariffs and how do they work? EJ: A tariff is essentially just a tax on trade, specifically international trade. The way it works is that an importer has to pay a tax, at least directly. Now, that doesn’t mean the importer ultimately is the one who pays the final tax. What I mean by that is, the importer can simply increase the price at which he or she sells his or her product to the American consumer, in which case the tax incidents — or in other words who ultimately pays the final tax — would not be the importer but would actually be the American consumer. But I think it’s important to remember that, again, this is just a tax on trade, in this case international trade. It functions exactly the same way as the income tax or the sales tax does domestically. JOHN: And the expectation for most imports and exports is that there’s going to be some sort of tariff imposed. Is that correct? EJ: Yes, that’s correct. There are a lot of both tariffs and what we would call “non-tariff barriers” on the international stage today. One of the things that happened in the Trump administration, there was a lot of talk about increase in tariffs, but there was not a lot of attention paid to all of the decreases in tariffs that were also accomplished. This is what I think the former president means when he talks about both free and fair tariffs, fair trade. Using tariffs essentially as a weapon and negotiating tactic, if you will, to get a level playing field for American producers abroad. JOHN: Speaking of the Trump-era tariffs, what items did the Trump administration target and did their tariffs work?  EJ: Well, one of the things they targeted was Chinese steel, and there actually was a very positive impact for that. Although there was a small increase in the price that American consumers and American businesses had to pay for those steel imports, about 80% of the tariff actually just got eaten by the Chinese producers. In other words, the Chinese producers were not able to pass along the full freight of that tariff to consumers in the American market, whether that was individual consumers or businesses. The reason for that is because there were too many alternatives both produced domestically, but also produced in countries like Sweden, where the price was nearly the same. And so if the Chinese exporter were to, again, increase their selling price by the full cost of the tariff, then it would have been prohibitively expensive. Everyone would have just bought domestically or bought from producers in other countries, like Sweden. So the result of that was essentially a countering of the subsidies which the Chinese steel industry receives from the Chinese Communist Party. Ironically, you ended up having Chinese taxpayers paying for that subsidy, and then the steel company paying the tariff to the U.S. Treasury. So in a very roundabout way, Chinese taxpayers were paying the U.S. Treasury. A container ship leaves its berth with a full load of containers at the Qianwan Container terminal of Qingdao Port in Qingdao, China, on September 15, 2024. (Photo by Costfoto/NurPhoto via Getty Images) JOHN: So that was an example of an extremely successful tariff approach. The Biden administration has left many of these tariffs in place, yet they continue to criticize Trump and his economic policy. How do Biden and Harris reconcile that? EJ: This is a great question. I don’t think you can square that circle. They have been in power now for almost four years. They have had countless opportunities to reverse so many of the economic policies of President Trump, some of which they have, but regarding tariffs they haven’t – and it’s completely unclear as to why. Again, this has been at their fingertips available for them to do at any time and yet they have left all of these tariffs in place possibly because they have actually been very, very successful, despite the rhetoric on the Left. JOHN: On the campaign trail, Trump has proposed tariffs as high as 60% on imports from China, 10 to 20% on global imports, generally. Are these good ideas – and why, as The Atlantic has highlighted, is the legacy media “mocking” those proposals?  EJ: Well, the same legacy media that is mocking the proposals of President Trump also told us that we weren’t going to have any inflation when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris started spending, borrowing, and printing trillions upon trillions of dollars we didn’t have. This is also the same legacy media that, when Trump was first inaugurated in 2017, told us it was going to cause a stock market collapse, economic calamities, etc. So, they have been wrong time after time. I frankly don’t know why anyone would listen to anything they say. If anything you’re better off just assuming the opposite of whatever they’re telling you. But that aside, there’s no reason to believe that any of the tariff strategies that Trump would pursue in a second term would cause any of these deleterious effects. One of the things to remember is that Trump uses tariffs as a weapon. This is tactical bombing, not strategic bombing. This is not the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, for example, where we essentially carpet bombed international trade by imposing wildly high tariffs in the name of protecting American industry. Protectionism, when it comes to tariffs, always ends very, very poorly. But if you’re using tariffs to raise government revenue, as we did for all of our nation’s history before the income tax was put in place, if you’re using tariffs as a negotiating tool, those are conditions that, again, have proven to be very, very successful when you look at the historical record. And Trump has been perhaps the most successful when it comes to using them as a negotiating tool. JOHN: A lot of the trade discussion revolves around China, for good reason. They’re the world’s largest exporter, a massive economic power. Where does the U.S.