Tag Archives: Agenda 21

Apr 20 2022

Fannie Mae More Than Triples Negative Forecast for Housing Sales


Posted Originally on the conservative tree house on April 19, 2022 | sundance

Lots of people talk about an inflation driven recession.  Essentially, that’s a total economic contraction in the value of goods and services produced, sold and purchased, due to rising prices.   However, as CTH has been pointing out for more than six months, if you subtract the federal COVID infusion money from the overall economy, we have been in a contracting demand economy for almost nine months.

A negative GDP outcome is quite possible, perhaps likely, when the first quarter GDP figures are released on the last Friday of this month.  The most recent sales and economic data shows that U.S. consumers are prioritizing spending and high priced durable good sales are negative.

Now, Fannie Mae is delivering a rather stunning shift in their economic forecast.  In addition to projecting a recession for 2023, these revised home purchase figures are remarkable:

...”We have downgraded our total home sales forecast for 2022 to a decline of 7.4 percent (previously a 4.1 percent decline) followed by a decrease of 9.7 percent in 2023 (previously a 2.7 percent decline).” (link)

That is a very significant change in home sales forecast to the negative position.

We already have serious energy inflation to contend with and low wage growth.  We already know a third inflation wave on highly consumable goods is coming this summer, likely around 30% or more in food prices at the grocery store.

The professional forecasts are always tilted toward the positive for this administration, so this new statement by Fannie Mae should be considered accordingly.  Remember, Boy Scouts motto.

Apr 18 2022

Environmental Terrorism


Armstrong Economics Blog/Climate Re-Posted Apr 18, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Woke domestic terrorist groups are permitted to freely operate on Twitter and other social media platforms, even when they call for violence. Adbusters, a self-proclaimed “global network of activists writers artists designers hackers tricksters poets philosophers and punks,” has requested that “activists” begin targeting SUV owners under the Tyre Extinguishers “movement.” These idiots are calling it a “deflating movement” and have justified their actions by saying they are “defending ourselves against climate change, air pollution and unsafe drivers.”

Luckily the group is planning on leaving clear evidence of their crimes at the scene. These terrorists are urging people to begin by targeting wealthy neighborhoods first before disrupting the working class. Their website suggests not targeting vehicles with disabled handicapped stickers.

FOX Business reached out to Twitter to ask why these blatant calls for vandalism and crime are permitted. At the time of this writing, the organization’s page is still online and it hosts over 65.1K followers. They have provided copies of their leaflet in various languages and are hoping this “deflating movement” takes off worldwide.

Their website provides a video on how to delate tires and operate effectively as criminals. They are requesting that people repeat the crime endlessly. Hybrid SUVs are “fair game” too. The majority of people I see driving SUVs have children. These domestic terrorists are going to end up killing innocent people because they’re scared of the big bad car. Law enforcement should begin cracking down on this pathetic movement immediately before we see a string of preventable crashes on the news. At this point, crime is permitted so long as it is within the realm of the leftist agenda

Apr 17 2022

Biden Organizes Special Summit of ASEAN Leaders in Washington DC, May 12-13


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 16, 2022 | Sundance 

The ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) region including India, comprises a combined population of 1.85 billion people, one-fourth of the global population. Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar (Burma), and Laos are included.

As Biden doubles down on a proxy war against Russia in Europe, and given the financial stakes within the western economic sanctions, the global trade cleaving could leave the countries around India with a decision on which financial trade mechanisms they will support.

This is the background for Joe Biden to organize a special summit of ASEAN leaders in Washington, DC, May 12th and 13th.

WHITE HOUSE – President Biden will host the Leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Washington, DC on May 12 and 13 for a U.S.-ASEAN Special Summit.

The Special Summit will demonstrate the United States’ enduring commitment to ASEAN, recognizing its central role in delivering sustainable solutions to the region’s most pressing challenges, and commemorate 45 years of U.S.-ASEAN relations.

It will build on President Biden’s participation in the October 2021 U.S.-ASEAN Summit, where the President announced $102 million in new initiatives to expand our engagement with ASEAN on COVID-19 recovery and health security, fighting the climate crisis, stimulating broad-based economic growth, promoting gender equality, and deepening people-to-people ties. 

It is a top priority for the Biden-Harris Administration to serve as a strong, reliable partner in Southeast Asia. Our shared aspirations for the region will continue to underpin our common commitment to advance an Indo-Pacific that is free and open, secure, connected, and resilient. (link)

…”So, well, I told them we needed to focus on cat food for transgender kittens.”

Apr 17 2022

Rule One, Economic Security Is National Security


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 16, 2022 | Sundance

…Rule two, there is no bigger rule than the first rule.

“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”

~ Niccolo Machiavelli

Never has that Machiavelli quote been more apropos than when considering the MAGA movement and the rise of Donald Trump.

Thankfully, we are now in an era when the largest coalition of American voters have awakened to the reality that, to quote the former president: “Economic Security is National Security.”

As we live through the economic mess of a Biden administration hell bent on eroding the middle class of the United States, there are numerous pundits contemplating 2024 Republican presidential candidates other than Donald Trump; consider this group the lukewarm defenders Machiavelli noted.

At the same time the leftist coalition, writ large, are apoplectic about the base of the Republican Party now belonging to Donald Trump.  This group consists of those affluent Wall Street agents and politicians set on retaining the profits derived from decades of institutional objectives.

Institutional Democrats hate Trump, and institutional Republicans are lukewarm, at best, in defending Trump.  Both wings of the DC UniParty fear Trump.  Extreme efforts at control are a reaction to fear.  In this outline, I rise to explain why Donald Trump is the only option for the America First MAGA coalition; and I make my case not on supposition, but on empirical reference points that most should understand.

Everything, is about the economics of it.

If you accept that at its essential core elements the phrase “economic security is national security” is true – meaning the lives of the American citizen, person, worker, individual or family are best when their economic position is secure – then any potential leader for our nation must be able to initiate policies that directly touch the economics of a person’s life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  As a result, economic security and economic policy must be the fulcrum of their platform.

Now, look around and ask yourself this question: “What separated Donald J. Trump from the remaining field of 17 GOP candidates in 2016?”   An honest top-line answer would be immigration (border control), and his views on American economic policy.   In essence, what set Donald Trump apart from all other candidates was his view on the U.S. economy, and that was the driving factor behind ‘Make America Great Again’, MAGA.

Now, look around.  Look at every other potential candidate for political office. Is there another person in the field of your political view who comes from the starting point that economic security is national security?

Put aside all other issues and shiny things that may change from moment to moment as the political winds swirl and settle, and ask yourself that question.  Who can deliver MAGA, if not the central person who lives, eats, sleeps and thinks about U.S. economic security from every angle at every second of every hour of every day.  That’s Donald J. Trump.

Trump knows the extremely consequential sequence of BIG things that lead to a structurally strong American economic foundation.

We don’t have to guess at whether Trump can deliver on that policy sequence, we have reference points.

♦ Donald Trump knew that independent U.S. energy policy was a condition for a strong U.S. economy. He also knew there would be negative consequences to allies and partners if the U.S. energy policy was independent.  Trump knew that OPEC nations in general would be negatively impacted, and he knew that Saudi Arabia specifically would be weakened geopolitically.   That is why the very first foreign trip by Donald Trump was to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States that make up the majority of OPEC.

Look at what President Trump did on that trip.  First, he assured Saudi Arabia that the United States would stand with the Gulf Cooperation Council and Mid-East nations as it pertained to their security.  Trump knew making the largest energy consuming nation independent from foreign oil would be adverse to the economic stability of the Mid-East, and as an outcome, could open a door to destabilization from extremist or ideological groups therein.