-China trade deficit stand today? EJ: It is still in the hundreds of billions of dollars, but one of the interesting things that has happened in the wake of COVID has been an acceleration of the decoupling of the United States and China. So, we seem to be at a turning point. If you want to take us all the way back to Richard Nixon when he went to China and both nations opened up each other’s markets to one another and we thought that that was going to moderate China. Ironically, it ended up moderating us — we have become less free as opposed to them becoming more free. But it seems like we, again, are at a decoupling, a cusp, a change in the winds if you will here, where we are increasing trade with other partners, whether that’s Canada and Mexico, or even one’s future partners further abroad, like India, for example, whose manufacturing sector is growing faster than any other in the entire world. So, as we develop deeper ties to these other trading partners, not only is international trade overall with China declining, but our trade deficit with them should also diminish over time. JOHN: We saw an NBC News report that said the trade deficit with China is actually the lowest since 2010. They actually credited Trump’s tariffs for that. So did his tariffs actually improve the trade deficit some? EJ: I think so, again, because one of the things that it did is, any of those instances where Chinese manufacturers were not willing to eat most of the cost of the tariff – in other words, pay it themselves – when the manufacturers tried to pass the full freight on to the American consumer, the American consumer chose alternatives. And some of those alternatives were making those products domestically. And so, again, it’s not simply a matter of all of these costs are guaranteed to be passed along to consumers, which is one of the things that the legacy media is asserting today. But that simply is not true. It’s not true theoretically, and it’s not true either empirically when you look at the historical record. JOHN: The Biden administration, we mentioned, has been critical of Trump’s tariffs while maintaining a lot of them – and actually imposing some new ones. $18 billion worth of tariffs on Chinese goods went into effect last Friday. What products were affected by these Biden administration tariffs? EJ: Well, unfortunately, this really focused on much of the green energy agenda, if you will, and, and different products and subcomponents related to that agenda. And the reason that’s problematic is twofold: Number one, it frankly is a silly agenda. It’s not economically viable. You’re talking about energy sources that are literally net losers. In other words, over the lifetime of something like a solar panel or a windmill, you will put more energy into the thing than you will ever get out, especially once you consider the opportunity costs involved. But the other problem is that very oftentimes you are looking at things where China has a near monopoly. And so this will be exactly the opposite of the effects we saw under Trump, where the American consumer had alternatives. And so now what you’re going to do is you’re going to see the full freight actually passed on to the American consumer. Now, it’ll be dispersed across a great many products and a great many industries. So it’s not as if you’ll see something like the cost of a solar panel for your roof go up by 200%. But, again, you will see cost increases from that. And you can argue that this is still a kind of tactical as opposed to strategic bombing. But ironically, you’re tactically bombing your own warehouses instead of the enemy’s. JOHN: So it will effectively drive up the costs of green energy, if I’m hearing that correctly. EJ: Yes, I think that’s very fair to say. And, again, it goes back to this idea that the American consumer, and American businesses also – because some of these things are intermediate goods, not final goods – but Americans, whether it’s businesses or consumers, do not have as many alternatives frequently for these types of inputs as they would have four or five years ago when the Trump tariffs were put in place. It frankly is just a very good example of the tactic being applied poorly. LISTEN: Catch the full interview with EJ Antoni on the Saturday Edition on Morning Wire JOHN: Now, you mentioned protectionist policies. There’s something else going on here with Trump’s proposals – trying to keep manufacturing in the U.S. He said he would impose a hefty tariff on John Deere if they moved production out of the country. We’ve seen this also with some automakers. Can you explain how that kind of strategic tariff works related to US manufacturing? Is it something that can be effective? EJ: It depends. Very often times it can be effective, but that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. In other words, you might have better options out there. You know, because what you’re essentially saying to the business is, instead of your three options being produce it here and make less money; produce it abroad and make more money; or shut down, you’re essentially making one of those three completely unviable. And so now the only two options are shut down or make it here but make less money. That’s going to cause a