Take away top-line economic revenue from Saudi et al, and the leaders of those oil economies have a more difficult time remaining stable and controlling unrest and extremism.  Generations of Arab citizens know nothing other than the trickle down benefits of oil exports.  President Trump knew this, and he approached our need for energy independence by first assuring the Arab states of his commitment to their stability and safety.

President Trump delivered to those states a list of approved arms and defense agreements during that trip.  In essence, what he was doing was putting the promise of security into actual delivery of tools to retain that security.  Actions speak louder than words.  President Trump also promised to work diligently on peace in the region; a real substantive and genuine peace that would provide security in the big picture.

Over the course of the next few years, Trump delivered on that set of promises with the Abraham Accords.   Yes, economic security as national security applies to our allies as well as ourselves.  Again, actions speak louder than words.

With the U.S. energy independence program in place, President Trump then moved in sequence to the next big thing.

♦ Donald Trump moved to face the challenge of China.   A major shift in U.S. policy that is likely considered the biggest geopolitical shift in the last 75 years.  Trump strategically began with Trade Authority 302 national security Steel and Aluminum tariffs at 25% and 10% not only toward China but targeted globally.

The entire multinational system was stunned at the bold step with tariffs.   But remember, before Trump went to Saudi Arabia, he held a meeting with Chairman Xi Jinping in Mar-a-Lago.  The global trade world was shocked by the tariff announcement, but I’ll bet you a doughnut Chairman Xi was not.

That February 2017 meeting, only one month after his inauguration, was President Trump graciously informing Chairman Xi, in the polite manner that respectful business people do, that a new era in the U.S-China relationship was about to begin.  New trade agreements, new terms and conditions were to be expected in the future.  The tariff announcement hit Wall Street hard, but not Beijing – who knew it was likely.

U.S. financial pundits proclaimed the sky was surely falling.  These tariffs would cause prices to skyrocket, the global order of all things around trade was under attack by Trump.  They waxed and shouted about supply chains being complicated and intertwined amid the modern manufacturing era that was too complex for President Trump to understand with such a heavy handed tariff hammer.   Remember all of that?  Remember how cars were going to cost thousands more, and beer kegs would forever be lost because the orange man had just triggered steel and aluminum tariffs?

Did any of that happen?  No. Of course it didn’t. Actually, the opposite was true and no one could even fathom it.  Communist China first responded by subsidizing all of their industries targeted by the tariffs with free energy and raw materials, etc.  China triggered an immediate reaction to lower their own prices to offset tariffs.  Beijing did not want the heavy industries and factories to start back up again in the U.S, so they reacted with measures to negate the tariff impact.

China’s economy started to feel the pressure and panda was not happy.  Eventually, as the tariffs expanded beyond Steel and Aluminum to other specific segments and categories, China devalued their currency to lower costs even further for U.S. importers.  The net result was something no one could have imagined.  With lower prices, and increased dollar strength, we began importing all Chinese products at cheaper rates than before the tariffs were triggered.  Yes, we began importing deflation.  No one saw that coming…. but Trump did.

While all that initial U.S-China trade shock was taking place, Donald Trump took his next foreign trip to… wait for it…. Southeast Asia.

Just like in the example of the trip to Saudi Arabia, economically-minded Trump told partners and leaders in the export producing countries of Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and ASEAN nations to prepare for additional business and new trade agreements with the U.S., as factories inside China might start to decouple.   Look at how they responded, they did exactly what Trump said would be in their best interests.

To seriously gather the focus of this SE Asia group, President Trump started direct talks with North Korea and Chairman Kim Jong-un for peace and regional stability.  It’s easy to forget just how stunning this was at the time, but generations of people in Asia were jaw-agape at the U.S. President confronting China, engaging with North Korea, and opening his arms to new trade deals with ASEAN partners.

On the world stage of geopolitics and global trade, any one of these moves would be a monumental legacy initiative all by itself.  But together, simultaneously, you can see how the entire continent physically stopped midstride and stood staring at this, this man, this American President, who was just about to step across the Demilitarized Zone in North Korea and shake hands with Chairman Kim…. and, wait for it…. they are smiling.

√ Energy security triggered and friends in Mid-East supported.

√ Mid-East peace initiatives triggered.

√ A return of heavy industry and manufacturing security triggered.

√ A confrontation of Chinese economic influence triggered.

√ Stability between South Korea and North Korea, triggered.

√ New trade deals and economic partnerships with Japan and South Korea, triggered.

And then, as if that was not enough… just as multinational investment groups started realizing they needed to change their outlooks and drop the decades long view of the U.S. as a “service driven economy”… just as they realized they needed to start investing domestically inside the United States for their own growth and financial security… as if all that wasn’t enough… President Trump kicks off an entirely new trade deal and renegotiated standard for all North American trade via NAFTA.

We don’t have to guess at whether Donald Trump can put together a program to ensure Economic Security is National Security.  We don’t have to guess at whether Donald Trump can deliver on economic policy.  We don’t have guess if Trump’s policy platform, proposals and initiatives would be successful.  We have the experience of it.  We have the results of it.  We have felt the success of it.

We also don’t need to guess at who is the best candidate to lead Making America Great Again, we already know who that is.

There is no other 2024 Presidential Candidate, who I am aware of, who could possibly achieve what Donald John Trump has achieved, or who could even fathom contemplating how to achieve a quarter of what President Trump achieved.

Do not tell me Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is a better option. DeSantis is an unknown commodity, a blank slate, when it comes to big picture economic outlooks. DeSantis doesn’t have an economic agenda inside his administration from which to contemplate or analyze his economic views.

Governor Ron DeSantis has a lot of really good skills and policies on the domestic front unique to his position in Florida; however, it is not a slight toward him to point out he has never expressed any larger economic proposal that would give any confidence in a national economic policy.

Look at the sum total of it, and there’s so much more that could be outlined to what Donald Trump achieved and could yet still achieve, it’s not even a close question.

And that my friends is exactly why Donald Trump is under relentless attack from both wings of the UniParty in DC.  Additionally, it is clear the Wall Street Republicans are trying to position Ron DeSantis as an alternative to another Trump term.  Look carefully at the current advocates for DeSantis, Nikki Haley and/or Kristi Noem, and you will note every one of those early voices are attached to favorable Wall Street politics and multinational corporate advocacy.

Look at what Donald J. Trump was able to achieve while he was under constant political attack.  Just imagine what Trump 2.0 would deliver.

They, the leftist Democrats and Wall Street Republicans, are yet again absolutely petrified of that.

Apr 17 2022

The Possibility of a Win for Marine Le Pen in France Has EU Worried


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 16, 2022 

One week from tomorrow the presidential election in France will be decided.  Polls put the race between Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron in a statistical dead heat, and combined with the recent Hungary election outcome – that has many bureaucrats in the EU very twitchy.

No doubt this race would have major ramifications if Marine Le Pen could end up victorious.  Factually, the Western alliance military operation in Ukraine could fundamentally change.  A post-COVID shift toward increased nationalism in France and the European Union would be very problematic for the forward plans of the professional political class and corporate globalists.

ASSOCIATED PRESS – […] If Macron falters in France’s April 24 presidential runoff between the two, the far-right could be at the helm of the European Union, an abhorrent idea to most leaders in the bloc.

Experts say a win for Le Pen would have immense repercussions on the functioning of the EU. Not only would her coming to power damage the democratic values and commercial rules of the bloc, but it would also threaten the EU’s common front and sanctions in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine.

[…] France has always stood at the heart of the EU — a founding member that has partnered with neighbor and historical rival Germany to turn the bloc into an economic giant and an icon of Western values. … [Le Pen] has proposed removing taxes on hundreds of goods and wants to reduce taxes on fuel — which would go against the EU’s free market rules and efforts to fight climate change.

[…]  Jean-Claude Piris, who served as a legal counsel to the European Council, said a victory for Le Pen would have the effect of an “earthquake.”