flight from shareholders, it’ll cause a flight of investment capital, and it can cause a lot of problems for that business. It can even result in fewer people being employed and less products being made. So a much better alternative in that type of instance would be to say, why is it that manufacturers can’t produce here and can’t produce here viably? Now, sometimes it is because we tend to tax things domestically at a higher rate than we tax the imports. This is the whole drive behind what’s called a “border adjustment tax.” It aims to essentially cancel that out and give American producers more freedom, a level playing field against their foreign counterparts. However, another big problem is the regulatory burden that American manufacturers face here at home that you don’t see abroad. This amounts to literally tens of thousands of dollars per worker. In fact, if you have a manufacturing employee who’s making $50,000, the regulatory burden on the employer can be another $50,000. So, what looks like a $50,000 employee is actually a $100,000 employee in the eyes of the employer. So all that to say, the American worker needs to be more than twice as productive as his or her foreign counterpart, assuming that foreign counterpart is getting paid the same amount, in order to be competitive. Now, if their foreign counterpart is getting paid less, then the American worker needs to be even that much more productive, and therefore competitive, in order to keep his or her job. So, we don’t want to understate just how bad the regulatory burden is on American manufacturing, and just how much capital flight out of this country that has caused. JOHN: Final question. Last weekend, U. S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai talked about tariffs as a useful tool that helps the middle class and empowers the working class. Do you believe that’s ultimately a fair framing of the potential impact of tariffs?  EJ: Well, I think the biggest thing to remember here is the fact that tariffs are just a tax on international trade. They function exactly the same as taxes on domestic trade, like a sales tax, like an income tax. And what you really want at the end of the day, if you’re going to tax transactions, is you want to tax all transactions exactly the same, because otherwise, you’ll introduce economic inefficiencies, because you inadvertently will end up favoring certain types of transactions as opposed to others. So, if we had a world where there were no tariffs and the only thing we taxed was domestic trade, you would actually be encouraging trade and production to move abroad because it would be cheaper, all else being equal, to import things, as opposed to making them here at home. And so, if you can get into a situation where, through tariffs, you now have the same taxes on imports that you do on domestic production, again, you have leveled that playing field, and you allow American businesses and American workers to compete. One of the things that has really gutted the American middle class over the last several decades, and one of the things that has really helped drive manufacturing overseas, has been this push to reduce taxes on inputs while increasing taxes on the things that are still made at home. Look, if you tax something more, you get less of it and if you tax something less, you’ll get more of it. That’s just Econ 101. And so as we have taxed imports less, but taxed domestic production more, we have seen that violent swing in production, and we have seen that manufacturing flight accelerate out of the United States. Cargo ship loaded in New York container terminal at night viewed from Elizabeth NJ across Elizabethport reach. Ultima_Gaina. Getty Images. JOHN: Has the Biden administration made that worse or lessened that domestic burden? EJ: Well, I think with legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act – which was a complete misnomer, by the way – but that aside, I think legislation like that has actually helped to make the situation worse because it has introduced not only new taxes, but also new regulation on different types of energy production here at home, while not imposing the same kinds of taxes and regulations on that produced abroad. And also not simply energy, but also a lot of products that Americans use every single day. You think of a home appliance, whether it’s a refrigerator, a clothes washer, or a dishwasher, again, you name a home appliance and I can pretty much guarantee you that this administration has imposed new regulations on it. One of the problems is that these are not simply regulations in terms of how much water or electricity or natural gas these appliances can use, it also has to do with regulations regarding their production. But those are regulations that only apply to production here at home. You can make the exact same thing abroad in a much less environmentally friendly way or in a much less labor friendly way, and it will not have to meet those same stringent standards. And so, again, you have simply encouraged production to leave this country and to go overseas, and when that production leaves, the jobs and the incomes go with it. JOHN: Well, we can’t afford prices going up any more or any more jobs lost. EJ, thank you so much for joining us. EJ: Thank you so much. My pleasure. JOHN: That was EJ Antoni, research fellow at Heritage Foundation’s Center for the Federal Budget. *** LISTEN: Catch the full interview with EJ Antoni on the Saturday Edition on Morning Wire

Biden Was 'Possibly Sick or Injured' Days Before Dropping Out of Race