“She is in favor of a form of economic patriotism with state aids, which is contrary to the rules of the single market,” Piris told The Associated Press.

“She wants to modify the French constitution by giving preference to the French, by suppressing the right of the soil, the right of asylum,” which would be “totally incompatible with the values of the European treaties,” Piris added. (read more)

There isn’t a ‘splodey head detonation meter big enough to record the sound of the EU eruption if Marine Le Pen stands victorious next Sunday.

Vive le France!

Apr 16 2022

Musk’s Battle to Save America From Absolute Tyranny


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Apr 15, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Elon Musk’s battle to take over Twitter and restore free speech is a battle to save the very foundation of what a real free society was supposed to be. Every person on the board of Twitter is doing their part in trying to destroy the United States and hand our dignity and sovereignty to the United Nations precisely as the World Economic Forum openly states in their goal.

The hate that these people are pushing to destroy the very foundation of freedom is just unbelievable. They cheer Bill Gates for becoming the largest farm landholder and Jeff Bezos for taking over the Washington Post and pushing as far left as possible. These evil manipulators think they can bullshit the people all the time and they are doing their best to brainwash everyone they can. The launch of CNN+ gets less than 10,000 viewers which is less than even our sites.

These people cheer Twitter for taking a Poison Pill to prevent free speech so they can try to force their distorted view of freedom upon the entire population. These are the same people who kiss the ground that George Soros walks on holding hands with Klaus Schwab – people who cannot die without destroying the very world that gave them wealth and stature. George Soros has come out and said  “America is the gravest threat to world freedom.” Thus Soros send money to DEFUND POLICE in order to create civil unrest.

t

I wish I could buy millions of shares of Twitter and join Elon Musk. Unfortunately, because of SEC regulations, I cannot own any shares without disclosing every share I own since we advised around the world. Otherwise, I would join Musk for this is now a battle for the very heart of America. These people need to be sent a message to stop trying to destroy America by following their fearless leader – Klaus Schwab. I will NOT allow any company that is partners with Schwab or his World Economic Forum to access Socrates or any advice whatsoever.

All I can hope is that real patriots will come and support Musk in his take over of Twitter.

Apr 16 2022

Elon Musk for President? Evil Lurking Inside Twitter


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Apr 15, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Twitter retested the low on your ECM date and the whole rally began from that target. Did Socrates predict what Musk was going to do? And btw, would you support Elon Musk for President? Have you ever met Musk? He is into AI as well.

DH

ANSWER: Well the answer would be yes, but you have to know only a “natural born citizen” can be president. His mother was Canadian but her father was an American-born Canadian. So I do not this that would qualify him to be president or VP. This is expressly stated in the Constitution so that would require a Constitutional Amendment to change it. There is no other requirement of this nature imposed to be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court or to either chamber of Congress. Article II, Section 1 states:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Therefore, Musk could be in the President’s cabinet or he can run for the Senate or Congress, but I would not recommend that. He would be one voice among many and that would not produce change. Hence, Trump won for he was NOT a politician. This is why some people are now talking about Elon Musk being a better choice. I understand that but it is not practical under the Constitution.

No, I have never met Musk. I would like to, but that opportunity has not presented itself. I suppose he would find Socrates fascinating, but Socrates doesn’t drive a car – he just monitors the world economy. As to whether or not Socrates predicted Musk’s takeover, probably but it did not say who.

Musk responded to Twitter thinking about a “poison pill” move suggesting that it would expose Twitter’s board to “titanic” legal liability. Anyone who is supporting Twitter is anti-Free Speech and is clearly more interested in destroying our civilization and everything that made America once upon a time great. Now it is the leftists trying to tear down everything.

Bret Taylor is the chairman of Twitter but he is also the co-CEO of Salesforce which is a partner with none other than Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. This is why they have banned Trump. This is all political and it is intended to ultimately overthrow the United States. They state that clearly in their Agenda 2030.

Salesforce is toying with forcing the Great Reset upon everyone. Personally, I would never do business with Salesforce.