Antony Blinken Gets in on Biden-Harris Admin Tone Deaf Brags While Americans Wait for Help

Michael Douglas was diagnosed with stage four tongue cancer in 2010, and after a series of chemotherapy and radiation therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, he was declared cancer-free in January 2011. Since then, Douglas has nursed a morbid fear of his health and hopes to live up to his 100th birthday. The actor is now living an intentional lifestyle and opting for healthier habits to make his hopes come true someday. Michael Douglas prepares to turn 100 Michael Douglas / Instagram Shaken by his life-threatening experience with cancer, Douglas has changed his diet, routine, and social setting to avoid a relapse and make it to 100. He reportedly maintains a gluten-free diet and is so intentional about ditching sugar that he hardly relaxes about it. Douglas also cut alcohol and caffeine out of his diet completely and takes daily vitamin supplements to help boost his immune system. The 80-year-old frequents the hospital for medical checkups and now has the gym as a part of his daily routine. Despite previously hating exercise, Douglas now does one-armed push-ups effortlessly. Michael Douglas / Everett Michael Douglas is inspired by his father to live long in spite of cancer scare Douglas came from a celebrity household with actor Kirk Douglas as his father, who also doubles as a mentor and an inspiration. Kirk lived for up to 103 years before his passing in 2020, and this motivates Douglas to show up daily for workouts to match his late father’s feat. Michael Douglas / Everett This year, Douglas decided to partially retire from Hollywood to settle at his breathtaking estate in Mallorca. He regards the spot in Spain as a home away from home, which he purchased with his ex-wife Diandra Luker. Occasionally, Catherine Zeta-Jones joins him on the 250-acre for a quick family break. Next up: The Cast Of ‘Little House On The Prairie’ Slam Anniversary Event Organizers For Poor Planning The post Michael Douglas Worries About Living Up To 100 After Cancer Scare appeared first on DoYouRemember? - The Home of Nostalgia. Author, Peace A

A while back, I posted Part 1 of the novella, Three Miles: When a Dream Vacation Goes Terribly Wrong, Who Can You Trust? It’s been a while, so you may want to go back and re-read it first. Part 1 After 15 minutes of hurrying through the darkness, they were about to emerge on a major street, Agia Asomaton.  Max stopped before going out toward the street. “I want to see if we can find out what’s going on,” she said quietly.  Ellen leaned against a building and took off her shoes, rubbing her aching feet. Max went back to Google News to search for updated information. “We can’t go back to the hotel,” she told the group. “There are even more protestors there. And buildings are on fire.” What do we do?” asked Ellen. “We have to get to the US Embassy,” Max replied. “I can’t think of a better option.” “How far away is that?” Robert’s normally red face looked even more so than usual, even in the darkness. Max put the address in the navigation app. “It’s three miles.” Will said confidently, “Three miles? No problem. We’ve got this.” Max dropped her backpack to the ground.  “I got a few supplies.”  She handed out hoodies to the women. “This will help disguise your shape. You don’t want to draw attention.” The women donned the sweatshirts solemnly.  “Do you guys have sunglasses?” “Why would we need sunglasses?” Will asked. “It’s dark out.” “There’s a possibility of smoke bombs, fire, even tear gas. Sunglasses aren’t much but they’ll help protect your eyes a little,” Max replied. She unfolded her knife and cut the scarves longways through the middle. “This will help protect your airways,” she said as she handed out strips of scarves to everyone. “How do you know all this?” Robert asked. “What are you, some kind of ninja survivalist?” He looked at Ellen, hoping for approval of his mockery. For once, Ellen had the good sense to ignore him. “I read a lot,” said Max, dismissing his scorn. “We need to stay away from the busier streets, and we need to stay away from people. Everyone is worked up. Nobody is our friend.” She looked dubiously at Ellen’s pumps. They were obviously expensive, made from soft-looking leather and designed with elegantly pointed toes and statuesque heels. “Are you going to be okay in those shoes?” Ellen nodded, “I’ll live.” “Damn right you will,” said Max, appreciating Ellen’s resilience. Her overall level of fitness would help a lot, despite her inappropriate footwear. “Okay.  I want you to stay as close to the buildings as possible. When you have to cross a street or a place with no buildings, I want you to make a run for it. Our goal is to be silent and invisible. Got it?” Everyone nodded. It looked like Max was the leader of this pack whether she wanted to be or not. Nobody else seemed to have any kind of survival skills whatsoever. “We’re going to cross this street one at a time and head right. I’m going first to check things out. Then I’ll flash my phone light at you twice and the next person can go. We’ll wait in that alley away from the streetlight.” “Okay, now we’re going right. Who feels comfortable bringing up the rear? Do any of you have military training?”  She looked at all the blank faces. She was on her own here.  