Socrates projected in 1985 that a potential third-party/non-politician would win in 2016 (31.4 years into this wave) predicted Trump would win but it did not predict it would be Trump 31.4 years before. It did project the rise in authoritarianism, civil unrest, disease, and the commodity boom based upon shortages. There is just a time and place for everything.

Apr 16 2022

Biden Administration Authorizes New Oil and Gas Leases on Limited Federal Land


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 15, 2022 | Sundance

Energy development companies had identified 744,000 acres of federal land which could yield significant returns for oil and gas extraction.  Today the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) authorized leases for 173 parcels on 144,000 acres; approximately 80% less than was identified by energy companies.  [BLM Press Release Here]

Dept of Interior Secretary Deb Haaland (pictured left) shared, “today, we begin to reset how and what we consider to be the highest and best use of Americans’ resources for the benefit of all current and future generations.”

The Biden administration, together with tribal leadership are concerned about environmental justice and sustainable energy equity for a host of multigenerational shareholder elements within the limited areas under consideration.

As the press release notes, “this pragmatic approach focuses leasing on parcels near existing development and infrastructure, such as gathering lines that can help reduce venting and flaring, and will help conserve the resilience of intact public lands and functioning ecosystems.

The new leases are mostly for areas where already existing oil and gas exploration is taking place, and the Biden administration has raised the federal royalty charges from 12.5% to a new 18.75%.   In order to keep upward pressure on gasoline prices, Green New Deal national target price $7/gal, the new leases will not be available until later this year.

[Media Article Here]

Great Sneezing Feathers, together with Strong Pine Fish and the progressive clan of the Algae and Whiskey tribe, will watch carefully as the colonizing white man puts hole in ground to feed metal people wagons.

“Worse than Carter? …. Sheesh”

Apr 16 2022

Twitter Responds to Elon Musk Proposal by Creating Poison Pill


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 15, 2022 | Sundance

The social media and communication platform Twitter, responded to the bid by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk by announcing Friday the Twitter board of directors has unanimously adopted a “poison pill” defense in response to Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s proposal to buy the company and take it private. [LINK to Press Release]

Twitter said the move, formally called a “limited duration shareholder rights plan,” aims to enable its investors to “realize the full value of their investment” by reducing the likelihood that any one person can gain control of the company without either paying shareholders a premium or giving the board more time. Poison pills are often used to defend against hostile takeovers.

According to Twitter’s plan, if Musk or any other person or group acquires at least 15 percent of Twitter’s stock, the poison pill will trigger.

At that point, every other shareholder, aside from Musk, would be allowed to purchase new shares of Twitter at half the going market price, which stood at $45.08 at the closing bell on Thursday.

The flood of half-price shares would effectively dilute Musk’s ownership stake, making it massively more expensive for him to build up a controlling position.  Twitter said its board had voted unanimously in favor of the plan, which will remain in effect until April 14, 2023.

Obviously, the people in control of Twitter really do not want to lose control over the platform.  Elon Musk’s offer to purchase Twitter at $54.20 per share, represents a value of 38% more than his first shares purchased.  The public shareholders would make a sizeable return on their investment. However, the fiduciary responsibility of a board of directors to its shareholders is really not what this is about.

In the big picture, Twitter is a bottomless pit of financial cost.   Once you understand the technology behind Twitter, it is easy to understand why the public speech platform is not a viable business model, and it never was.

Twitter is exclusively a ‘user engagement‘ social media platform with no hosted content.  Twitter is massively expensive to operate because the costs of operating the technology, all of which are driven by the substantive issue of ‘simultaneous users‘, exceeds the capacity of the platform to generate revenue.

Almost all other internet websites and social media have two structures: (A) Content, and (B) User Engagement.

Content represents a small part of any internet hosting expense for a platform and represents almost 100% of the platform’s ability to generate money.  User engagement on the other hand, costs massive amounts of money – due to the need for data processing to handle the engagement and simultaneous users – and provides almost no revenue.

Many news and information content providers do not even host a user engagement commenting system any longer.  User engagement is just too expensive and requires monitoring, moderation and massive amounts of data processing space on the platform servers.

Twitter’s operating model only consists of ‘user engagement.’

The platform itself is a massive global commenting system – the ‘public square’ discussion.

♦CONTENT is the material that can be monetized easily.  Content is the article, graphic, podcast, or video you would see and watch.  Content is profitable based on advertising.   Eyeballs on content means eyeballs on internet advertising.  This is how websites and content providers are able to pay for expenses and operate as a business model for the continuation of content.  Hosting costs for content, even on a massive scale of viewership/readership are low, and the income from advertising increases with more readers and viewers.  This is the traditional business model of content providers.

♦USER ENGAGEMENT is the part that is not as easily monetized, and user engagement drives a higher cost.  User engagement is the comments, likes, dislikes and discussion that takes place based on the users who view the content material and discuss.  More user engagement, particularly more simultaneous users, costs more money for the platform, because the random capability of the audience to interact with the server network creates exponentially more data processing demand.  Data processing, not capacity, drives the cost.

Server capacity is a relatively easy issue to solve for content providers.  In order to see the content, the host needs to ensure they have enough capacity for the audience to arrive and view, read, or watch the content without overwhelming the server network.  Server processing speed and data performance are a part of the construct to ensure everything is smooth.

Server capacity is not the challenge for ‘user engagement.’  Processing trillions of simultaneous user-activated functions is the tech challenge for ‘user engagement.’  It’s not the capacity, it’s the data processing.  As a result, it is far more expensive to operate social media than it is to operate a simple website construct, because user engagement is the entire premise behind social media.

Facebook and Instagram have a more viable business model because users provide the content they host.  Content can be monetized, and in the case of Facebook, Google, Instagram and YouTube they can also monetize the user that provides it.  Twitter does not host content at all.

Facebook makes money by selling advertising like a traditional website.  Facebook and Google have also specialized in the micro-targeting of advertising to very specific tailored advertising audiences.   Advertising agencies pay a premium for the micro-targeting of a specific audience.

Facebook also makes money by selling data on users.  You may remember the reference of Cambridge Analytica purchasing micro-targeting user information from Facebook for use in elections and voter targeting efforts.  More recently, Facebook has cut out the middlemen and started micro-targeting for politics and getting paid directly by political campaigns for their efforts.

In almost all social media, the user is providing the content that the platform can monetize.   In the Facebook example above, the platform can offset the extreme increases in user engagement costs (data processing) by making money from the hosted content, and from selling the data of the user (there are many purchasers).

However, for Twitter the business model problem is: (a) the absence of content to monetize, and (b) the extreme costs of user engagement that dwarf the “simultaneous user” data processing costs for Facebook.

As Facebook grows, they can grow their revenue.   As Twitter grows, it increases their expenses massively and only moderately increases their revenue.

Twitter is not making a decision to decline the generous offer by Elon Musk because of stewardship or fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.  The financials of Twitter as a non-viable business model highlight the issue of money being irrelevant.  Twitter does not and cannot make money.  Growing Twitter only means growing an expense. Growing Twitter does not grow revenue enough to offset the increase in expense.

There is only one way for Twitter to exist as a viable entity, people are now starting to realize this.

What matters to the people behind Twitter, the people who are subsidizing the ability of Twitter to exist, is control over the global conversation.

Control of the conversation is priceless to the people who provide the backbone for Twitter.

Once people realize who is subsidizing Twitter, everything changes.

That’s the fight.

.

Apr 15 2022

True danger is a nation of citizens who blindly parrot govt propaganda


By Tulsi Gabbard  Published originally on April 14, 2022 

It is not the government’s job to shield us from information—no matter how “dangerous” they claim it to be. The true danger is a nation of citizens who blindly follow and parrot government propaganda instead of looking for and courageously expressing the truth.