It was going to be a long night. “I’ll do it,” Rob volunteered reluctantly. “I used to play football.” Max mentally congratulated herself. Called it, she thought. “Okay – single file, as quiet as you can. Hustle across the open spaces.” That’s how they began the three-mile journey to the embassy. One by one, silent and invisible. Chapter 5 Max took a careful look around. The street appeared to be deserted. She dashed to a dumpster, took another look around, then ran across the street. She pinned herself flat against a building and poked her head around the corner to look in the alley – it was pitch black.  She cupped her hand over the light on her phone, switched in on for a quick second. Then, satisfied that it was relatively empty, she melted into the darkness of the alley. She flashed her light 2 times. Joan was going next. She wasn’t fast, but she was careful as she followed in Max’s footsteps. She was a little bit out of breath when she made it across. Max wasn’t sure if it was nerves, the running, or all of the above.  She patted the older woman on the arm. “Good job,” she whispered. Ellen removed her high heels and dashed across barefoot, wincing when she stepped on something sharp. This was going to be an issue. Walking 3 miles in bare, neatly pedicured feet was going to be miserable. She pulled off one sneaker and peeled off her sock. Then she put her shoe back on and repeated the exercise with the other foot. She handed her socks to Ellen. “It’s not much protection, but it’s better than nothing.” Ellen looked at Max’s slightly sweaty socks with distaste but was smart enough to accept the offer without comment. Max watched as one-by-one, they scurried across the street. Athens, a city that was usually bustling night and day, was eerily bereft of traffic at the moment. When they’d made it across, she pulled out her map and used the flashlight on her phone for a moment. She memorized the route she wanted to take, put her map back into her backpack, and put it on her back. “Okay, that was awesome. You guys have the hang of how we’re going to do this now, right?” she asked quietly in the darkness. A chorus of quiet yesses were her answer. The group was far more subdued as the reality of their situation began to sink in. “We’re going down this street in single file. Stay as close to the buildings as you can so you’re less noticeable,” she told them. Max led the way. They made it two blocks before she halted in her tracks. Joan, who was right behind her, bumped into her.  Max held up her hand in a stop gesture. She turned to whisper, “I hear something ahead. We’re going into the next alley, then we need to check this out. Stay quiet.” The group continued to hug the buildings until a small, recessed doorway appeared. Max waved them in.  They huddled together in the doorway.  “Okay, something is going on up there. We need information before we continue.” Will asked, “Do you want me to go take a look while you guys wait here?” Max was surprised. She’d never imagined Will to be a guy who would put himself in harm’s way. “Yeah, if you’re okay with that. I’ll stay here. If for some reason you come back and we aren’t here, go back to the last alley and we’ll wait for you there for 20 minutes,” she said. “If it takes longer than that, we have to continue on a different route.” Will nodded. “I’ll be back soon.” He took off at a jog. Ellen sat down, rubbing her feet. They had to be killing her, Max thought.  She pulled water bottles out of her backpack and offered them to her little crew. The group sat quietly, whispering in hushed voices about the next step and resting in the darkness. “Shhh!” Max hissed when she heard footsteps approaching the alley in which they were ensconced. Everyone froze, stiffening in silence, barely breathing. Max could hear her pulse pounding in her ears and wondered if the others could hear it too, like the throbbing tell-tale heart in Poe’s story of the same name. She held her breath, hoping to silence the booming noise that made her deaf to everything else. When Will appeared in the entrance to the alley, they simultaneously exhaled in a whoosh. Max almost wanted to hug him for the first time in their entire acquaintance. Almost. “What’s going on? What did you learn?” she demanded. “It’s another fight between police and protestors. The entire square ahead of us is full of people fighting,” Will informed her. “Okay,” Max mused. “We need to reroute, then, and avoid that area.” She pulled a map out of her backpack and used the small LED flashlight on her keychain so she could see. She quickly recreated the route to the embassy, avoiding the square ahead… When suddenly a spotlight shone down the alley where they were hidden no more. If you want to read about the rest of Max’s escape from Athens, name your price for the novella here. The post Three Miles: Part 2 appeared first on The Organic Prepper.

?-MY BOOKS: ✅"Street Survival Skills" https://amzn.to/2KxdbHe ✅"The Modern Survival Manual" https://amzn.to/2lX5TlB ✅"Bugging Out and Relocating" https://amzn.to/2Ld70Fa -MY VIDEOGAMES & MOVIES CHANNEL! https://www.youtube.com/@gemreviews2840 -TMS AMAZON STORE AND RECOMMENDED GEAR! https://www.amazon.com/shop/themodernsurvivalist -BACKUP CHANNELS https://odysee.com/@TheModernSurvivalist:a (very cool platform folks! subscribe!) -WHERE TO BUY BITCOIN Buy usd 100 and get usd 110 of BITCOIN in COINBASE using this link: https://www.coinbase.com/join/5978cae22fa56d008ef754a5 My Spanish Channel "SupervivienciaModerna": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-fbEK4iGZgKKbwcfwlL8A -Visit My Website: http://www.ferfal.blogspot.com DISCLAIMER: This post contains Amazon and other affiliate links which means we may receive a small commission at no extra cost to you if you buy something. This of course helps keep the channel going and is much appreciated.